Similar posts

Emergence - The Musical #fundie religionethics.co.uk

There is a whole antitheist industry or modus of entertainment/expression based around ridiculing all of theism which rides on the back of unfalsifiability.

Apart from revealing the inner redneck there is real social harm to be had here.

The term ''there might be categoric differences'' is disingenuous.

These are either points to take seriously or humourously. If we are to take philosophy seriously we must look to non categorising or generalising.

Atheists find God unfalsifiability.

Atheists find ridiculous things unfalsifiable

Atheists then conclude that all unfalsifiables are ridiculous

Atheists challenged by multiverse

Atheists conclude not all unfalsifiables are ridiculous.

Antitheists still like the ridicule link though.

Antitheists arbitrarily single out which unfalsifiables are ridiculous and include God.

Antitheists take the rise out of theists and mock them on the same bases that homophobes might ridicule say a gay pride march........ based on logical fallacies.

u/smellyuglypouchld #racist reddit.com

u/smellyuglypouch1d

AITA for throwing away my gf's umbilical cord?

Throwaway because her brother knows my reddit.

Hi, my (34M) gf (21F) of two years is native American and she had this small, beaten up leather pouch. It was about the size of a golf ball, and it was beaded but there were beads missing and thread exposed and the leather was stained and greasy with something. It was supposed to look like a turtle or a lizard or something, but it was so beaten that I was hard to tell. The thing absolutely stunk. We had it in a box of keepsakes along with our photos and other things, and it made the box have a musty smell.

Imagine my horror when I asked her what the thing was, and she told me it was her umbilical cord?? It grossed me out and I thought she was joking, so I laughed. She looked upset, so I asked if she was serious. She was. I asked her why she had it, and she told me it was her people's cultural practice to stop you from searching for things or something among other things. I thought the sentiment was nice, but it stunk and was hideous.

I understand that some people keep teeth and that sort of thing, but teeth don't stink. And teeth aren't kept in a strange little pouch. The whole thing skeezed me out, so I put it back and left it alone.

But two weeks ago when she was sleeping, I was going through our things and wanted to scan an old photo. I opened our keepsake box and the wave of musty air hit me. I couldn't take it anymore, so I hid the thing in a box in the basement. We went through our photos and things together (it was a lovely night, we did it over wine) and she didn't even acknowledge that it was missing. I even asked her if she noticed anything gone from our stuff. She said she didn't, and laughed.

So yesterday, I decided to rid us of it and put it in the trash. It went, and I could breathe a sigh of relief knowing my girlfriend's actual entire mummified umbilical cord was where it should've been to begin with.

But today her mom called, and told her that she was willing to remake the pouch for her if she sent it. Oops... She proceeded to tear apart our room looking for it, sobbing hysterically and not listening to any kind of reason... I'll admit, I felt bad. Maybe I should've just left it alone, but why even keep such a thing? I came clean and told her that I threw it away because I thought she wouldn't notice.

She started screaming at me and said that it wasn't my right to throw her things away. I reminded her of when she threw my favorite shirt away just because it had a hole and a grease stain. She told me it wasn't the same thing, but isn't it? They were both items kept purely out of sentimentality. At least my shirt wasn't making our photos smell musty.

She was suddenly calm, and I thought she was willing to talk about it, but she started packing her stuff. I begged her to stay but she took her car and her stuff and left. I don't know where she went, or if she'll be back, but I'm so devastated. It was such a small and dumb thing to split us up over, but I do regret it. Am I the asshole?

ETA Stop bringing our ages into this, she was and is an adult and you have no right to judge us. Focus on what I'm talking about here and now. I didn't want to put it in a different container because at the end of the day, we still would've had a body part that should've been tossed to begin with. Just because something is cultural doesn't mean that justifies it. Would it be okay if I kept all my fecal matter in a little bag because I thought it was special? It doesn't and didn't make sense. I feel like she was overreacting and I think everyone calling me the asshole should have to smell the damn thing. Then you'd know why I tossed it.

ETA2 All these comments are making me feel like complete shit. The last time we fought, she came back after an hour. She isn't back yet, and it's starting to take a toll. She's the one that makes dinner, cleans, comforts me. She's always there for me. The notion that I might spend tonight alone is destroying me. She's always been perfect to me, and I do things like this that upset her. Maybe I AM the asshole.... I'm sorry guys. I've been calling her and calling her and she won't answer. I just want to apologize and get her back. I want her to know how much she means to me. I think I might call her mom and tell her what I did and see if she can make another one... I know it won't be the same and it won't have her umbilical cord anymore, but maybe it'll be a start?

ETA3 I couldn't get ahold of her mom, but I have been on the phone with the sanitation department for our city, and they put me on hold for 45 minutes looking through the trash from our neighborhood. I barely caught them, and it took a lot of pleading and convincing but they were kind. They managed to find the pouch, and I'll have to pay a huge recovery fee, but that's all worth it. They agreed to let me pick it up tomorrow. If I can get ahold of my gf, hopefully she'll come back to me and things can be alright. I'll never touch her stuff again if it means she'll stay with me. I'll update this when I can get ahold of her.

ETA4 This will be the last update... I'm so devastated. I got the pouch back from the sanitation center today as soon as they called me at 8am this morning. It was a little smashed up but it's ok. If our city wasn't as small as it is, I might not have been able to get it back. I paid them and left. I left a voicemail for my gf telling her I got it back, and she finally called me back. She told me she was coming back and I felt butterflies again like when I first met her. I was waiting for her to show up, and I wanted to fully check the condition of the pouch, so I opened it and discovered what was causing it to smell-there was a cigarette butt in it beside her umbilical cord that looked like it might have been wet at some point. It made the pouch smell like ash, along with the leather stinking from whatever greasy substance was on it. The pouch was okay, so I waited for my gf to come.

Well she came this evening and asked for it immediately. I asked if she wanted to have dinner with me and she said no. I was hurt, she said she was coming back? She told me no, she just wants her pouch. I didn't want to be an asshole again, so I just gave it to her. I told her I loved her and she slammed my own door in my face. I began to mourn our relationship but she came back in and grabbed me by my shirt and asked why I opened it. I told her I wanted to see if it was ok.

She said I didn't need to open it, and asked if I took the cigarette out. I told her I just touched it to look at it and she began to cry... She told me she was keeping that since her father committed suicide because it was the last thing he touched. She grabbed me again and I thought she was going to hit me, but she just went to our room presumably to see if she got all her stuff. Then she told me not to contact her again or she'd send her brothers to me.... I won't be an asshole and get the police involved, but that was definitely a threat.

I'm so heartbroken... I've lost my whole life. For two whole years, she was everything to me. I helped her get off her reservation, I paid for her GED. I did so much for her but none of it matters now. I put so much time into our relationship and into her, I was in it for the long haul. I know I messed up. I know I'm an asshole. I know I'll be alone forever. Thank you all for making me see that.

I went to our room, and she threw what looks like porcupine quills or something everywhere. She stabbed them into my side of the bed, put them in my shoes, in my dresser drawers. It seems spiteful to leave something so difficult to pick out of carpeting and bedding. They're all I have of her now though. I'm going to keep them. I hope she's better off without me. Lesson learned I guess.

Maximus Decimus Meridius #fundie returnofkings.com

The Orthodox Church Is The Answer To Reviving Christianity In Europe And Saving The West

Maximus is a Man, capital M, period. Love. Truth. Justice. Liberty. Respect. These are the lodestones pointing true to magnetic masculinity in a polarized feminist west. His goal for writing on ROK is to be the gadfly that provokes thought and counters groupthink. You can find more of his writing at A Dream That Was Rome .

First let us take a look at a Christian faith that is strong, vibrant and alive.

Christianity is a beautiful faith. For all my previous criticism of its intellectual formulation, the one thing it gets 100% correct is that it actually enshrines the nuclear family unit – Father, Son and virgin Mother. In that respect, it is more patriarchal than Islam in overtly formulating The Father as divine authority, The Son as heir to that authority, and the virgin Mary as model all women should aspire to be as wife and mother. The video above is a 26 minute silent reflection on life inside a men’s Orthodox Christian monastery in Abkhazia. The power of the documentary is palpable for its very lack of speech and thus quiet testimony to the essence of Christian truth – the worship of God through Jesus Christ.

After the passionate response to my last essay, I went on YouTube to look up what I could find on the Eastern Orthodox faith. Here is a great video series I would like to share with you all.

For Christianity to return and thrive in Europe & The West, there must be unity.

The single biggest advantage of the Orthodox faith is its unity. There is simply too much division and conflict in almost all flavours of Christianity outside the Roman Catholic Church. Historically, the Orthodox faith does not have a real history of theology (per se). That is, the Orthodox don’t think too much or question too deeply about their faith. They accept. They believe. They practice. Most importantly, they do not allow any change – none – to what they believe is the original church handed down to humanity from St. Paul.

For the Orthodox, it is not about the intellectual foundations (i.e. theology) so much as the community of worshipers and keeping to past traditions. They keep to what their ancestors practiced and see no need to change anything. Doing so would be a grave break and violation of the past, a complete insult to the body of Christ and the family tradition that has been passed down for generations to preserve the faith.

Eastern Orthodox Christianity has kept the original Byzantine rituals and formulations for worship. A good example of its seriousness and unwillingness to change is the fact that they will not let anyone who is not Orthodox to take part in communion. They see communion as a serious ritual, the true taking in of the body and life of Christ, His word, and His salvation. To allow just anyone to partake without proper preparation, proper orientation, and proper intention, is dangerous. The liturgy and hymns are also old. They go back all the way to the original church over 1000 years ago and more. The swinging incense pots is not some ornate flashy thing they do, there is real spiritual purpose and foundation to everything in an Orthodox liturgical mass.

What I have just described is practiced by all Orthodox churches which may strike many American Protestants and Evangelicals as odd. The different designations (Greek, Ukrainian, Russian, etc.) are nothing more than jurisdictional boundaries. If you are Russian, you want to go to mass in your language and with your people. Each church is local and loosely affiliated with the others, but there is no over arching official hierarchy, no Pope as it were for the ENTIRE faith. What unites them as Orthodox is not a single authority ON doctrine (per se), but common faith IN practice (de rigueur).

In many ways, Martin Luther was a revolt against the Pope having authority over how to worship by the local community. His opposition to Indulgences and a paper titled “The Pagan Servitude To The Church” are reminiscent of my own intellectual wrestling trying to understand Christianity. For Luther, it was ultimately about a return of faith to the followers of Christ, not blind obedience to papal authority for which he saw no authority given to it.

@Martin Luther ~ Wikipedia

His theology challenged the authority and office of the Pope by teaching that the Bible is the only source of divinely revealed knowledge from God[3] and opposed sacerdotalism by considering all baptized Christians to be a holy priesthood.

Ironically, in Eastern Orthodox, the power of the church rests in the local faithful and has forever been this way. In one video, a story is told about an Orthodox priest who was invited to a world religions syncretic type seminar where he was quoted at the end of the conference as saying “Yes, there are many paths to God and all are valid.” When he returned to his local church and went to put the key in the door, the local church members had already changed the locks!!! How many Catholics would like to do that to the current Pope?!?! This is why the East rejected authority of Rome over THEIR religion. Christ belongs to the people, from God, and the Eastern Orthodox have protected this faith and non-hierarchical organization since the beginning of Christianity.

Why is it that Eastern Christians are agreeable about this? Why don’t they clamour and agitate for new stuff, for revision, for updating? The reason is that in the East, we expect the faith to actually do something. It isn’t just a matter of having the right institution, or having the right theology, though I believe the Orthodox church does have those things. That’s not what does it, really. It’s that we expect that practicing this faith will change people. And you know what? We see that it actually does. We see it over and over again. We see it in contemporary lives. We see people actually transformed.

To an Orthodox, they practice because it works, not just because it is right.

This… that single statement… would unite all Christianity. Gone would be the divisions, the arguments, the 1000s of flavours of Christ by each Protestant wanting to be a Pope.

If I ever become Christian, it will be in the Orthodox faith. This single video series has proved to me beyond a shadow of doubt that what the Orthodox has works. It works because…

Even after over 70 plus years of Communist oppression & outright murder, the faith has rebounded

Russians are Orthodox because faith in Christ works, not just because it is right. If you have ever known a Russian, you know how much they value what works and not what is bullshit. My intellectualization and analysis of Christianity is precisely the problem in The West. No single Christian tradition in The West, outside of the Catholic faith, can truly claim that what they have works, but they have ALL argued and warred for centuries about being right.

If Western Christianity did work, people would not have left. Leaving aside the massive hurdle of getting Westerners to actually stop being atheists or completely ignoring God, a Christian faith that can actually claim to work is precisely what will get someone like me back in the church. A claim I must repeat, that is actually backed up by evidence, not rhetoric.

The final video I want to close off with is an Orthodox explanation of salvation.

This… brought tears to my eyes. It actually answered one, if not THE, core complaint Westerners have about Christianity as they know it – you are condemned to hell if you reject Christ, and no amount of good works or deeds or repentance can save you if you do not accept Christ, the end. Of importance to note, this priest refers to God only when explaining the Orthodox version of salvation; it is God, not Jesus that is the focus of Eastern Orthodox faith. I suspect this is why the Protestants split from The Vatican and we can see it in their further splintering right up to today; Protestants wanted more Jesus and less God talk from the Pope because it was Jesus that truly saves. (Once again, you can see why a non-Christian starts to scratch his head in puzzlement.)

This Orthodox version of salvation is one I have never heard from any Christian priest or pastor in The West. If Europe, if America, were to hear the message of God in the Orthodox faith, I think you would have a revival like none we have ever witnessed in the past. In fact, the whole Theoria YouTube channel is, I suspect, a production created for just that reason. Thousands of disillusioned Protestants and other long lost former Christians are filling the Orthodox churches. The Theoria video series was created to help orient and guide the newly faithful. Is their any other church outside Catholicism that is seeing this kind of resurgence? (Assuming Catholicism is seeing an influx, I do not know and just speculating because it too has a good history of unity in faith and would be The West’s oldest incarnation of Christianity.)

Conclusion

Putin is demonized in the West for many things, but the one reason “they” hate him the most? Putin and Russia are a walking, talking, living reminder of a faith they thought was all but extinct by their design and command. Putin’s Christian message is not just reaching America, but the entirety of Europe. Note as well that Putin is an astounding example of the claim to proof that the Orthodox faith works.

He has single-handedly inserted himself in Syria and reversed what was not just the holocaust of Syrian Christians, but the globalist plan to balkanize the region with Iran being the last Muslim nation standing in their way. For all those who claim Islam is favored by the elites and want it to take over Europe, just look to Muslim lands where, regardless of how you feel about Islam as a religion, the homeland of Muslim faith is being literally bombed into oblivion in a way Christian “Muslim invasion” Europe is not. Make no mistake, after Islam’s “victory” in Europe, it will be up next for targeted wholesale destruction by they who hate God more than they hate humanity.

I have no doubt that if Europe and The West can find its way back to Christianity, our future will look as bright as Russia’s. From even this most minimal and cursory review of the Eastern Orthodox faith, it is the only path back to Christ in Europe and The West that I can see actually working.

What Christianity needs is unity of faith, unity of belief, unity of practice and unity in God. All of this is found in the Eastern Orthodox church and nowhere else.

[Emphasis original]

Got Questions Ministries #fundie gotquestions.org

Question: "Is there an argument for the existence of God?"

Answer: The question of whether there is a conclusive argument for the existence of God has been debated throughout history, with exceedingly intelligent people taking both sides of the dispute. In recent times, arguments against the possibility of God’s existence have taken on a militant spirit that accuses anyone daring to believe in God as being delusional and irrational. Karl Marx asserted that anyone believing in God must have a mental disorder that caused invalid thinking. The psychiatrist Sigmund Freud wrote that a person who believed in a Creator God was delusional and only held those beliefs due to a “wish-fulfillment” factor that produced what Freud considered to be an unjustifiable position. The philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche bluntly said that faith equates to not wanting to know what is true. The voices of these three figures from history (along with others) are simply now parroted by a new generation of atheists who claim that a belief in God is intellectually unwarranted.

Is this truly the case? Is belief in God a rationally unacceptable position to hold? Is there a logical and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Outside of referencing the Bible, can a case for the existence of God be made that refutes the positions of both the old and new atheists and gives sufficient warrant for believing in a Creator? The answer is, yes, it can. Moreover, in demonstrating the validity of an argument for the existence of God, the case for atheism is shown to be intellectually weak.

To make an argument for the existence of God, we must start by asking the right questions. We begin with the most basic metaphysical question: “Why do we have something rather than nothing at all?” This is the basic question of existence—why are we here; why is the earth here; why is the universe here rather than nothing? Commenting on this point, one theologian has said, “In one sense man does not ask the question about God, his very existence raises the question about God.”

In considering this question, there are four possible answers to why we have something rather than nothing at all:

1. Reality is an illusion.
2. Reality is/was self-created.
3. Reality is self-existent (eternal).
4. Reality was created by something that is self-existent.

So, which is the most plausible solution? Let’s begin with reality being simply an illusion, which is what a number of Eastern religions believe. This option was ruled out centuries ago by the philosopher Rene Descartes who is famous for the statement, “I think, therefore I am.” Descartes, a mathematician, argued that if he is thinking, then he must “be.” In other words, “I think, therefore I am not an illusion.” Illusions require something experiencing the illusion, and moreover, you cannot doubt the existence of yourself without proving your existence; it is a self-defeating argument. So the possibility of reality being an illusion is eliminated.

Next is the option of reality being self-created. When we study philosophy, we learn of “analytically false” statements, which means they are false by definition. The possibility of reality being self-created is one of those types of statements for the simple reason that something cannot be prior to itself. If you created yourself, then you must have existed prior to you creating yourself, but that simply cannot be. In evolution this is sometimes referred to as “spontaneous generation” —something coming from nothing—a position that few, if any, reasonable people hold to anymore simply because you cannot get something from nothing. Even the atheist David Hume said, “I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that anything might arise without a cause.” Since something cannot come from nothing, the alternative of reality being self-created is ruled out.

Now we are left with only two choices—an eternal reality or reality being created by something that is eternal: an eternal universe or an eternal Creator. The 18th-century theologian Jonathan Edwards summed up this crossroads:

• Something exists.
• Nothing cannot create something.
• Therefore, a necessary and eternal “something” exists.

Notice that we must go back to an eternal “something.” The atheist who derides the believer in God for believing in an eternal Creator must turn around and embrace an eternal universe; it is the only other door he can choose. But the question now is, where does the evidence lead? Does the evidence point to matter before mind or mind before matter?

To date, all key scientific and philosophical evidence points away from an eternal universe and toward an eternal Creator. From a scientific standpoint, honest scientists admit the universe had a beginning, and whatever has a beginning is not eternal. In other words, whatever has a beginning has a cause, and if the universe had a beginning, it had a cause. The fact that the universe had a beginning is underscored by evidence such as the second law of thermodynamics, the radiation echo of the big bang discovered in the early 1900s, the fact that the universe is expanding and can be traced back to a singular beginning, and Einstein’s theory of relativity. All prove the universe is not eternal.

Further, the laws that surround causation speak against the universe being the ultimate cause of all we know for this simple fact: an effect must resemble its cause. This being true, no atheist can explain how an impersonal, purposeless, meaningless, and amoral universe accidentally created beings (us) who are full of personality and obsessed with purpose, meaning, and morals. Such a thing, from a causation standpoint, completely refutes the idea of a natural universe birthing everything that exists. So in the end, the concept of an eternal universe is eliminated.

Philosopher J. S. Mill (not a Christian) summed up where we have now come to: “It is self-evident that only Mind can create mind.” The only rational and reasonable conclusion is that an eternal Creator is the one who is responsible for reality as we know it. Or to put it in a logical set of statements:

• Something exists.
• You do not get something from nothing.
• Therefore a necessary and eternal “something” exists.
• The only two options are an eternal universe and an eternal Creator.
• Science and philosophy have disproven the concept of an eternal universe.
• Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.

Former atheist Lee Strobel, who arrived at this end result many years ago, has commented, “Essentially, I realized that to stay an atheist, I would have to believe that nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; and non-reason produces reason. Those leaps of faith were simply too big for me to take, especially in light of the affirmative case for God's existence … In other words, in my assessment the Christian worldview accounted for the totality of the evidence much better than the atheistic worldview.”

But the next question we must tackle is this: if an eternal Creator exists (and we have shown that He does), what kind of Creator is He? Can we infer things about Him from what He created? In other words, can we understand the cause by its effects? The answer to this is yes, we can, with the following characteristics being surmised:

• He must be supernatural in nature (as He created time and space).
• He must be powerful (exceedingly).
• He must be eternal (self-existent).
• He must be omnipresent (He created space and is not limited by it).
• He must be timeless and changeless (He created time).
• He must be immaterial because He transcends space/physical.
• He must be personal (the impersonal cannot create personality).
• He must be infinite and singular as you cannot have two infinites.
• He must be diverse yet have unity as unity and diversity exist in nature.
• He must be intelligent (supremely). Only cognitive being can produce cognitive being.
• He must be purposeful as He deliberately created everything.
• He must be moral (no moral law can be had without a giver).
• He must be caring (or no moral laws would have been given).

These things being true, we now ask if any religion in the world describes such a Creator. The answer to this is yes: the God of the Bible fits this profile perfectly. He is supernatural (Genesis 1:1), powerful (Jeremiah 32:17), eternal (Psalm 90:2), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7), timeless/changeless (Malachi 3:6), immaterial (John 5:24), personal (Genesis 3:9), necessary (Colossians 1:17), infinite/singular (Jeremiah 23:24, Deuteronomy 6:4), diverse yet with unity (Matthew 28:19), intelligent (Psalm 147:4-5), purposeful (Jeremiah 29:11), moral (Daniel 9:14), and caring (1 Peter 5:6-7).

One last subject to address on the matter of God’s existence is the matter of how justifiable the atheist’s position actually is. Since the atheist asserts the believer’s position is unsound, it is only reasonable to turn the question around and aim it squarely back at him. The first thing to understand is that the claim the atheist makes—“no god,” which is what “atheist” means—is an untenable position to hold from a philosophical standpoint. As legal scholar and philosopher Mortimer Adler says, “An affirmative existential proposition can be proved, but a negative existential proposition—one that denies the existence of something—cannot be proved.” For example, someone may claim that a red eagle exists and someone else may assert that red eagles do not exist. The former only needs to find a single red eagle to prove his assertion. But the latter must comb the entire universe and literally be in every place at once to ensure he has not missed a red eagle somewhere and at some time, which is impossible to do. This is why intellectually honest atheists will admit they cannot prove God does not exist.

Next, it is important to understand the issue that surrounds the seriousness of truth claims that are made and the amount of evidence required to warrant certain conclusions. For example, if someone puts two containers of lemonade in front of you and says that one may be more tart than the other, since the consequences of getting the more tart drink would not be serious, you would not require a large amount of evidence in order to make your choice. However, if to one cup the host added sweetener but to the other he introduced rat poison, then you would want to have quite a bit of evidence before you made your choice.

This is where a person sits when deciding between atheism and belief in God. Since belief in atheism could possibly result in irreparable and eternal consequences, it would seem that the atheist should be mandated to produce weighty and overriding evidence to support his position, but he cannot. Atheism simply cannot meet the test for evidence for the seriousness of the charge it makes. Instead, the atheist and those whom he convinces of his position slide into eternity with their fingers crossed and hope they do not find the unpleasant truth that eternity does indeed exist. As Mortimer Adler says, “More consequences for life and action follow from the affirmation or denial of God than from any other basic question.”

So does belief in God have intellectual warrant? Is there a rational, logical, and reasonable argument for the existence of God? Absolutely. While atheists such as Freud claim that those believing in God have a wish-fulfillment desire, perhaps it is Freud and his followers who actually suffer from wish-fulfillment: the hope and wish that there is no God, no accountability, and therefore no judgment. But refuting Freud is the God of the Bible who affirms His existence and the fact that a judgment is indeed coming for those who know within themselves the truth that He exists but suppress that truth (Romans 1:20). But for those who respond to the evidence that a Creator does indeed exist, He offers the way of salvation that has been accomplished through His Son, Jesus Christ: "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13).

David Chase Taylor #conspiracy sites.google.com

Isis was a goddess of Ancient Egypt (which is historical cover for the Greco-Roman Empire) who was admittedly worshiped throughout the Greco-Roman world. Her name means “throne” and she was the patroness of nature and magic who is often depicted as the mother of Horus, the hawk-headed god of war. Isis (S+S) or “SS” was evidently the goddess of the Greco-Roman “system” of war and fascism which was created by Minos on the Island of Crete. Although Chania (C/K+N) is known as the founding city of Crete, the city of Knossos (C/K+N+S+S) was likely the second. Based on the double “SS” found within its name, the city of Knossos was likely the first capital of Crete where Greco-Roman warship armed with cannon and gunpowder was birthed. According to modern historical accounts, the religion of Isis spread throughout the Roman Empire. Roman practitioners of Isis used a rose in worship, an apparent tribute to the Island of Rhodes, the primary military base of the Greco-Roman Empire’s which was responsible for developing the ship. The sun atop the head of Isis is likely a symbolic reference to fire of Roman cannons which gave the Greco-Roman Empire unrivaled naval supremecy. Because Isis was the god of the magical Greek Fire (i.e., Roman gunpowder), temples, where human sacrifices were held, and obelisks (i.e., gravestones) were erected in her honor. Neoclassical Greco-Roman temples to Isis include but are not limited to: the Temple of Isis at Philae (Agilkia Island, Egypt); the Temple of Isis (Delos, Greece); and the Temple of Isis (Pompeii, Italy).

Isis Symbology
The sacred image of Isis with her child Horus (which became the model for the Christian Madonna with the baby Jesus), appears to be an allegorical metaphor for the “system” (i.e., Isis) feeding the “baby” or Babylon, the former capitol of the Roman Empire. Interestingly, the symbol of Isis is a “tiet” or “tyet” (meaning “welfare” and “life”) which was also called the “Knot of Isis”. Tiet is an apparent reference to the tit or breast of Isis whose symbol coincidentally mimics a woman’s nipple. The “Knot of Isis” a likely reference to the aforementioned city of Knossos. Isis is always pictured holding the “ankh” which is alleged to be an Egyptian hieroglyphic character that is known as “key of life”. Although being “Egyptian” in origin, the “ankh” features the arrow shape of the Island of Rhodes intersected with the Greek cross of Tau which also doubles as the Crete-shaped fasces.

Isis & Zeus Comparrison
It is imperative to note that Isis (S+S) and Zeus (Z+S) are consonatly the same in Roman-English because the letter "Z" is often replaced with the letter "S" (e.g., close, confuse, easy, has, his, is, pose, president, raise, rose, use, was, etc.). Therefore, their names are in essence one and the same. While Isis means "throne", Zeus is often depicted sitting in a throne. While Isis is depicted with the sun atop her head (symbolizing fire), Zeus is depicted holding lightningbolts (symbolizing fire). Both the sun of Isis and the lightning of Zeus represent Greek Fire, otherwise known as Roman gunpowder which was vital in the Greco-Roman Empire's defeat of every nation and culture on earth.


Tributes to Isis
Modern tributes to “SS” are numerous, a few of which include the Swastika, the Nazi Waffen-SS (whose shape mimics Zeus' lightnight bolts), the SOS distress signal, the name of Israel (Isis+Ra+El), the “ß” (“SS”) letter in German, the ISS (International Space Station) and the “USS” title for all U.S. Navy ships (e.g., “USS Dwight D. Eisenhower”). Isis (Zeus) is also found on the wall of the U.S. Senate where two “S”-shaped-branches form an “SS” or an “SZ” around twin Greco-Roman fasces. This is fitting because the U.S. Senate has approved and funded more wars over the last 200 years than any government on Earth. That being said, the wars were planned by the CIA of Switzerland.

?eus
Zeus is "Father of Gods and men", the King of the Gods, and the King of Heaven who oversees the universe. In Greek mythology, he is the god of sky, thunder and lightning who rules over Mount Olympus which is located in Greenland. According to the Greek geographer Pausanias, "That Zeus is king in heaven is a saying common to all men". Symbols attributed to Zeus include the thunderbolt, eagle, bull, and oak. Zeus is frequently depicted in Greek art either standing, striding forward, with a thunderbolt leveled in his raised right hand, or seated on a throne. The thunderbolt of Zeus is a symbolic reference to Greek Fire (i.e., Roman gunpowder) which was used by the Greco-Roman Empire to conquer the world. With one exception, Greeks were unanimous in recognizing the birthplace of Zeus as the Island of Crete where he was worshipped at caves near Knossos. In order to dispel any notion that Isis and Zeus were gods of a city, Hellenistic writer Euhemerus reportedly wrote that Zeus was a great king of Crete who posthumously turned into a deity. Neoclassical Greco-Roman temples to Zeus found near the Mediterranean Sea include but are not limited to: the Temple of Olympian Zeus (Athens, Greece); the Temple of Zeus (Cyrene, Greece); the Temple of Zeus (Nemea, Greece); the Temple of Zeus (Olympia, Greece); and the Temple of the Olympian Zeus (Agrigento, Sicily).

Jesus = Esus = Isis
The name of Jesus appears to be the same as Esus or Hesus (an aspirated form of Esus), a Celtic god worshiped by the Imperial Cult of Rome which coincidentally mirrors the Greco-Roman god of Isis. Aside from the fact that in the language of Spanish the name of Jesus is pronounced “Hay-SOOS” (a possible tribute to the Greco-Roman god of Zeus which is the same god as Isis), the 18th century Druidic revivalist Iolo Morgannwg identified Esus (S+S) with Jesus (J/G+S+S) based on the strength of the similarity of their respective names. Predictably however, modern scholars state that the striking resemblance between Esus and Jesus is purely coincidental. However, the Ichthys, a basic symbol consisting of two intersecting arcs that resemble the profile of a fish, was reportedly used as a Christian symbol in the first decades of the 2nd century. Its popularity among Christians was allegedly due to the fact that the five initial letters of the Greek word for fish (ICHTHYS) describes the character of Christ: “Iesous Christos Theou Yios Soter” (??s??? ???st??, Te?? ????, S?t??), meaning, “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior”. In order words, “Iesous” (S+S) was the first word to describe the deity that is now called Jesus. The Catholic Church corroborated this notion a few hundred years later when Pope John Paul II published a declaration on August 6, 2000, officially declaring that the title of Dominus Iesus means “The Lord Jesus” in English. Although the vowels change (the Roman alphabet did not contain vowels) the consonant letters of “S” and “S” stay the same. In other words, Iesus (S+S) is the official name of Jesus according to the Catholic Church who not only produced the Holy Bible but are admittedly the "sole Church of Christ" according to the Nicene Creed. Therefore, they have the final word on the official name of Jesus. Consequently therefore, the worship of Esus, Hesus, Iesous, Iesus or Jesus is the unintentional worship Greco-Roman god of Isis.

Esus Symbology
Esus is most known for his depiction on the Pillar of the Boatmen (c. 100 AD) which also contains the Tarvos Trigaranus. The Pillar of the Boatmen is a stone block statue with multiple depictions of Roman and Gaulish deities, including the god of Esus. It originally stood in a temple in the Roman “civitas” of Lutetia which was located in modern day Paris, France. In both engravings, Esus is portrayed cutting down branches from a tree with his axe. Esus is accompanied on a different panel of the Pillar of the Boatmen by Tarvos Trigaranus, the ‘bull with three cranes’ or crowns. The imagery of the bull (B+L) is likely representative of “Baby Line” or “Babylon”, the former capitol of the Greco-Roman Empire. The bull’s three horns as well as the three cranes are likely representative of the number “33” which doubles “CC”, an numerical acronym for Chania, Crete, the birthplace of the Roman Empire. The three horns of the bull or Babylon individually appear to represent the three homes or dens of Rome (i.e., Island of Crete, Island of Sicily, and the Island of Greenland). Consequently, Eusu chopping down the tree with an axe likely represents the cutting of the 13 Bloodlines of Rome who vacated Babylon for Greenland, ending their family tree in the underworld.


Human Sacrifices to Esus
A well-known section in an epic poem “Bellum Civile” or “Pharsalia” (c. 60 AD) by the Roman poet Lucan talks about the gory blood sacrifice offered to a triad of Celtic deities (i.e., Esus, Teutates and Taranis. According to the Berne Commentary on Lucan, human victims that were sacrificed to Esus were suspended from a tree and flailed. The use of trees, particularly oak trees, in human sacrifice is rampant throughout the lore of gods associated with the Greco-Roman Empire (e.g., Odin, Thor, etc.). The Gallic medical writer Marcellus of Bordeaux appears to offer a second textual reference to Esus in his “De Medicamentis” (c. 400 AD), a compendium of pharmacological preparations written in Latin in the early 5th century, the sole source for several Celtic words. The work contains a “magico-medical charm” in Gaulish which appears to invoke the aid of Esus in curing throat trouble. Marcellus’s account of Esus is spelled Aisus (S+S), a name consonantly the same as Esus (S+S), “Iesous” (S+S), Iesus (S+S) and Isis (S+S). The strange medical reference appears to be an inside joke as the victims of human sacrifice carried out by the Imperial Cult of Rome routinely had their throats cut while being hung upside down from a tree. Consequently, due to gravity, the blood would gush out, providing a blood bath for those participating in the sacrifice. It is imperative to note that all religious denominations who worship Jesus (e.g., Baptist, Catholic, Christian, Lutheran, Jehovah’s Witness, Methodist, Mormon, Presbyterian, etc.) are Roman Catholic and therefore are, albeit unwittingly, worshiping the Greco-Roman god of Isis.

Global Worship of Esus
John Arnott MacCulloch, one of Scotland's pre-eminent scholars on Celtic religion and mythology, offered a summary on the scholarly interpretations of Esus in 1911, stating in part: “The whole represents some myth unknown to us…Esus was worshipped at Paris and at Trèves…a coin with the name Æsus [S+S] was found in England; and personal names like Esugenos, "son of Esus," and Esunertus, "he who has the strength of Esus," occur in England, France, and Switzerland. Thus the cult of this god may have been comparatively widespread. But there is no evidence that [Esus] was a Celtic Jehovah [another name for Jesus] or a member, with Teutates and Taranis, of a pan-Celtic triad, or that this triad, introduced by Gauls, was not accepted by the Druids.” MacCulloch’s reference to a Celtic god and the Druids is interesting for they are both part of the Imperial Cult of Rome who carried out the aforementioned blood sacrifices. The notion that Esus was a global deity is indicative of Isis who was worshipped throughout the global Roman Empire prior to the alleged Fall of Rome. Lastly, the fact that Switzerland is mentioned by MacCulloch is not just by chance for the small European country is the primary proxy state of the Roman Empire which is solely responsible for plotting and financing assassinations, terror attacks and wars on a global level. Therefore, the worship of Isis would not be possible by the Romans in Greenland if it were not for Switzerland doing her dirty work in the underworld.

Martin #fundie premierchristianity.com

MR: Again, when you write that paper and win a Nobel prize, I'll believe you, cause I'm open to actual evidence, of which you've demonstrated none. Without evidence, you just come off to me as a naive and gullible person repeating discredited propaganda... or a Russian shill, I'm not sure which. Evolutionary science is based on the same principles of research as any other science, and if you so distrust science, I suggest you quit using it. If churches forced people to choose between church and the benefits of science, the church certainly wouldn't last very long! We all know the benefits of science, and especially when someone's life is on the line, people may pray, but they sure as hell hedge their bets and go to the doctor, don't they!? I have a dear Christian friend who "doesn't believe in evolution" getting treatment right now with medicine based on evolutionary science. It's working.

Martin: Isn't it strange how you claim Evolution is science yet you cannot demonstrate it.
Science is what is observed and demonstrated, repeatedly. Evolution doesn't fit that.
And no, your friend is not "getting treatment right now with medicine based on evolutionary science", they are getting treatment based on real, experimental, empirical science.

MR: Which is based on what we know about evolutionary science. It's why we use other animals in medical experiments, particularly animals with which we have a closer common evolutionary ancestor. Based on what we know about the evolution of cells and viruses. You don't have to accept it, I don't care, but scientists do. I trust the scientists who have cured me and my friend more than I do some anonymous science-denying internet dude. When you give up the benefits of science, that's when I'll believe that you take your own arguments seriously.

Martin: One of the fallacies of medicinal experiments is that you can test satisfactorily on different organisms. It leads to errors in the design of medicines. Nether cells nor viruses evolve, although they very within their range.

MR: Says the non-scientist who hasn't provided a shred of evidence for his view. Scientists are well aware of their limitations. Nor does everything need to be recreated in the lab to come to a conclusion. Forensic scientists don't need to recreate a murder in order to solve a crime. I don't have to know what every little gadget in my car does to understand the basics of how a car works. The same for evolution.
Every time I travel to another part of the world, I read up on the geology of the place, the fossils, its ancient past and compare it to what I've learned. It's always consistent. Every time I travel, the evidence supports science. You've not given me one reason to believe your view. Unsupported assertions mean nothing. Until you write the paper that overturns the scientific consensus, I think we can safely ignore your opinion. Just because you have heartburn about evolution doesn't change a thing. All of your "Answers in Genesis-style" talking points have long been debunked. Even religious institutions are understanding that you can't keep asking people to check their brains at the door of the church, and have come around to the evidence of evolution. Fortunately, science and scientists keep on doing their thing without regard to your willful ignorance. Tell me again how scientists are wrong. You can tell me any lie you want. Until you provide actual evidence they're wrong, we can safely dismiss your protestations. I eagerly await your Nobel prize winning paper.

Martin: You have provided no evidence for Evolution, not merely missed out a little. My evidence is the Bible.
That fossils match the strata they're in is no surprise, for the strata are defined by the fossils. Consensus is destructive of science, it was scientific consensus that Galileo had to battle against. The evidence of the rocks and fossils is entirely consistent with the Genesis Flood narrative, scientifically.
No, the evidence and interpretations from Creationist organisations hasn't been debunked. In the main they've been ignored.It isn't a case of not using your brains, rather it's a case of actually using your brains and looking at the evidence. Exactly the same evidence you claim for Evolution supports the Genesis Flood much better.

MR: Science has provided a mountain of evidence for evolution. You've provided none. The Bible isn't evidence any more than the Vedas are evidence for a Hindu version of the universe. Creationists haven't provided any evidence, even gave up providing evidence. If they had evidence, then they'd have convinced scientists. They haven't. They just keep asserting nonsense, like you keep asserting nonsense. I'm to believe some anonymous internet dude over people who dedicate their lives making this world a better place? Wait..., have you written that paper yet? No? Oh, well, then a shout out to Frances H. Arnold, George Smith, and Sir Gregory Winter in today's news for winning the Nobel Prize for their "pioneering work in evolutionary science." Thanks for continuing to provide us with evidence for evolution. Great job!

Martin: You have provided no evidence for Evolution. What you need to do is provide a demonstration of the descent of all life from the LUCA. Anything else is just interpretation. I await your demonstration.
Creationist have provided plenty of evidence, there are papers that examine and refute the claims of Evolution. The reason many scientists will not be convinced is because then they'd have to admit there is a Creator.

wwweamonreillydotcom #fundie #wingnut deviantart.com

image
There is a religion that is spreading so fast and so sneakily that it has almost achieved all its goals already and most people here haven’t even noticed. The carpet is about to be pulled out from under our feet. This religion’s members who have positions in very high and powerful places have done their job well. Soon every piece of our country will be affected by this religion. Our school children will be indoctrined in the dogma and most people in this country are already speaking in the language of this religion. Those who wish to spread this religion are the worst zealots of all. This religion is atheism.

Atheism is a religion. It is an anti-christ religion. Without Christ there would be no atheism. Those who would love to see this religion prosper often refer to our constitution that refers to ‘people being cherished of all religions and none’. It uses that statement continuously because it infers that atheism isn’t a religion itself. It puts atheism on a platform against ‘all the religions’. Another misnomer is ‘beliefs’. Atheists have ‘reason’ they tell us and people who know that God made us have ‘beliefs’. Atheists have ‘beliefs’ too. They believe that God doesn’t exist. Isn’t that a ‘belief’?? Also this cherishing people of all religions and none is rubbish. The atheist religion are the only cherished ones. All the others are bunched together and the atheists are given the high ground. Another misnomer is ‘secularism’. As atheism is an organised religion, with it’s own churches, websites, fanclubs, etc that tries to enforce its views, ways and dogma on everyone else in every way they can, secularism should be called what it really is –sectarianism.
In one minute I could name, off hand, at least a dozen Irish celebrities and politicians who have proclaimed themselves atheists. People in the print media, government, seanad, tv and radio who are so influential to our younger , impressionable generation. All of these scoff at Christians and think they are ‘cool’ by proclaiming themselves atheist. Could anyone name a dozen self-proclaimed militant Christians in one minute from those same powerful, influential fields?? Could anyone name more than two??

Instead of admiring the saints like we used to do in Ireland, we idolise z-list showbiz celebrities , sports people and talentless, empty people who are just famous for being famous. Being famous is the new religion here now. It was having money and property a few years back. Will we ever get back to admiring people who actually spent their lives giving to others and loving ourselves without always wanting to be someone else? Maybe. We can only live in hope amid the banal emptiness and despair. And people wonder why the young are taking their own lives??

Back to the non-atheist church. The abuse scandal was used, to full effect, to ridicule and silence the church forever after by the huge atheist organisation. This is despite the fact that less than 3% of priests actually carried out the vile abuse and there was no more abuse in Catholicism than there was in any other religion or ‘secular’ institution in the world. The systematic sectarian bigoted attacks against Catholics in particular and other Christian religions is now a fact of life every day we watch tv, listen to the radio or open a magazine or newspaper any day of the year. Go online and be horrified at the ignorance of the sectarian attacks on twitter, facebook and any of the boards. It’s become a fact of life for every religion except the atheist religion. Anything the people of the non atheist churches stand for MUST be ridiculed and the words and phrases ‘regressive’ ,‘the dark ages’, ‘medieval practices’, ‘the 1950’s’ and ‘John Charles McQuaid’ ‘child abuse’ and ‘magdalene laundries’ must be thrown into the discourse ad nauseum.
Today there is a several pronged attacked, by this atheist religion, on Ireland. Our Christian faith schools are going to be sacrificed for atheist schools to thrive instead. It doesn’t matter that the majority don’t want a change from the Christian Schools. The Atheist dictators will have their way anyway like they have done in most of Europe already. In the recent oireachtas hearings on abortion the atheists wanted abortion on demand into Ireland despite the will of the people and the advice of the psychiatrists and experts. Anyone willing to bet against them getting their way on this too??

All a bishop has to do is to express an opinion on something and we get the same shrill, squealing voices about ‘interfering’ and ‘dictating’ and more of the ‘1950’s’ and ‘John Charles McQuaid’ quotes. Please change the record, folks. The bishops have the same right to express an opinion as anyone else has.

After abortion has sneaked it’s way into Ireland for the first time ever, we will have gay marriage (despite many, many gay people being against it), euthanasia and after that anything and everything’s possible and likely and it will take place whether we want it or not.
Now after that food for thought (which will no doubt be ridiculed in the comments underneath this article if the newpaper has the courage to publish it in the first place) I will leave you with one more thought.
Say what you like about God but nobody was ever saved from a life of crime, drink, drugs, gambling, despair or depression by finding atheism.

Christian Ryan #fundie animaladventures1314.blogspot.com

Rerun Article: Did Dinosaurs REALLY Evolve Into Birds?
I hope everyone had a terrific Harvest Day! As you might recall, last year I took part in the Nanowrimo (National Novel Writing Month) challenge, which requires me to write a 50,000-word novel during the month of November. I am doing this challenge again this year, so I will be posting quite a few rerun articles this month. Don't worry though, I'll pick articles from a little ways back.

Anyway, Thanksgiving will soon be upon us? Do you have any Thanksgiving traditions? If so, leave them in a comment below.

Days till:
It is: 16 days till The Good Dinosaur's theatrical release
It is: 17 days till Thanksgiving
It is: 45 days till Christmas

In the Spotlight:
Again, nothing of note to share this week.

Topic of the Week by Christian Ryan

Did dinosaurs really evolve into birds? What does the fossil record actually reveal?
Every Thanksgiving, people all over the United States cook and serve the American turkey. Despite not being part of the first Thanksgiving, the turkey is a symbol for this holiday. But for many Americans, they aren't merely eating a bird – they're actually eating a dinosaur! Evolutionists believe that all birds, including the turkey, descended from small, feathered theropod dinosaurs; to be more accurate, they actually believe that birds are dinosaurs. Such a claim, if true, would be a major problem for creationists. How should a creationist respond to such this idea? What's the truth behind this belief?

Is this delicious Thanksgiving entree the descendant of dinosaurs?
The idea that reptiles evolved into birds isn't new. Not long after renowned naturalist Charles Darwin published his book in 1859 called On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life . . . it's easy to see why most people just call it The Origin of Species. In 1860, a feather was discovered fossilized in Germany and the species of which the feather belonged to was called Archaeopteryx. In 1863, Sir Richard Owen (the inventor of the name “dinosaur” and a creationist) described an entire skeleton of the creature; the fossils revealed a relatively small creature, with feathered and clawed wings, teeth and a long bony tail. In 1869, biologist Thomas Henry Huxley, often considered “Darwin's Bulldog” declared the animal as the missing link between reptiles – specifically dinosaurs – and birds. Ever since, most evolutionary scientists cling to the idea that theropod dinosaurs evolved into birds.

The similarities between dinosaurs like Compsognathus and birds led Huxley to believe that dinosaurs evolved into birds.
Before we go any farther, we must understand both perspectives of the origin of birds: the creation perspective and the evolutionary perspective. Let's look at them both now. Most evolutionists believe that sometime between the early to late Jurassic Period, about 201-145 million years ago, the scales of small theropod dinosaurs began evolving into fur-like proto-feathers for warmth. After millions of years of evolution, these proto-feathers evolved to be firmer and longer; dinosaurs began using their longer feathers for display purposes, perhaps to attract mates. Evolutionists are unsure as to how the power of flight came about. Some evolutionists believe these feathered dinosaurs were tree-climbers and began using their feathered limbs to glide through the trees; others believe they developed the power of flight from the ground up, using their proto-wings to increase their leaps into the air, perhaps after prey. Either way, these dinosaurs eventually were able to get airborne and were now technically birds.

An early conception of "proto-birds" from 1916.
What does the Bible say about the evolution of birds? Well, it says God created all the flying creatures on the Fifth day of the Creation week, 6,000 years ago, the day before He created dinosaurs.
“And God created...every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good...And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.” Genesis 1:21-23.
This is a major contradiction to the evolution story, which states that dinosaurs came about before birds. Meanwhile the Bible states that land animals – dinosaurs included – came after birds! And instead of evolving through the processes of natural selection and mutation like evolution teaches, birds appeared on earth fully-formed and ready for action.

Evolutionists commonly point to Archaeopteryx as being a transitional form between dinosaurs and birds.
Many evolutionists (specifically atheists) believe that there is too much evidence for evolution for creation to be true. I find it rather interesting how many evolutionists refuse to even consider creation an option; in fact, many will go as far as to say that creationists don't know science. I was browsing the internet and came across an article entitled Feathered Dinosaurs Drive Creationists Crazy by Brian Switek. “Oh, really?” I thought upon seeing this article; I was rather unimpressed by this evolutionist's attempt to denounce creationists. Curious, I read the article, expecting to find much criticism aimed at creationists. Much of the article was devoted to how our view of dinosaurs has changed over the years, but perhaps a quarter into the material, he talked about creationists and the “overwhelming evidence” that dinosaurs evolved into birds, in addition to his other criticisms about dinosaurs living with humans and dinosaurs living 6,000 years ago etc. He also spent a great deal of time talking about Answers in Genesis CEO Ken Ham and the Creation Museum. Here's an excerpt below:
“...dinosaurs with feathers are not welcome at Ham's amusement park [speaking of the Creation Museum]. Even though paleontologists have uncovered numerous dinosaurs with everything from bristles and fuzz to full-flight feathers—which document the evolution of plumage from fluff to aerodynamic structures that allowed dinosaurs to take to the air—creationists deny the clear fossil record.”
He had much more to say of course, some of which I'll get to in a minute. I must say that while reading the article, I was troubled how many misconceptions Switek has about creationism. What really ticks me off is when evolutionists try to make a case for themselves without actually doing the research. I find Switek's ignorance of what we creationists believe appalling. If only he continued to research and find answers to why creationists don't believe dinosaurs evolved into birds, then perhaps he would not have been so bold in his statements. Like any other fossils in the fossil record, even though the observable evidence – dinosaur and bird fossils – can point to or suggest a certain conclusion, they do not speak for themselves and are left to the interpretation of the individual based upon observable evidence. Evolutionists like to claim that creationists start from a presupposition and use that to base their opinions on, while they base their opinions on scientific facts. Now, it is true that we have presumptions, but so do evolutionists! They fail to realize is that they do the exact same thing. In this article, I plan to talk about the evidence for and against the dino-to-bird hypothesis and see what the evidence best suggests.

So what is the “evidence” for this belief in dinosaurs evolving into birds? Switek claims there is a “mountain of evidence that birds are living dinosaurs” and that we creationists deny the clear fossil record. Let's at the so-called evidence now and see whether we're the ones rejecting the clear fossil record. Before we go on though, let me explain that evolutionists do not believe all dinosaurs evolved into birds; they believe the ancestors of birds are maniraptorans, small theropod (meat-eating) dinosaurs. Some of these dinosaurs include Deinonychus, Troodon and the famous Velociraptor.

Dromaeosaurs, such as this Velociraptor, are commonly seen as relatives of modern birds.

Bird-hipped and Lizard-hipped Dinosaurs
Evolutionists are quick to mention that maniraptorans are very similar to modern birds anatomically. This is true. In fact there are over 100 skeletal features that dinosaurs share with birds; some dinosaurs such as Velociraptor even had a wishbone. But what is often not mentioned are the often quite significant differences between the two. Within the order Dinosauria there are two subcategories in which dinosaurs are divided, saurischians (lizard-hipped dinosaurs) and ornithiscians (bird-hipped dinosaurs). The dinosaurs in these two categories are divided based upon their hip shape. The difference between the two hip shapes is the pubis bone; the pubis bone in birds and bird-hipped dinosaurs points toward the rear instead of to the front as in lizard-hipped dinosaurs, modern reptiles and mammals.

Saurischian or lizard-like hip structure.

Ornithischian or bird-like hip structure.

Problem with dino-to-bird evolution? All the dinosaurs that evolutionists believe are related to birds (e.g. Velociraptor, Troodon, Sinornithosaurus) are lizard-hipped! Dinosaurs that are bird-hipped include Stegosaurus, Triceratops and Parasaurolophus. These dinosaurs bear very few bird-like features and are not believed to have evolved into birds. Yet the few times this is ever mentioned in secular literature, documentaries and etc. this problem is never presented any emphasis. And why would they?

The lumbering 4-ton Stegosaurus is a bird-hipped dinosaur, meaning it must have evolved into birds! Right? Of course not!

Three-Fingered Hands

The hand bones of Dienonychus (left) and Archaeopteryx (right) are quite similar.
Evolutionists absolutely love to talk about how both theropods and birds have three-fingered hand bones. Evidence of a dino-bird relationship? Hardly. As birds supposedly evolved from theropods, you'd expect that the digits represented in the hand bones would be the same in both dinosaurs and birds. However, dinosaurs have the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd digits (the first being the thumb); birds have the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th digits in their hand. What happened?

Avian vs. Reptilian Lungs

The dinosaur Sinosauropteryx was so well preserved, that the reptilian-like lungs have also been fossilized.
If theropods are the ancestors of birds, you should find avian-like lungs in theropods. Of course, as most dinosaur remains are fossil bones, we can't know too much about their lungs and respiratory system. However, paleontologists have discovered the fossilized remains of a Sinosauropteryx, a small bird-like theropod from China, related to Compsognathus. This Sinosauropteryx specimen retains the outline of the visceral cavity, and it is very well preserved. Much to the dismay of evolutionists, they reveal that the lung is very much like that of a crocodile.

In Switek's article, he mentions how the Creation Museum didn't display feathered dinosaurs, nor does Answers in Genesis portray dinosaurs with feathers in books and DVD's. And he's right. But what if there's actually a scientifically good reason for this? Of course, failing to do his research to see why creationists don't portray feathered dinosaurs, he just scoffs and claims that “they take pride in promoting out-of-date, monstrous dinosaurs that more easily fit their contention that these animals were created separately from all other forms of life.” I'm very sorry Switek, but maybe you are the one who's trying to go against the fossil evidence. Like just about every other evolutionist out there, he claims that creationists just believe in non-feathered dinosaurs because we believe they didn't evolve into birds and then points to so-called “feathered” dinosaurs; no further explanation is given. He would have only had to read a few articles on the Answers in Genesis website to find their true opinion, which I will get to in a minute.

Is there actually evidence to support the belief that dinosaurs, like this Troodon, had feathers?
There are two types of “feathered dinosaurs” you'll hear about: dinosaurs with bird-like flight feathers and dinosaurs with proto-feathers. First let's look at the dinosaurs with “proto-feathers”. In 1996, evolutionists thought they found the amazing proof for their theory upon the discovery of Sinosauropteryx. This small carnivorous dinosaur is associated with the outline of what many believe to be fur-like proto-feathers. But upon looking at the “proto-feathers” closely, you can see that they really aren't that feather-like. They are much more similar to hair in appearence. In fact, it seems to some creationists that seems that these features are actually connective tissue fibers (collagen); this is found in the deeper dermal layers of the skin. These features have been found not only on other dinosaurs, but also ichthyosaurs, dolphin-like marine reptiles! Yet no one suggests these creatures were feathered. Another thing about the "fluffy-looking" structures that creation scientists have noticed is that many of these structures appear almost fur-like. Perhaps some of these dinosaurs were covered in something similar to pcynofibers, fur-like structures found on pterosaurs that are very similar to mammalian hair.

Dinosaurs like Sinosauropteryx might have been covered in a type of "fur".
In this article, Switek mentions this fossil discovery:
“Put feathers on a Velociraptor—we know it had feathers thanks to quill knobs preserved along its arm bones—and you get something disturbingly birdlike, revealing the dinosaur's kinship to the ancestors of Archaeopteryx and other early birds.”
In 2007, scientists published the find of a fossil arm bone of a Velociraptor. Along the forearm are six bumps that they claimed were very similar to those found on the bones of some modern birds. In modern birds the bumps are the quill knobs where feathers were once supposedly rooted. Is this proof of a feathered dinosaur? Perhaps, but sources that talk about this find give no details as to why the quill knobs don't extend further along this bone or if there were other fossils were also examined or how complete the find was. Who's to say this is even the arm bone of a Velociraptor? There are many uncertainties with this fossil. Keep in mind that I'm not doubting the validity of the scientists who studied the fossil, but we should also remember that we should be cautious about such claims based on scant evidence and the claims made by scientists with evolutionary presuppositions.

No feathers seem to have been present on Velociraptor, but pcynofiber-like fuzz is still a possibility.
What about “dinosaurs” that actually have fully-functional actual feathers? Archaeopteryx and Microraptor are two such creatures. Both of these animals bear toothy snouts, clawed and feathery wings and bony tails. They also both have a pair of enlarged retractable toe claws like those of raptor dinosaurs, such as Deinonychus and Velociraptor. Surely this is proof that these animals are the missing links between dinosaurs and birds.

Microraptor is a very unique creature with four fully-functional feathered wings.
First of all the feathers on the bodies of Archaeopteryx and Microraptor are actual feathers and not collagen fibers or fur-like structures. They also have the same digits configuration of modern birds (like modern birds they bear the 2nd, 3rd and 4th digits). Undoubtedly, these animals are birds. The fact that they have reptilian features does not make them half reptile/half bird. In fact, there are several actual birds that have reptilian features: ostriches and baby hoatzins also have clawed wings, and no one questions that these animals are birds; the extinct bird Hesperornis possesses teeth in its beak; and the seriema of today even has an enlarged second toe claw, similar to the ones seen in raptors. If you don't need a missing link between dinosaurs and birds (which creationists don't) then there's no need to call Microraptor and Archaeopteryx anything other than 100% birds.

The seriema is a medium-sized bird living today with an enlarged toe claw, similar to the ones found on dromaeosaurs.
If you look in dinosaur books, you've likely seen diagrams similar to the one below:

This is a typical chart showing the evolution of dinosaurs to birds.
This picture suggests that the fossil record wonderfully displays the evolution from dinosaurs to birds; with more dinosaur-like creatures in lower geologic rock layers and more bird-like creatures in higher layers, slowly evolving more complex feathers. Isn't it strange that we creationists reject the plain evidence in the fossil record as Switek states we do?

Unfortunately, this isn't what the fossil record represents at all! Despite this being portrayed in just about every secular dinosaur book, the “clear fossil record” (as Switek puts it) tells a different story. Archaeopteryx, the famed transitional between dinosaurs and birds is believed to have existed 150-148 million years ago, during the Late Jurassic Period. The problem? Most bird-like dinosaurs that are commonly said to be closely related to birds, according to this worldview, lived before Archaeopteryx! Sinosauropteryx, a dinosaur with “proto-feathers” is claimed to have lived 124-122 million years ago! In fact, most dinosaurs with so-called “proto-feathers” are found above rock layers with more bird-like animals! The only dinosaur with "proto-feathers" that evolutionists have that didn't live after Archaeopteryx is Juravenator. But according to evolutionists, Juravenator lived at the same time as Archaeopteryx! In addition to this, we find birds very similar to the ones we see today living with "dino-birds". A Microraptor skeleton described in 2011 was discovered with tree-perching bird fossils (more bird-like than Microraptor) inside of its abdomen! This animal didn't only live with modern-like birds – it ate them! Even Velociraptor, a very bird-like dinosaur, is usually dated to live about 80 million years ago, long after birds has supposedly been flying through the skies for millions of years. These creatures were hardly ancestors to the birds. I for think the fossil record clearly demonstrates that dinosaurs evolved into birds, don't you? (That was sarcastic by the way).

Of course, I am not at all saying we should find all the transitional forms between dinosaurs and birds if this transition really did occur, but we should find a few. Evolution on this scale would take tens of millions of years and millions of generations between dinosaurs and birds. Where are these fossils? Surely some should have popped up if the "clear fossil record" suggests dinosaurs evolved into birds.

And to make matters even worse for evolutionists, extinct birds such as Anchiornis, Xiaotingia, Aurornis and potentially Protoavis are buried in sediment “older” than Archaeopteryx!

So, Switek, you believe the "clear fossil record" portrays dinosaurs evolving into birds? Hm...

Earlier, I mentioned how Switek claimed creationists don't like feathered dinosaurs. What if a feathered dinosaur with actual feathers were discovered? Would this prove that dinosaurs evolved into birds and that the Bible is untrue? Nope! In fact, nothing in the Bible goes against the idea that dinosaurs might have had feathers. Not only that, but I happen to like the look of feathered dinosaurs; I am not against the notion of feathered dinosaurs in the slightest, just the idea that they evolved into birds. Finding a feathered dinosaur would be no different than finding a mammal that lays eggs. which we actually have! The duck-billed platypus and porcupine-like echidna are monotreme mammals that lay eggs instead of giving birth to live young like all other mammals. Yet they aren't half mammals/half reptiles; they're mammals that lay eggs. We creationists aren't against the idea of feathered dinosaurs at all, it's just that so far, the evidence for feathered dinosaurs is missing in action.

Like Microraptor, the platypus bears characteristics of many different creatures, including the ability to lay eggs, a duck-like bill, a beaver-like tail and webbed feet, a mammal's fur, the ability to use a form of sonar and even a venomous spur. Yet it is not some evolutionary missing link, but a mosaic.
In order to prove that dinosaurs evolved into birds, one would need to find evidence of a transition between the two in the fossil record (like reptile scales evolving into feathers) and the fossil record would need to show dinosaurs and birds evolving in the right order. This is not what we find!

Why haven't evolutionists who love to talk badly about creationists bring up the points I made in this article? An even better question is why would they do such a thing? Never in Switek's article does he even mention these problems with the dino-bird theory (or solutions to them)! Like many other evolutionists out there, he decided to pick on the claim made by creationists rather than the evidence that backs up the claim in order to make creationists sound like unprofessional idiots. What he wrote in this article shows just how utterly and willingly ignorant he is of creationism and what we believe to be true (and more importantly why we believe it to be true).

As I hope to have made clear throughout this article, if one looks at the fossil record from an evolutionary perspective, we don't really learn about the origin of birds. It's really sad how little research Switek did on the truth about creationism, Answers in Genesis, dinosaurs, birds and the fossil record as a whole. I doubt hearing the truth would have actually change his mind, but at least he would have been more informed. Until he decides to learn what creationists actually have to say and only talking about evidence from his own side of the argument, he should avoid talking about creationism altogether. (Unlike him, I used information from both sides).

I do however hope that this article has enlightened you, my readers, and helped you understand that the fossil record doesn't support the belief that birds and dinosaurs didn't share the same lineage, but that they do share the same wonderful Creator God.

You can relax, dinosaur lovers! The turkey you'll have for Thanksgiving this year isn't the descendant of this Velociraptor!

John Ramirez #fundie search.stillsmallvoicetriage.org

John Ramirez, Escape from Hell Ex-Satanist

I grew up in a neighborhood that, first of all, the first killing that I experienced was feet away from me when I went to go in and get a gallon of milk. Was only 10 feet away from me, they shot a guy, like, 7 times. They shot him 7 times, it was a young boy. I've seen killings after killings after killings. In order to survive in the streets of the South Bronx you had to be a killer, you have to be a murderer, you have to smart, you have to be slick. On my father's side, it was all witches and warlocks. We lived on witchcraft, we had a contract right with the devil himself. I remember when I was younger, 8 or 9 years old, I seen him going through the room to worship the devil. I could see the presence of the devil come into that room. And my father was worshipping, speak in demonic tongues and worship and put flowers and put candles and put water out. 7:00 at night until 5:00 in the morning. I was already going to demonic church, I was going to witchcraft church. I was being trained to be a warlock, I was being trained with witches in the religion for 30 years, 40 years, 50 years. It was training me to know how to speak to principalities, spirits in the ground, the devil himself. You couldn't speak to the devil right away, you had to earn your right to speak to the devil.

In the first mass killing that they did in my neighborhood was at this house right here. The husband stabbed a lady 52 times and cut her ears off - here. And then me, my brothers would hang out with their daughter and we came to the house to walk them back home, to go hang out with the daughters right here and the daughters found their mother cut up to pieces here, in this house.

I was in a schoolyard playing with some friends in a schoolyard. A pastor came and they had this band came in, they were singing songs and people started to gather in the schoolyard. It was an amazing atmosphere, you know. Amazing joy in the schoolyard. I came from a broken home. This pastor's up on stage and he's talking about some Bible story and some Bible book and he's talking about how God loves everybody, ya know, this other stuff. And for the first time I'm getting kind of captivated. "Wow, maybe God does love me. Maybe God does want me. Maybe God wants my family. Maybe God wants to touch me and my family. Maybe He wants to change my family around." I said, "Wow, I can get some of that, I can get some of that. 'Cause He's coming my way." and for the first time ever I felt an incredible love that was indescribable. There's pastors coming off the stage, praying for people, touching people. So I said, "Now, it's my turn. Now he's gonna touch me." Ya know? Now Jesus is gonna accept me, Jesus is gonna show me what love is about. And this pastor passed me by. Never touched me, never laid his hands on me. He went down the line, and when he came up to me, he passed me by, he touched the other person. And I said, "Jesus don't love me, either. My dad don't love me, Jesus don't love me." I come from a broken home. Jesus - he likes the fact that my mother gets beat up. He likes the fact that I go to bed hungry. He like the fact that, you know, there's no heat in my apartment. he likes the fact that when we go to school, we're rejects, we're misfits in school.

So, this Jesus guy - he's just like my father. He's no different. He's just like my dad.

So, I went home, broken. I went home sad. I remember a week later, a couple of weeks later - two weeks later, I went to the schoolyard, hanging out, playing with a friend of mine's. I heard something fell and hit the ground. It was a voodoo necklace. So, I took the voodoo necklace - it had many colors - I took it, I put it on and the necklace was my first contract with the devil.

We went to a Tarot card reading, and when I went to a Tarot card reading, I was a little boy, I was 10 years old - we went in. The lady doing the Tarot card reading, called the witch lady, doing the Tarot card reading she was fascinated - had her eyes fixed on me. And she said, "This boy's got, this boy - we want him. We want him, we want him. The ___ which is Santeria want him. Spiritualism___ is Spanish, Santeria they call it worship of the saints, but it's not worship of the saints, it's worship of demons. We want him. And if you don't give him to us, he's going to lose his eyesight in 30 days." So, my mother was so desperate as a mother, my mother sold her furniture. My mother sold her bedroom set to get $250 to do my first ceremony, because this lady put so much fear in us, so much fear in my mother that my mother had to sleep on the floor, because there was no bedroom for her to sleep on, because she didn't want me to lose my eyesight.

So, they initiated me to the dark side. I was 8 to 10 years old. Their first love, the first contact I had, as a 10 year old boy, the devil showed up and took the offering of giving my life to him. And they put five beads around my neck. The five worst demons of principalities that are under Satan. They put them right around my neck, which is Santeria. They put them right around my neck and they said, "These are your spiritual guides. These are going to be your guardian angels, and they are going to take care of your life from now on."

(driving downtown) This is the building, this corner building here? Used to be almost abandoned, this building here - it's in the book. It used to be so broken down, my brother used to get the water from the pump - the pump (fire hydrant) right there. The apartment was all empty, all the apartments were abandoned, Only me and my family lived here. My whole childhood was stolen, my whole childhood was worshipping the devil, going to demon church. I would go to demon church from 7:00 in the evening to 5:00 in the morning, being trained by witches and warlocks, powers, principals, rites - who owned this region, who's in this region, who's running this principality, what principality name is this? I had...how to channel powers. By the age of 13 years old I was astro-projecting, my body - I would leave my body home and go to regions, in through the spirit and curse regions, curse a neighborhood, put the spirit of prostitution, the spirit of drugs onto the neighborhood. Homosexuality spirits here, demonic spirits here, a spirit of murder, spirit of suicide. I knew how to channel all these spirits into a neighborhood. At the age of 15, 16 years old, I was going into hospitals and putting death and ICU, death in one room so this person could die, because I wanted to be promoted with the devil. To move up the ranks, to be the biggest devil worshipper in New York City. The devil became my daddy. He replaced my dad, because I prayed - I said, "You kill my dad..." At the age of 33 years old my dad got shot in a nightclub, in the face, a woman that wasn't even his, when he had a good woman home - the devil took him out. The devil said, "I replaced the old to keep the new." And the devil became my daddy.

There was a club here, and my father died there. 33 years old. And we lived over there. And then, when I was 11 years old little boy, there was a store right here on the corner and a guy got shot in the street right there, right there - on the little corner here? Guy got killed there when I went to get the gallon of milk.

And I moved up the ranks, through devil worshipping, I moved up the ranks - I moved up through principalities and demons to the point that I was able to just sit with the devil like I'm sitting with you today. And the devil would manifest himself in human form, his presence would come into the room. And I would speak to the devil all night long. He would give me assignments. I would go to five clubs, five lounges a night, to look for people to recruit for the dark side. I would tell people their fortune. I would tell people their lifes, tell people the things that they did, things that was going to happen to them. Then they had no clue who I was, they didn't know who I was, I just had the demonic powers. I had a taste for blood. I would kill animals and drink their blood every week. If I didn't have money, didn't had time to buy an animal, I would cut myself and drink my own blood. The ring of the people that I was with, there was this demonic world: doctors, lawyers, principals, judges, police officers - they were all into witchcraft. Even singers today that are very well known. I would move principalities on that region to control demons on the ground operate to cut down the church, to cut down the growth of the church. To cut down the opportunity for people to get saved. I would be drunk, I'd come out of a club, half demon possessed, drunk. I was standing in the middle of the street and say to God, "Come down. You want some of this? You want me to slap you in your face? You want me to spit in your face? You come and mess with me."

I got married on Halloween. I had a demonic wedding on Halloween. I got married on Halloween. All the demons and principalities from different regions of around the work came to my wedding. No human beings came to my wedding, they were afraid to come to my wedding. So, I had a crazy...I sent out invitations, no one showed up. There were no wedding gifts. But demons came to my wedding, they baptized(?) my wedding. So my wife was a witch, I was a witch and then my daughter was born and I was training her to be a witch, too.

I remember the first time that I was going to sacrifice my first human being. The devil was sitting in the passenger side of my car when I parked. He said, "You love me?" I said, "Of course I love you, Dad." He said, "The guy on the rooftop, he's trying to...he's going to try to take you and hurt you and take your money. You'll kill him if you love me." So when I went up there to the rooftop, I lived on the 12th floor, I remember that. When I went up to the rooftop, I remember the part that he was hiding behind. He was hiding behind the stairway. This guy was 6'5", 250 pounds. I was half demon possessed. I felt that the demon went into me, it wasn't me anymore. So I was going to drag him into my apartment and stab him in the neck, 'cause I had a _____pot - it weighed about a hundred pounds plus, plus I had 9 machetes in it, it had knives in it that I ____ the roosters with. But when I went to grab this guy, I wanted to bring him to my apartment, he got off my hands, and just disappeared. He went down the stories - I mean this guy was like an Olympic athlete, he just - woosh - gone, he just disappeared. And I couldn't grab him and kill him. I was very disappointed that I couldn't kill my first human being.

(walking down a street, pointing to the side of a building) People wrote graffiti over it - this is a demon right here. Look at the demon that runs the gates of Hell. This is the one I was telling you about that is in my book on Santeria, right here. This little demon. This is the demon that runs Haiti. The principality over Haiti. The one that's over there is the principality over Islam. Look at this. To trap the people. The Truth. The Truth will set you free. They put that up there so that people can think they're part of this. (the cross.)

What is this place?

This a place where everyone in the park comes here to __? in witchcraft to hurt people, kill people. This is the place. We can go inside. Come on.

If I tell you I was going to kill you in 30 days, you prepare for your funeral, you was going to die in 30 days. I don't care who you were, I don't care who you knew, I don't care what religion you call yourself - you say you were Catholic, you were Christian, you say you were a believer - I was going to kill you. UNLESS you had a real relationship with Jesus Christ.

The lady that lived downstairs, she came up, she told me her husband was cheating. I want you to kill the woman he's cheating with, put a witchcraft spell on her and kill her. How much you charge me?

I said, "Look. Come back, I'm going to speak to the devil, my Daddy, for a time. Come back and I'll let you know in a couple days." The lady came back, the devil told me what to buy, he said to buy a coffin box, buy 21 black candles. Buy an image of the lady, put in the box, you know, to do the witchcraft to kill this lady. So we were going to do her for 21 days, she was going to die. after 21 days we were going to do her funeral. So the lady came to my house, we were going to charge her $10,000 dollars, I told her, to kill the lady. I said "Sure. I tell you what - I know you, you been good to me, everybody house parties...give me $7,000. I give you 30% off. I said, "I'll kill her. Give me - I'll take 30% off the 10, give me $7,000." So, when the lady was going to leave my house, she said, "By the way, the lady's a Christian. The lady's a Christian." I said, "I'll kill her for free." I said, "I don't need the money. I'll kill her for free. I'm going to teach these Christians a lesson they're gonna learn. I'll kill her for free." I told her, I don't want your money -I'll kill her for free.

So I did the voodoo thing, I did the witchcraft thing and 21 days went by and the lady didn't die. A month went by, the lady didn't die. And I was like, wow - what's going on? I mean, my reputation's on the line. So I called the devil, I called the demons that were assigned - I increased the witchcraft. I increased the witchcraft, I doubled the witchcraft on her, so she could die, like, overnight. Nothing was going on, nothing was going on. I was home at night and the devil shows up, the presence of the devil comes into my house. He tell me, "We have to abort the plan on the lady you want to kill." And I said, "Why would we want to abort the plan? My reputation is on the line. I'm a witch, I'm a warlock. If I don't kill the lady, people won't think that I have any powers." The devil say, "You don't understand. The God that she serves said don't - leave her alone. Don't touch her." And I said, "Who's this God?" He said, "The God that she serves."

I was so angry, I said no, give it one more week, but let's kill her. He said, "No. The God that she serves said leave her alone." From the witchcraft that I did on the lady, she should have been dead in less than 21 days.

(In a store)This is Jezebel. This is Jezebel in their religion. This is how it works. See these statues here, they don't mean nothing, but it's the demon behind it. So in order for me to identify with this, this has to be created, because i can't identify to a spirit. I can't identify to the spirit, we have nothing in common. I'm humanity, a spirit is immortality. A spirit is a spirit demon. I can't relate to it, so in order for me to relate to it, you have to put this guy in the middle, so I can relate to it, because he's human form. He looks like a human being. There's a story behind this guy, so you and I can related to him. so the demon operates through him. Understand? Same thing with these guys. And then they give themselves names and days and birthdays. The American Indians can get caught up with demonic forces, they can get caught up into the occult. These are the entrapment of the Native American Indians. But those are statues that the people use in demonic ways, in demonic religion. There's nothing in here that is holy, there's nothing...the only thing holy here is us standing here.

What happens in this place?

This here in the back, they do witchcraft in the back, they do voodoo, they do with spells in the back, they do cleansings in the back. All these demons they want you to buy a new statue so you can take a demon home. See, selected prayers. They make you believe that you're praying to God. Look. I used to use this book, selected prayers. They make you think that you're praying to God, but these prayers are not Godly prayers. Nothing in the Bible here, say nothing about the Bible, the crucifixion.

We had a book in New York City, in American. I was the third person to get this book that had symbols in the book of different demons, different principalities, of different ways of killing people with the witchcraft. I mean this book was so...no one had a copy of this book. You couldn't have a copy of this book unless the devil signed off on you. And I was the third person to receive that book. And I would take symbols in that book and do witchcraft to people, put people...make people lose their mind. I put witchcraft on people, make people get diseases out of nowhere. I put witchcraft on people, make people get leprosy. I put witchcraft on people, make people get cancer. I mean, I gave witchcraft to people, I gave people miscarriages, I gave people abortions, I put people in hospitals for surgeries, that didn't even have to go for surgeries. I did witchcraft so people would lose their minds. I spirits of bi-polar, of schizophrenia, spirits of disease on people. I put suicide spirits on people. I'd be up all night long, praying and talking to the devil - when Christians can't even go to church for one hour. When Christians can't even pray for one hour.

The spirit realm is more real than the natural realm. And we fail to see that. In whatever's not covered with Jesus Christ is an easy target to bring down. Like, and atheist - I could kill him easily. They are easy to kill. The Jehovah Witness was easy to destroy. The Mormon was easy to destroy. The people that walk around and say, "We don't believe in the devil." they were easy to destroy, because they didn't know how to seek any spiritual help.

I remember a time when Nicky Cruz came to...a Nicky Cruz group came into my neighborhood and they were called TRUCE. They would come and do drive-bys in my neighborhood. They would do, like, worship and then they would preach a word and then go to another corner and do the same thing. And I came after these groups to try to put, to try to bring them down, this group. And they were young kids, they were like 18, 17, 16, 20 - I mean. So I said how do they dare to place this junk, this filthy music in my neighborhood - see, they would call worship. This filthy music in my neighborhood, I would go after them. I would destroy these kids. So when I went up to where they were at, there was a wall of fire around them. I couldn't penetrate against them. And there was something that pushed me back, every time I try to throw demonic forces against them, something there would just push me back and I was never able to touch these kids. And I said, there was something here. It's not right. Something is not falling into place. So I walked away, I left them alone. I didn't want to deal with them, I said, okay - they won this first round.

(back in a store) So, it's obvious there are spirits here watching us.

Oh yeah, of course they're watching us.

Yeah, and so we're all protected, we're all...

Yeah, we're protected. We're under the Blood, brother. There ain't nothing like the Blood of Jesus. Amen? There's nothing that can touch us. We got a hedge of protection around us and we can walk into this place, we can chase demons out of here, we can curse the place to the ground, in Jesus' name and there's nothing that the devil can do.

I mean, I had so much money. Beautiful cars, beautiful woman, I had it all. I lived in a world that people...my neighborhood, my neighbors were terrified of who I was. They said, you mess with that guy, your family will die. You mess with that guy, he gonna get a gun, he'll kill you in your sleep. My daddy was awesome, my daddy was...he knew had had...he give me powers beyond what I could imagine. He gave me powers that people have fear of me, police have fear of me, the securities in my neighborhood fear me. People that knew that I was a devil - they would call me the devil's son. I brought Christians to their knees, not to pray, because they had no power. It wasn't because their God wasn't all powerful, don't get me wrong. Because their God was all powerful - the vessel was weak. The vessel had no prayer life, the prayer had no fasting life. And they had no relationship with God. There was a form of godliness in the person, but no power. The person was weak, the person had nothing going. He had a Bible, he had the right suit on, she had the right dress on - but there was no connection with Jesus Christ. Because they was out of His will, they was out of His promises and they was out of His divine purpose, and I had you. I owned you. I had you as a slave, I broke you, I put witchcraft on you. I kept doing that to Christian after Christian after Christian after families after churches. I'd chase everything down that represented the Cross of Jesus Christ.

(driving)Very demonic place.

So that place has an effect on the whole neighborhood, is what you're saying?

Oh yeah, of course. Oh yeah. This whole region unlocked that. That's the devil's throne, we just went into the devil's throne. (referring to the store they had been in)

That throne been there since the 80's. And then they go spend $100, $200 buying these things, and then they broke, they on welfare, public assistance. But they got money to buy all this junk, because they think their life is going to get better, they think that their life is going to improve, they gonna make progress in life, they think that they're going break generational curses. They think they're going break vex, spells, voodoo - they think they're gonna break all that, and basically, God says "I come. I'll do that for you for free."

He says give your life to Me, and I'll set you free. But they don't want that, that's too difficult for them. That's too complicated for them. But they can walk into a place like this and drop $200 and think that their life is gonna be free. And they're gonna live a life of abundance.

I had contact with the principality that runs Haiti. His name is Condero(?). I had contact with demons in Miami. I had contact with demons in Africa. I had contact with demons in New York City, principalities that run crossroads of the world. He owns 42nd street. Okay? There's a different principality that runs crossroads of the world here on 42nd street than the one that tries to run this neighborhood.

I didn't have a conscience. I remember I did witchcraft to my brother, I put him in jail for 5 years. Witchcraft - to my own brother, my own flesh and blood. I did witchcraft and put him in jail for 5 years. My other brother, there was a warlock. He came into my house one time with an attitude and the demon jumped on him. He ran out the house, he couldn't hold the pain in his stomach. My mother can bear witness to that. I did so much ceremonies in my body. I did so much ceremonies in my body, the last ceremony I did - I not only sold myself to the devil, I did a ceremony were I had to swallow animal blood and gunpowder. It was called (?) This is a ceremony of Haitian and French. If you do this ceremony with a demon - so when I go to people's houses and eat, they can't put witchcraft on the food. I did all the ceremonies you can do.

I would go to demon church. Every year, we would have a meeting, a secret meeting. All the high witches and warlocks would have this meeting to find out what principality was gonna usher out and bring in to run the region. We were more organized than the church itself. The kingdom of darkness was more organized than the church of Jesus Christ. We knew how to do ceremonies, we knew how to do things before the year was over to prepare ourselves for the next year. When Christians couldn't go to church and pray for one hour. When Christians couldn't go to church and have a consistent relationship with God. I even took a sabbatical from witchcraft and the devil punished me - took my eyesight for one year. I was completely blind for one year. Was registered with the Commissioner for the Blind. I was completely blind. They were training me to use a Seeing Eye dog, they were training me to use one of these sticks that you use to walk the streets. My mother took care of me for one year. My eyes went black. And a mist of gray went over my eyes. I was completely blind. And when I gave my life back to the devil, after 7 surgeries, the devil gave me back my eyesight. And I could see again. And that was my punishment for taking one year off, I wanted to take off. The devil said, you want one year off? I give it to you. He took my eyesight.

And that's the world I lived in. If you mess with the devil, he'll kill you, he'll kill your family. It was a fear that was great beyond measure, that you could not leave this religion. You could not leave Santeria, you could not leave ______, you could not leave spiritualism. The doctors could not explain how I lost my eyesight. Meanwhile, Christians - and would say, what Christians do bad, Christians sometimes missed the mark, and the only thing that shows up in their house is grace and mercy. When you're short with the devil, you do something the devil don't like - he kill someone. He kill your family member. I remember the devil warned this lady, he said you can't be with that person no more and she didn't care, 'cause she was in love with the person - the devil demon-possessed a homeless guy in the street. He took a hammer and hit her 17 times on her head, killed her.

One day, I was sitting home. It was amazing. I came from a nightclub the night before. I was sitting home watching a show called Jerry Springer, a crazy show - people beating each other up. I got joy outta that, I was getting joy outta that, laughing. For the first time I heard a voice say to me, "Son. I am coming soon. What are you going to do with your life?" An audible voice, shouting from across the room. And I thought it was the TV talking to me..But then I saw it can't be the TV, these people were beating each other up. This voice... I knew the voice of the devil, I would sit with the devil like I'm sitting with you today. He would come into human form, he would come in the room, he would come in sometime, the presence come into the room. The atmosphere changes and I now he was there for me, and he was talking to my conscience. I would talk back and we would talk all night long. I knew that, too. I knew him like you knew the back of your hand. I knew every demon, every principality that ran the region, that ran everything in America. Everything in Canada. Everything that ran - I know every principality that ran every occult, wicca, new age, buddhistism, Islam, Andria, spiritualism - I knew every principality that ran. I had a contract with every principality with them, I had straight A marks with every principality, with every demon in the ground, the devil, Jezebel. I had every - I knew demons that I couldn't even tell you names, because you wouldn't know who they are. I knew them all by name. And this voice was very different than any other voice. When I heard that voice come out of nowhere - it came out of the air. The Voice.

I went into shock. And then I saw a vision from the other side of the apartment like the sky was on fire, and people underneath - I saw people running for cover but there was no cover, where to hide. And I think, why did I see that vision? So I shook it off. But I remember I went to sleep, like a deep sleep, like someone put on anesthesia and I went to sleep. I ended up in a train full of people. I couldn't believe I was in a train full of people. And this train was going faster than you could ever imagine. I'd never been on something this fast on Earth. And it went into hell. And Jesus Christ took me to hell. And when I got to hell, the doors opened. I mean, there was a slam in the doors, there was an unspeakable echo that struck all the doors open and there was heat that came out of nowhere. It felt like you were gonna suffocate, the heat that came out. I ran, I got out the train and the people on the train, they had no faces. But you could see the fear on the people on the train. You could feel the fear, the impact of the fear that they were going to a place that they were never going to return. And the place was packed.

And then, I tried, I said, "I can't die here. I can't die here. This is not for me. I wasn't born to be in this place." I was saying this to myself, I was not born to be here. So I tried to find like a tunnel, a tunnel in hell. I was walking, trying to run through the tunnels in hell, trying to find a door. Maybe a window. Maybe there was a gap somewhere that I can come out and come back to reality. But there was no gap. I remember as I...the more I went into the tunnels, the more the fear gripped me, the more the suffering. I heard suffering, just draped over you. This fear drapes over you like you're wearing a garment. This fear drapes over you, something you can't even control. You have no control over. Something like, it grabs you. It don't let you go. I couldn't see the hand in front of my face. But I hear the wailing - I hear wailing. Like, you ever hear like a kid wail, an animal wail at the same time. It's like, they're kinda wailing, it's indescribable. And there was heat and a smell that was like...like if you was in the sewers or the gutters in New York City. I mean, but crazier than that. As I came to a part of the tunnel, the devil showed up. He said, "I was your Daddy. I gave you everything you needed. I took care of you. I blessed you. I protected you. I killed people for you. I did...I give you powers, I give you a name in the darkness, the kingdom of darkness. I gave you a name. When people came against you I destroyed them, because I knew you were going to be the vessel I was going to use to move my kingdom on the Earth. And now you want to leave me? Now you want to betray me? In demonic tongues, and I'm talking back to him in demonic tongues and telling him no, I'm not leaving, I'm just confused. I don't know what's going on. And he said, "No. I know what you're going to do. You're going to leave me and you're going to expose my religion. You're going to expose who i am and how I operate in the realm, in the spirit realm. Because I taught you things that I never taught no one else. I showed you. I trusted you with the things that I needed you to know so you can further my kingdom. Because I wanted to use you in a greater measure way." And in the confusion, he went to grab me. He went to grab and destroy me and the Cross of Jesus appeared. I didn't understand how a cross, a three foot cross appeared in hell, when I was wearing blue shorts and a T-shirt. And I put it on him. And when I put it on him, the devil melt like he was an infant, like an infant he melt and fell on the floor. Like, no powers. So I took that opportunity and I ran deeper into the gates, I ran deeper into the tunnels of hell, hoping that there was a door. I had...my hope was being...there was not hope in the hope at all. There was no place saying I'm coming out of here! This was it, this was the end. I had a fear that gripped me that was indescribable - I never felt fear like that, ever felt a despair - it was the opposite of what Heaven is, opposite of Joy, opposite of gladness, opposite of Peace. It was opposite of light and darkness. It was a place of torment, a place of...if I'm here, my family won't know I'm here. My daughter won't know I'm here. How would they find me? How would they look for me?

As I went deeper into the tunnel of hell, hoping that there was a door, a window, a crack somewhere that I can get out, the devil showed up again. "So now, we'll destroy you." I told him in the demonic language, I've got these marks, these are my contracts to protect me, to destroy you. He said, "Fool! I gave you those marks. Those are my marks that I OWN you. I OWN YOU. No one owns you, I do. And you're gonna live for me or you die." And he went to grab me a second time around. I said, this is it. He went to grab me a second time around - the Cross of Jesus Christ appeared in hell. There's no greater love than the Cross that would come for a sinner like me, in hell. So when David says, "If I make my bed in hell, He knows I'm there." Grace and Mercy showed up in hell. Grace and Mercy knew my address. Grace and Mercy have a plan for my life. To my unspeakable, demonic, selfish ways. Arrogant, self-centered ways in hell, when I was down for the count. Jesus Christ loved the misfit. And He said, "I have a plan for you. I love you more than you can ever imagine." And He showed up in hell. And when I woke up, my spirit came back into my body. I woke up and I bend my knee to Jesus Christ. I had $100,000 of witchcraft in my house. I threw witchcraft away, I threw religion away. I threw everything that had to do with darkness away. The people from Haiti, the people from Cuba, the people from Miami and New York said, "we have to kill him, because he knows too much. We have to destroy him. We have to kill him, because he knows too much. He's not one of us anymore."

And they came for the kill. They did their best, they came for the kill. I was asleep in the day. It was day and night when the demons showed up and tormented me 30 days. They tormented me for 30 days. They would grab me by my throat, pick me up off my bed. The room grew cold, I would lay in my bed. I'd feel another person laying next to me, ice cold, another person. I would look like this, and feel the presence. The presence was the devil himself, laying in my bed for 30 days. On and off, on and off trying to torture, trying to steal my mind, trying to rip my soul out of my body, trying to rip my spirit out of my body. I would tremble at night, like I never trembled before. 30 days. And I would cry out, I didn't know how to pray? I said, "Jesus! Jesus! Jesus!" I didn't know how to pray. I say, my sister prays - I heard her in church, she pray this way. I heard that person pray this way - I would bring all these prayers together, to try to pull them together like a puzzle, trying to fight for my life.

One day, I was in church worshipping. And I asked the Lord, "Lord, why are You letting this happen to me?" And one day I heard the voice of God again. He said, "I want to see how much you love Me. I want to see how much you trust Me." And never again, I was tormented by the devil. And I became an evangelist for Jesus Christ. Fourteen years serving the Lord and I would never trade it for nothing in the world. Over on Hallelujah Boulevard, there's a mansion for John Ramirez. And one days says, Welcome Home, well done faithful servant. And I tell you, there's nothing - I'm not talking about Christianity - I'm talking about a relationship with Jesus Christ. He is my Lord. He is my beginning and end. No weapon formed against me will ever prosper. I die when Jesus say I go Home. Not because of a witch. Not because of a person. Not because hex, voodoo, incantation - none of that can separate me from the love of God.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

I had never thought about the possibility that the Greek and Hebrew study aids I'd been using for decades were unreliable. I always figured they were the “experts,” making them theologically invincible. The truth is that Satan is a deceiver (John 8:44; 2nd Corinthians 4:4; 11:13-15). Satan's method is always to associate, infiltrate and then dominate. Many of our churches have been infiltrated by occultists and are now dominated by corrupt Bible versions and heretical Greek and Hebrew study aids!

Thank God for the trustworthy King James Bible!!!

As hard as it may be to believe, many of the popular so-called “scholars” are heretics: Strong, Vine, Scott, Thayer, Moulton and Milligan, Kittel, Wuest, Bauer, Danker, Metzger, et cetera. These men are all bad news... corrupted along with the Westcott and Hort Bible butchering crowd. Miss Riplinger details the unholy connection between these reprobates concerning the Christian faith in her book.

On page 1195 Dr. Riplinger summarizes the dangers of using Greek and Hebrew Bible study tools.

They —

Elevate the English words in lexicons by unsaved liberals above the English words in our Holy Bible.
Demote the words of the Holy Bible resulting in a loss of confidence in it.
Establish an elevated priest-class of a few Greek and Hebrew scholars and incite a rebellious anarchism in the pews, where everyman's own interpretation, taken from stacks of software supercedes that in the Holy Bible.
Give false doctrines and the heresies of history (e.g., hell dissolved, women deacons, the end of the 'world' updated to the end of the 'age,' Jesus reduced to a servant, not a Son, et al.).
Bring Christians in contact with pagan and secular interpretations, thoughts, views, heresies, and translations.
Provide a dangerous shortcut which leads Christians to believe that understanding the Bible is a linguistic feat, not a time when they meet with God as they “labour in the word” (1 Tim. 5:17). “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another . . .” (Col. 3:16). This has been replaced by solitary surfing in dangerous tides of software, books and on the web.
Lead to time spent away from the Holy Bible.
SOURCE: Dr. Gail Riplinger, Hazardous Materials: Greek & Hebrew Study Dangers - Introduction, pages 1195-1196.

If you research the matter you will learn, as I did, that Satan's primary attack is against key doctrines concerning Christ; such as, the Lord's deity, the Godhead, worshipping Jesus as God, Christ's preeminence, the plan of salvation and the blood of Jesus in Heaven. This is true of the Greek and Hebrew study aids as much as the modern corrupted Bible versions. They all came from the same occultist-inspired cesspool of iniquity in the late 19th century. By using only the King James Bible, you are bypassing all of the corruption of the past two centuries.

To put the matter another way, beware of anything that men publish of their own accord. The King James Bible is not only our “final authority,” it is the ONLY authority!!! Bless God, I am as narrow minded as the Holy Bible!!! You don't have to understand Greek and Hebrew to understand the English Bible.

Please consider the following quote from Dr. Riplinger concerning the unreliability of the Greek texts themselves...

No One Agrees on Greek Grammar

Should we wait for the latest A+ Greek grammar to spring up like Aphrodite or Apollo from Hades, and solve the confusion? Hardly, since as long as there are different minds seeking to be “as gods,” there will be different opinions. Man's conflicting ideas about tense, aspect, voice, mood, person, number, augment, thematic vowels, reduplication, principle, parts, tense formatives, personal endings, and deponency are as endless as new versions which put them in print. Newer grammars hold no hope as generation X grammarians slide further and further from the ABC's of the KJB (ABC = Always Based on Content).

SOURCE: Dr. Gail Riplinger, Hazardous Materials: Greek & Hebrew Study Dangers - Introduction, page 129.

The serpent (Satan according to Revelation 20:3) deceived Eve in Genesis 3:1-4.

Satan's Three Step Plan:

You question God's Word and plant a seed of doubt in the victim's mind.
Once the seed of doubt is planted, then you tell them, “It's a good book, but it's not perfect.”
After you cause the doubt, then you remove the Bible. Now that God's Word has been removed, man becomes deified and tell them that their feelings are the standard of truth. This is Satan's method and it has worked for thousands of years.
By using the preceding method of deception, the Devil has deified modern Greek and Hebrew so-called “scholars.” May we never elevate men above the precious Lord Jesus Christ and the inspired Words of God (which I believe to be the King James Bible).

Berend D. Boer #fundie berenddeboer.net

[Intro to a website claiming to refute the Skeptic's Annotated Bible]

By chance I stumbled upon the Skeptics Annotated Bible. Obviously a lot of work has gone into this. And the website is done quite well. But I have to disagree with the premises as expounded in the preface. The first is:

"Yet few of those who believe in the Bible have actually read it."


As no proof is cited of this, and the author only quotes from his personal experience, I feel free to do the same. I grew up in a Dutch Christian family, where we actually read through the Bible year after year. Every time after a meal, three times a day, we would read a portion of the Bible, continuing where we had left before. And now, in my family, I do the same. Everyone in my church did this, as did everyone at the Christian school I attended. Currently I'm living in New Zealand and at the Church we attend people read through the entire Bible as well. My denomination is Scottish, and everyone from our churches in Scotland does the same. So it's actually not uncommon among Christians to read through the entire Bible.

The author makes another claim, namely that the clergy quote very selectively. My experience absolutely cannot support that claim, as many Bible passages the author finds troublesome in one way or another, are quoted or refered to at various times. I have to admit that this is in Churches were people are expected to know the Bible very well. In Churches where that isn't the case, quoting might be more selective, and that is quite understandable. If you are curious to know William Shakespeare, are you going to read his all his works? Or just the most well-known?

But to support my case even further consider these three things:
Many commentaries have been produced in the past, some especially targeted at laymen.
In the churches I know, pastors frequently use the Wednesday evening service to preach from a single book or a prolonged story in its entirety. They usually treat more popular items like Jacob or Joseph, Ruth or Esther, Elia or Elias, but they don't skip. They treat every single detail.
Some preachers are known for preaching through the entire Bible, every Sunday continuing where they left off. Their main reason was just to avoid being selective about the Bible, the very thing the author accuses them of. Take Luther and Calvin:
The Reformation: A Return to the Primacy of Preaching:
For 36 years then, Luther expounded the Bible in Wittenburg, first in the little chapel, and then in the great city church. He preached often: at least two times on Sunday, and usually three times a week, in the morning. And his method was to preach systematically through the Bible.
Calvin Courier Newsletter Fall 1997, Number 20:
He followed lectio continuo, preaching from the Bible one book after another, chapter by chapter, verse by verse.
Given the limited time and attention span it is understandable that most pastors don't preach through the entire Bible anymore. But I still find it regrettable. Pastors should do this more, just to avoid bias. The entire Bible is the Word of God, not just the parts that happen to be the most well-known. There might also be another reason why pastors avoid certain parts: new translations are so vivid and written in such plain newspaper-like language, that they are no longer suitable to be read in Churches where children are present. This is unlike the original Hebrew and translations like the King James, where restraint is always exercised in describing horrid situations.

The second premise I disagree with is:

But if so little of the Bible is actually used, then why isn't the rest deleted? Why aren't the repetitious passages -- which are often contradictory as well -- combined into single, consistent ones?
We currently have had two thousands years of the Bible as it is accepted by Christians. The author probably realises he isn't the first to see "contradictions". In my possession is a Dutch book, written by Johannes Polyander. I'm not aware of any English translation, but translated the title is "Apparent contradictions in the Bible explained" and was written in 1621. No doubt it is easy to find such books in the entire 2000 year history of the New Testament Church. A recent list of books that treat apparent contradictions can be found at Bible Contradictions and Other Bible difficulties

The author's `solution', deleting parts of the Bible, is wrong. As the author notes a few paragraphs below:

But to the Bible-believer the entire Bible is inspired, and has God as its author. To him each passage contains a message from God that must not be altered or deleted.
He has at least read those portions of the bible correctly! Let me quote this passage (Rev. 22:19):

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
So I agree with him that this is not the solution. And I will set out to show that it is not a necessary solution.

Having said this, I do not believe the approach of the SAB author to reading the Bible is a-priori invalid. As a protestant I firmly believe that everyone is allowed to read the Bible. One is encouraged to examine the Bible (Acts 17:11):

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
And you certainly don't have to be an expert in Hebrew or Greek as some people seem to have said. That's why a reliable translation has been valued always so much by protestants, up to this day. I even urge Christians to study contradictions raised by the SAB, for example at school. It might be very good for them to encounter things they cannot (easily) refute. Humility is good!

I intent to discuss all issues raised by the SAB. The SAB even encourages this ‘dialogue’ (asking for reciprocal links). I will do this by study each book in the Bible, picking a random one each time and going over the things SAB comments upon. As I'm embarking on this quest, I expect to be able to refute many of them. The ones I can't I leave to God. Faith in the Bible doesn't stand or fall with me being able to refute every apparent contradiction. As the apostle said (2 Peter 3:16):

As also in all his (Saint Paul's) epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
I just don't believe that what I don't understand is not true. I don't understand Quantum Gravity, is it therefore untrue?

It's not my goal to convince SAB followers or other atheists. It doesn't work that way. But my goal is to help those who sincerely study the Bible, and have questions about issues raised by the SAB. It's my prayer that God will bless my endeavours.

Berend Deboer #fundie berenddeboer.net

Preface

By chance I stumbled upon the Skeptics Annotated Bible. Obviously a lot of work has gone into this. And the website is done quite well. But I have to disagree with the premises as expounded in the preface. The first is:

Yet few of those who believe in the Bible have actually read it.

As no proof is cited of this, and the author only quotes from his personal experience, I feel free to do the same. I grew up in a Dutch Christian family, where we actually read through the Bible year after year. Every time after a meal, three times a day, we would read a portion of the Bible, continuing where we had left before. And now, in my family, I do the same. Everyone in my church did this, as did everyone at the Christian school I attended. Currently I'm living in New Zealand and at the Church we attend people read through the entire Bible as well. My denomination is Scottish, and everyone from our churches in Scotland does the same. So it's actually not uncommon among Christians to read through the entire Bible.

The author makes another claim, namely that the clergy quote very selectively. My experience absolutely cannot support that claim, as many Bible passages the author finds troublesome in one way or another, are quoted or refered to at various times. I have to admit that this is in Churches were people are expected to know the Bible very well. In Churches where that isn't the case, quoting might be more selective, and that is quite understandable. If you are curious to know William Shakespeare, are you going to read his all his works? Or just the most well-known?

But to support my case even further consider these three things:
1. Many commentaries have been produced in the past, some especially targeted at laymen.

2. In the churches I know, pastors frequently use the Wednesday evening service to preach from a single book or a prolonged story in its entirety. They usually treat more popular items like Jacob or Joseph, Ruth or Esther, Elia or Elias, but they don't skip. They treat every single detail.

3. Some preachers are known for preaching through the entire Bible, every Sunday continuing where they left off. Their main reason was just to avoid being selective about the Bible, the very thing the author accuses them of. Take Luther and Calvin:

The Reformation: A Return to the Primacy of Preaching:
For 36 years then, Luther expounded the Bible in Wittenburg, first in the little chapel, and then in the great city church. He preached often: at least two times on Sunday, and usually three times a week, in the morning. And his method was to preach systematically through the Bible.

Calvin Courier Newsletter Fall 1997, Number 20:
He followed lectio continuo, preaching from the Bible one book after another, chapter by chapter, verse by verse.

Given the limited time and attention span it is understandable that most pastors don't preach through the entire Bible anymore. But I still find it regrettable. Pastors should do this more, just to avoid bias. The entire Bible is the Word of God, not just the parts that happen to be the most well-known. There might also be another reason why pastors avoid certain parts: new translations are so vivid and written in such plain newspaper-like language, that they are no longer suitable to be read in Churches where children are present. This is unlike the original Hebrew and translations like the King James, where restraint is always exercised in describing horrid situations.

The second premise I disagree with is:

But if so little of the Bible is actually used, then why isn't the rest deleted? Why aren't the repetitious passages -- which are often contradictory as well -- combined into single, consistent ones?

We currently have had two thousands years of the Bible as it is accepted by Christians. The author probably realises he isn't the first to see "contradictions". In my possession is a Dutch book, written by Johannes Polyander. I'm not aware of any English translation, but translated the title is "Apparent contradictions in the Bible explained" and was written in 1621. No doubt it is easy to find such books in the entire 2000 year history of the New Testament Church. A recent list of books that treat apparent contradictions can be found at Bible Contradictions and Other Bible difficulties

The author's `solution', deleting parts of the Bible, is wrong. As the author notes a few paragraphs below:

But to the Bible-believer the entire Bible is inspired, and has God as its author. To him each passage contains a message from God that must not be altered or deleted.
He has at least read those portions of the bible correctly! Let me quote this passage (Rev. 22:19):

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.


So I agree with him that this is not the solution. And I will set out to show that it is not a necessary solution.

Having said this, I do not believe the approach of the SAB author to reading the Bible is a-priori invalid. As a protestant I firmly believe that everyone is allowed to read the Bible. One is encouraged to examine the Bible (Acts 17:11):

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

And you certainly don't have to be an expert in Hebrew or Greek as some people seem to have said. That's why a reliable translation has been valued always so much by protestants, up to this day. I even urge Christians to study contradictions raised by the SAB, for example at school. It might be very good for them to encounter things they cannot (easily) refute. Humility is good!

I intent to discuss all issues raised by the SAB. The SAB even encourages this ‘dialogue’ (asking for reciprocal links). I will do this by study each book in the Bible, picking a random one each time and going over the things SAB comments upon. As I'm embarking on this quest, I expect to be able to refute many of them. The ones I can't I leave to God. Faith in the Bible doesn't stand or fall with me being able to refute every apparent contradiction. As the apostle said (2 Peter 3:16):

As also in all his (Saint Paul's) epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

I just don't believe that what I don't understand is not true. I don't understand Quantum Gravity, is it therefore untrue?

It's not my goal to convince SAB followers or other atheists. It doesn't work that way. But my goal is to help those who sincerely study the Bible, and have questions about issues raised by the SAB. It's my prayer that God will bless my endeavours.

Unknown Commenter #racist #psycho reddit.com

(That whole thread is an absolute dumpster fire, but this guy I think is the worst, I apologize for the length of the quote but I wanted to include as many details about the shooting as possible to show just how psychotic this guy really is.)

RE: NEVER FORGET: In 2004, Chai Vang was out hunting when confronted by 8 armed white supremacists who hurled racial slurs at him, assaulted him and blocked him from leaving. It wasn't until one of the men fired a shot at Vang and missed that he put his military training to use and took them all out.

This guy shot four of the hunters multiple times in the back, and the "first shot" allegedly fired by one of the hunters was never recovered. Also, he removed the scope off his rifle before he fired his rifle.

This is why the claim of self defense was thrown out the window. Can you guys do some research before upvoting a literal murderer?

The white supremacists were fleeing to find cover so they could find somewhere from which they could safely return fire. Vang did the right thing and neutralized the threat. And you're actually expecting racist Wisconsin investigators to conduct an impartial investigation.

Yeah, no. When a white man shoots any person of color in the back, he gets off scot free from an all white jury by claiming self defense

Also, literal evidence of premeditation. If he was actually returning fire after being fired upon he wouldn't have had time to take it off.

Edit: oh, and he also had time to take off his orange vest and switch it over to it's camouflage side... and chase people several hundred yards through the woods... and then wait in the underbrush until two more people came out of the cabin on their ATV to tend to the wounded and shoot them in the back... then walk over to them and execute them at point blank range. Clearly self defense /s

6 men who were twice Vang's size surrounded him with guns and ATVs in the middle of the woods, called him a "chink" and "gook" and blocked him from leaving. Vang had every reason to fear for his life and unlike you - I have no sympathy for white people who call Asians "chinks" and "gooks".

But nah, it wasn't premeditated. He was already a good distance away when one of the men fired in his direction. He took cover, removed the scope and got down to business. I'm proud of Vang's actions. He's a hero. The men got what they deserved and their actions contributed to their death.

You're not allowed to kill people because they call you mean names sorry. Just because they were hunting and armed does not change that fact.

Yeah, you're not. You are allowed to kill people who shoot at you though. But let's suppose the men never shot at Vang.

Do I have any sympathy for those racists? Nahhhhh. Fuck em.

I'm pretty confident that Jessica Willers and Lauren Hesebeck were neither men or twice his size.

What's more, there were eight people there, not six. All eight were shot at, four of them in the back, three survived the immediate altercation, and one died in hospital shortly afterward.

It's starting to seem an awful lot like you're making up the details on your own.

Which means he was even more outnumbered than I indicated, which means he had even more reason to fear for his life than I indicated.

You're just salty your white supremacist cousins got fucking owned. Lmao.

6 men, two women, only one of whom was actually armed. Oh, and also they were on their own property and Vang was trespassing. That's like raiding the bar at someone else's family reunion, and pulling out a glock and gunning them down "because you were threatened by how many of them there were" when they told you to fuck off.

spicy words don't justify murder (even if that did happen, which is doubtful), also there is no evidence of them blocking him whatsoever, and the fact that he was able to remove his scope before firing (by his own admission) indicates that he was the one to fire first.

I have no sympathy for people who think that mass murder is the appropriate response to playground insults.

He shot mostly unarmed people in the back after trespassing on their property, and being told to leave. And even if somehow, despite the evidence, we were to assume that he didn't fire first, it still doesn't excuse, at the very least, the killings of Laski, Jessica Willers, and the Crotteaus, who were all shot in the back, at extremely close range, while they were already wounded on the ground as determined by forensic evidence. >I'm proud of Vang's actions.

except when you try to leave, guys twice your size start blocking your way, call you slurs and then shoot at you. THEN you start shooting back in fear for your life.

a bar is not the wilderness, there aren't always clear property lines in the wild. this man was out hunting and stumbled into someone else's property. not the same scenario AT ALL. you're comparing this to dylan roof? a known white supremacist who was posting on far right nazi online forums, who was PLANNING on killing black people because of all the nazi propaganda he was involved with. you think that's the same as a guy who was out hunting, stumbled into someone's private property and then when he proceeds to leave, they block his way, mock him, threaten him and shoot at him.

you're reaching hard to change the narrative. what a slimy piece of shit you are. fuck off moron.

”I'm sorry you're in pain.”

Oh, I got a tad upset at people rejoicing over mass murder. Clearly this makes me the asshole. Take me to jail.

Your white supremacist buddies got owned and it was fucking hilarious. Get over it.

We're rejoicing over an Asian man defending himself against white supremacists. And please refrain from using racial insults on me like your racist buddies did on Vang. Never at any point in this conversation did I call you a 'pedophile' even though being white means you probably are one.

Also, check out this story where a white dude got his face smashed in by a Korean guy after a racist coronavirus prank. Nothing offends white people more than Asians standing up to them. That's why white people are so salty about China. Because China challenges the US-dominated world order unlike Japan or South Korea which are subservient to US interests.

Elon Musk says Chinese economy will surpass US by 2 or 3 times: ‘The foundation of war is economics’

Too hilarious. LMAO

If a white guy just trying to provide for his family was a minority living in an Asian majority country, and 6 Asian men with guns surrounded him, called him a pedophile and a child molestor, tried to intimidate him and make him feel like he was nothing, assaulted him and then blocked him from leaving - then one of the men shot at him after he finally managed to leave - I would feel no sympathy for the Asian guys who were killed.

Well then it's pretty handy that none of that happened.

https://youtu.be/ehHj640dHEc?t=6526

The shooting started when they told him they were going to report him to the sheriff for trespassing after they saw his hunting tag number and wrote it down. Only one of the people he killed was armed.

Vang was walking away, that's true, but according to the testimony of the victims, they realized that his licence number was written on the back of his jacket, so they wrote it down, but also mocked him and told him that they were going to give the number to the sheriff (this is the way in which he was "threatened" i.e. by being told they were going to call the police on him), and at that point Vang took the scope off his rifle (which was an SKS variant) and started shooting. You see, Vang already had another conviction from trespassing, and also a DV incident on his record (in which his previous rifle was confiscated, which was why he was deer hunting with a shitty SKS) and was generally known for having a volcanic temper, so if he was reported again, he'd be in deep shit.

He shot 4 of them initially at a range of about 40 meters to 100 meters (he was, admittedly a decent shot). This evidence also directly disproves Vang's claim that he was surrounded since he was quite a distance away from even the closest people he shot. Of those 4 only 1 was armed, and one person was able to return fire with a single shot (not the originally armed guy, Vang shot him first, but one of the companions picked up the gun). They weren't able to find the shell casing for this shot, however of the 20 or so shots that he fired, forensics were only able to recover 16 (It turns out it's hard to track down casings in think underbrush even with metal detectors). He then chased another one, also unarmed, for several hundred meters through the woods before gunning him down too. After that point, the wounded, who he had left, were calling for help on their radios, while Vang was switching out his orange vest for the opposite side which was camouflage colored, and then hid in the underbrush.

When the property owner's daughter and friend came down from the cabin on the back of a single ATV, Vang shot them in the back, hitting both of them with one bullet. The daughter fell of the ATV first, at which point Vang fired another shot which hit the friend a second time, knocking him off the ATV. At this point Vang came out from concealment, walked over to the two, and executed them at point blank range. Both were unarmed. After this, he decided to loop back around to the site of his first set of victims, and finding one on the ground who was not dead, executed him too.

Vang then decided to finally make his escape after hearing more vehicles approaching from the cabin, about 10 minutes after he started shooting, and since he had run out of ammunition. Unfortunately for Vang, the initial confronters, had, in fact written down his hunting license number, which was given to the sheriff by one of the survivors.

Vang did tell a completely different story, but it was contradicted multiple times by the forensic evidence. Every time the story of the victims differs from that of Vang, the evidence backs up the victims and not Vang. He told a total of 4 different stories of the events, all un-coerced, all after being informed that he could have a lawyer, and two of them even after being begged by his lawyers to stop talking.

Man, it's almost like white people aren't gonna have each other's backs and there's almost no chance this author might be biased.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

I recently purchased an excellent, eye-opening, helpful 1203 page book by Professor Gail Riplinger titled, “HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - GREEK & HEBREW STUDY DANGERS - THE VOICE OF STRANGERS.” I recommend that every preacher, pastor, Bible teacher, evangelist and anyone who regularly studies the Bible using Greek and Hebrew study aids to get your own copy of this book. It's one of the best library investments I've ever made.

[...]

I had never thought about the possibility that the Greek and Hebrew study aids I'd been using for decades were unreliable. I always figured they were the “experts,” making them theologically invincible. The truth is that Satan is a deceiver (John 8:44; 2nd Corinthians 4:4; 11:13-15). Satan's method is always to associate, infiltrate and then dominate. Many of our churches have been infiltrated by occultists and are now dominated by corrupt Bible versions and heretical Greek and Hebrew study aids!

Thank God for the trustworthy King James Bible!!!

As hard as it may be to believe, many of the popular so-called “scholars” are heretics: Strong, Vine, Scott, Thayer, Moulton and Milligan, Kittel, Wuest, Bauer, Danker, Metzger, et cetera. These men are all bad news... corrupted along with the Westcott and Hort Bible butchering crowd. Miss Riplinger details the unholy connection between these reprobates concerning the Christian faith in her book.

[...]

If you research the matter you will learn, as I did, that Satan's primary attack is against key doctrines concerning Christ; such as, the Lord's deity, the Godhead, worshipping Jesus as God, Christ's preeminence, the plan of salvation and the blood of Jesus in Heaven. This is true of the Greek and Hebrew study aids as much as the modern corrupted Bible versions. They all came from the same occultist-inspired cesspool of iniquity in the late 19th century. By using only the King James Bible, you are bypassing all of the corruption of the past two centuries.

To put the matter another way, beware of anything that men publish of their own accord. The King James Bible is not only our “final authority,” it is the ONLY authority!!! Bless God, I am as narrow minded as the Holy Bible!!! You don't have to understand Greek and Hebrew to understand the English Bible.

Wendy D. Beard, Reserve Teacher #fundie quora.com

I have not read all 48 answers, but I am very disappointed in the ignorance out there on this subject.

There IS overwhelming evidence of Semites in Egypt which could very well be the Israelites. Google Avaris. A huge settlement underneath the more modern city of Rameses of which the Bible refers to! Besides a huge Semitic settlement, is evidence of larger numbers of infant boys being killed, and of the settlement being vacated suddenly in the spring! On top of that is an Egyptian pyramid for a Semite! alongside a huge statue of a red-haired man with a multi-colored coat. It appears Joseph, as second in command to Pharoah, got to have his own pyramid and statue! This is overwhelming and specific evidence of Israelites in Egypt, Joseph in particular, the killing of Hebrew boy infants, and a quick exodus.

This escavation is a newer development. But should be quite common knowledge now. A documentary called “Pattern of Evidence” has been out in theaters in addition to being available online in multiple websites.

As to Mount Sinai, there HAS been a lack of evidence because the mountain that is NOW called Mount Sinai has no evidence. However, when this mountain was named by one famous woman, doesn’t mean she was ever correct.

There is a mountain named Jabal al Lawz of which all the locals claim it is the “mountain of Moses (or Musa in Arabic). It has a charred top like described in Exodus. It has Egyptian Hebrew hierogyphics, pictures of huge calves on the walls, and 12 pillars of stone. There is evidence of large amounts of water around a rock which could certainly be evidence of when Moses struck a rock and it provided water for all the people and their animals. There is also the bitter stream mentioned. The entire area seems to match that described in Exodus.

There is also a land bridge from Egypt to Saudi Arabia which could be the remains of the crossing of the Red Sea complete with Egyptian chariots in the Sea next to it.

So IF you look at the CORRECT mountain and the CORRECT pathway, the evidence is there. It is just that for many centuries, people were assuming that the Mount Sinai on our maps was the same Mount Sinai as in the Bible, but it is not.

Connor R #fundie debunkedevil.blogspot.com

[Someone attempting to debunk this webpage http://www.evilbible.com/common_lies.htm]

CTS- Common Lies Christians Tell
Ok, a few apparent lies that Christians tell. For the sake of being thorough I'll go through all of them, even the ones mentioned in the introduction. Before I begin, I'd like to make a point about lying. A lie is defined as "a false statement with deliberate intent to deceive". This means that Charlotte is accusing Christians of, completely on purpose, deceiving everyone that they discuss the following topics. That is one large accusation. I would contend that most, if not all, Christians don't fully understand the Einstein, Darwin, or American topics. Now I'll begin the explanations.

Einstein

This is a hotly debated issue. I'm not sure whether or not there is enough evidence to say it one way or another, but there are two basic conflicting views. Richard Dawkins (wrote "The God Delusion") sees Einstein as a pantheist, which he goes on to say is basically "sexed-up" atheism. He believes Einstein's use of the word 'God' was always used only in a poetic and metaphorical sense. On the other side of the issue, Susan Wise Bauer (wrote "The Well-Trained Mind") doesn't try to portray Einstein as a Christian, but argues that Einstein believes in one god and had a tendency toward deism. This view basically portrays God as a universal clock-maker, who winds everything up and then lets it tick without interfering. So those are the differing views, I'll post a few links below so you can see both sides. What we can say about Einstein is that he absolutely believed in the existence of Jesus as a historical figure. He also believed that religion and science can cooperate, they are not in contention.

Evidence for Jesus's Existence

First of all, the Bible is absolutely reliable as a historical document. Archeologists frequently discover artifacts that confirm the events recorded in the Bible. For a video on these findings click here. The writings of Josephus, a Roman citizen who lives from c. 37-100 wrote about Jesus. He calls him "a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man", and says that he performs paradoxes and won over many Jews and Greeks. He even calls him the Christ. In a later writing, he also calls James the "brother of Jesus, who is the Christ". Many other early scholars reference "Christus", a Latinized Greek translation of the Hebrew word "Messiah". Justin Martyr mentioned an "Acts of Pilate", a record of some cases Pilate was involved in, but only Tertullian also mentions this. The evidence for the Bible and Jesus's historicity is to numerous to do more than touch on, so look around for yourself.

Darwin Recanted on his Deathbed

I don't believe this to be true. There is very little evidence for this. This story became popular when it was preached by an evangelical woman named "Lady Hope". She may have visited Darwin, but if she did it is most likely that she did so around 7 months before his death. At this point in time he would not have been bedridden as she had said, and therefore was unlikely that he was studying the Bible then. As Charlotte said, his daughter opposed this and his wife made no comment on it. It's likely she would have, as she was worried about the "godless nature" of his views. This doesn't rule it out entirely, but it doesn't have the background to be stated as fact.

Evolution is false (or only a theory)

This is an interesting one for sure. I agree that micro-evolution is as close to a fact as you can get with our limited knowledge. All it does is explain the variation we see every day as humans. Charlotte goes on to admit that "macro evolution remains a theory", and then contends that it is a fact (by saying "EVOLUTION DID HAPPEN"). I know a certain line of resources (look to the right) that would contend otherwise, and with scientific observations of their own. The theory of evolution by natural selection is at this point in time filled with far too many holes to be assumed to be a scientific fact. I'm also going to stray away from saying it is a flat-out falsity because of the evidence on the other side of it. Hopefully time will tell, but for now, Christians saying it's only a theory aren't lying.

Atheists Have No Morals

Once again, Charlotte using a statistic to prove her point and does not give a source for it. It is a gross generalization to say that no atheist alive has morals, so I don't agree with this statement. I do, however, take issue with Charlotte's accusations that Christians cause true immorality (genocide, slavery, etc). I've already disproved the slavery point, see here. I've also argued many times that genocide is not often caused by Christians, but when it is there are absolutely not following the Bible's teaching. The only wars backed by God were against societies taking part in extreme immorality (demon worship, human sacrifice, sodomy, etc).

Regarding women's suffrage, the Woman's Christian Temperance Union was one of the most influential groups pushing women's rights. Eleanor Roosevelt, a huge influential leader, was a theist (although not a Christian). The Christians who believed that women should not vote misunderstood the historical context of verses like 1 Corinthians 14.35 and Colossians 3.18. Women do have a different God-given role than men, but that is a different topic.

Back to atheists' morals. The Bible teaches that "the Law is written on our hearts" (Romans 2). This would imply that every person, unless their conscience has been severely fragmented by sin, has a basic moral awareness. Furthermore, many values consistent with Christianity are encouraged in our society. However, an argument exists that atheism, if left unchecked, will cause moral deprivation. If there is no God, there exists no standard for ethics beyond what is helpful for society. When no objective standard exists, it is easier to argue that choices like homosexuality, bestiality, abortion, prostitution, etc can do no material harm to society. In fact, one of the only atheists against gay marriage is Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who has been labeled a hypocrite by fellow atheists. Food for thought.

United States Founded on Christianity

Charlotte is correct here, but I'm going to add some perspective. There is no disputing the fact that the majority of the founding fathers and colonists at the time were Christians. This means that America was founded on a number of biblical Christian values (equality, respect, etc). However, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison were all deists. They believed in a generic god, but did not accept orthodox Christianity. Charlotte is correct, one of the principle reasons for the voyage to America was freedom of religion. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: State sponsorship is not conducive to a strong Christian faith. There's no need for Christians to push this idea. This "lie" is likely based on ignorance, not deception, I've not met one Christian who knows the information I just posted above. Atheists, please inform my brothers of this respectfully, there are not lying to you.

There Are No Atheists In Foxholes

You can wikipedia this to understand it. This is meant as an expression, not a statistical fact. The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, which Charlotte referenced, stands against the use of this as a statistic. It's simply meant to show that many people re-evaluate their positions on God's existence when under circumstances of extreme stress. This common idea is backed up by the experiences of people who encounter NDEs, or Near-death experiences. I've posted a link below for some information about atheists in particular who encounter this phenomenon.

Near-death experiences: http://www.near-death.com/experiences/atheists01.html
Einstein opinions:
http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/02/08/was-albert-einstein-religious/
Historicity of Jesus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#Non-Christian_sources
Julia Gillard: http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/atheists_against_gay_marriage

Paul F. Taylor #fundie answersingenesis.org

An issue often used in an attempt to beat biblical creationists over the head is the worldwide distribution of animals. Such a distribution, say critics, proves that there could never have been a global Flood or an Ark. If the Ark landed somewhere in the Middle East, then all the animals would have disembarked at that point, including animals that we do not find in the Middle East today, or in the fossil record in that area. How did kangaroos get to Australia, or kiwis to New Zealand? How did polar bears get to North America and penguins to Antarctica?

Skeptics often claim, “The Bible is not a science textbook.” This, of course, is true—because science textbooks change every year, whereas the Bible is the unchanging Word of God—the God who cannot lie. Nevertheless, the Bible can be relied upon when it touches on every scientific issue, including ecology. It is the Bible that gives us the big picture. Within this big picture, we can build scientific models that help us explain how past events may have come about. Such models should be held to lightly, but the Scripture to which they refer is inerrant. That is to say future research may cast doubt on an actual model, without casting doubt on Scripture.

With this in mind, the question needs to be asked, “Is there a Bible-based model that we can use to help explain how animals might have migrated from where the Ark landed to where they live today?” The answer is yes.

The Hard Facts

A biblical model of animal migration obviously must start with the Bible. From Genesis we can glean the following pertinent facts:

“And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive” (Genesis 6:19–20). The Bible is clear that representatives of all the kinds of air-breathing land animals and birds were present on the Ark. A technical term used by some creation scientists for these kinds is baramin—derived from the Hebrew words for created kind. Within these baramins is all the information necessary to produce all current species. For example, it is unlikely that the Ark contained two lions and two tigers. It is more likely that it contained two feline animals, from which lions, tigers, and other cat-like creatures have developed.
Another lesson from Genesis 6:20 is that the animals came to Noah. He did not have to go and catch them. Therefore, this preservation of the world’s fauna was divinely controlled. It was God’s intention that the fauna be preserved. The animals’ recolonization of the land masses was therefore determined by God, and not left to chance.
“Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat” (Genesis 8:4). The Bible is clear that the Ark landed in the region of Ararat, but much debate has ensued over whether this is the same region as the locality of the present-day mountain known as Ararat. This issue is of importance, as we shall see. The Bible uses the plural “mountains.” It is unlikely that the Ark rested on a point on the top of a mountain, in the manner often illustrated in children’s picture books. Rather, the landing would have been among the mountainous areas of eastern Turkey, where present-day Mount Ararat is located, and western Iran, where the range extends.
It was God’s will that the earth be recolonized. “Then God spoke to Noah, saying, ‘Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you. Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is with you: birds and cattle and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, so that they may abound on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth.’ So Noah went out, and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives with him. Every animal, every creeping thing, every bird, and whatever creeps on the earth, according to their families, went out of the ark” (Genesis 8:15–19). The abundance and multiplication of the animals was also God’s will.

The biblical principles that we can establish then are that, after the Flood, God desired the ecological reconstruction of the world, including its vulnerable animal kinds, and the animals must have spread out from a mountainous region known as Ararat.

The construction of any biblical model of recolonization must include these principles. The model suggested on the following pages is constructed in good faith, to explain the observed facts through the “eyeglasses” of the Bible. The Bible is inspired, but our scientific models are not. If we subsequently find the model to be untenable, this would not shake our commitment to the absolute authority of Scripture.

The model uses the multiplication of dogs as an example of how animals could have quickly repopulated the earth. Two dogs came off Noah’s Ark and began breeding more dogs. Within a relatively short time period, there would be an incredible number of dogs of all sorts of different shapes and sizes.

These dogs then began to spread out from the Ararat region to all parts of the globe.
The dog kind diversifying

As these dogs spread around the world, variations within the dog kind led to many of the varieties we find today. But it is important to note that they are still dogs. This multiplication of variations within a kind is the same with the many other kinds of animals.

One final comment must be made in this section. As I have used the word recolonization several times, I must emphasize that I am not referring to the so-called Recolonization Theory. This theory will be discussed later.

Modern Recolonizations

One accusation thrown at biblical creationists is that kangaroos could not have hopped to Australia, because there are no fossils of kangaroos on the way. But the expectation of such fossils is a presuppositional error. Such an expectation is predicated on the assumption that fossils form gradually and inevitably from animal populations. In fact, fossilization is by no means inevitable. It usually requires sudden, rapid burial. Otherwise the bones would decompose before permineralization. One ought likewise to ask why it is that, despite the fact that millions of bison used to roam the prairies of North America, hardly any bison fossils are found there. Similarly, lion fossils are not found in Israel even though we know that lions once lived there.

Comparisons can be made with more modern recolonizations. For example, the Encyclopædia Britannica has the following to say about Surtsey Island and Krakatoa and the multiplication of species.

Six months after the eruption of a volcano on the island of Surtsey off the coast of Iceland in 1963, the island had been colonized by a few bacteria, molds, insects, and birds. Within about a year of the eruption of a volcano on the island of Krakatoa in the tropical Pacific in 1883, a few grass species, insects, and vertebrates had taken hold. On both Surtsey and Krakatoa, only a few decades had elapsed before hundreds of species reached the islands. Not all species are able to take hold and become permanently established, but eventually the island communities stabilize into a dynamic equilibrium.1

There is little secret, therefore, how nonflying animals may have travelled to the outer parts of the world after the Flood. Many of them could have floated on vast floating logs, left-overs from the massive pre-Flood forests that were ripped up during the Flood and likely remained afloat for many decades on the world’s oceans, transported by world currents. Others could later have been taken by people. Savolainen et al., have suggested, for example, that all Australian dingoes are descended from a single female domesticated dog from Southeast Asia.2 A third explanation of possible later migration is that animals could have crossed land bridges. This is, after all, how it is supposed by evolutionists that many animals and people migrated from Asia to the Americas—over a land bridge at the Bering Straits. For such land bridges to have existed, we may need to assume that sea levels were lower in the post-Flood period—an assumption based on a biblical model of the Ice Age.

The rare conditions required to form an Ice Age may have been triggered by the Flood.

As Michael Oard, a retired meteorologist and Ice Age researcher, has suggested in chapter 16, an Ice Age may have followed closely after the Flood. In his detailed analysis, Oard proposed a mechanism of how the rare conditions required to form an Ice Age may have been triggered by the Flood, and shows how this explains the field evidence for an Ice Age.3

Severe climatic changes could have been the catalyst that encouraged certain species to migrate in certain directions. These severe changes could also have accounted for some of the many extinctions that occurred. Additionally, Oard’s studies provide a model for how land bridges could have developed.

Oard has pointed out that certain observed features from the Ice Age cause problems for the evolutionist, not the creationist. Thus, a creationist explanation of the Ice Age better explains the facts. An example of such an issue is that of disharmonious associations of fossils—fossils of creatures normally associated with different conditions (such as creatures with a preference for hot and cold climates) being found in close proximity.

One of the more puzzling problems for uniformitarian theories of the ice age is disharmonious associations of fossils, in which species from different climatic regimes are juxtaposed. For example, a hippopotamus fossil found together with a reindeer fossil.

Oard suggests that even with present topography, a number of significant land bridges would have existed to facilitate migrations if the sea level were only 180 ft (55 m) below current levels. However, there is even evidence that the land in some places where land bridges would be necessary could have been higher still. Thus, land bridges facilitated by the Ice Age constitute a serious model to explain how some migrations could have been possible.

Some still remain skeptical about the idea of land bridges all the way to Australia. Nevertheless, by a combination of methods that we see today, including land bridges, there are rational explanations as to how animals may have reached the far corners of the world. Of course, we were not there at the time to witness how this migration may have happened, but those adhering to a biblical worldview can be certain that animals obviously did get to far places, and that there are rational ways in which it could have happened.

We should therefore have no problem accepting the Bible as true. Creationist scientific models of animal migration are equally as valid as evolutionary models, if not more so. The reason such models are rejected is that they do not fit in with the orthodox, secular evolutionary worldview.

It is not a problem for us to rationalize why certain animals do not appear in certain parts of the world. Why, for example, does Australia have such an unusual fauna, including so many marsupials? Marsupials are, of course, known elsewhere in the world. For example, opossums are found in North and South America, and fossilized marsupials have been found elsewhere. But in many places, climatic changes and other factors could lead to their extinction.

The lack of great marsupials in other continents need be no more of a problem than the lack of dinosaurs. As with many species today, they just died out—a reminder of a sin-cursed world. One proposed theory is that marsupials—because they bore their young in pouches—were able to travel farther and faster than mammals that had to stop to care for their young. They were able to establish themselves in far-flung Australia before competitors reached the continent.

Similar statements could be made about the many unusual bird species in New Zealand, on islands from which mammals were absent until the arrival of European settlers.
Recolonization Theory

The most logical interpretation of the biblical record of the Flood and its aftermath would seem to suggest that the animals disembarked and then recolonized the planet. Comparisons with modern migrations and incidents such as Surtsey have suggested that this recolonization need not have taken long. A plain reading of Scripture suggests that the Ark landed in the mountains of Ararat, most likely in the region of modern Turkey and Central Asia. It is also our contention that the significant quantity of death represented by the fossil record is best understood by reference to the Genesis Flood (i.e., the majority of fossils formed as a result of the Flood).

More recently, a theory has developed among certain creationists in the UK and Europe which suggests that the fossil record is actually a record not of catastrophe but of processes occurring during recolonization. This theory is called the Recolonization Theory.5

Proponents of this theory suggest that the Flood completely obliterated the earth’s previous crust so that none of the present fossils were caused by it. To accommodate fossilization processes, Recolonization Theory suggests that the age of the earth be stretched by a few thousand years. Some advocates of this view suggest an age of about 8,000 years for the earth, while others suggest figures as high as 20,000 years.

A detailed criticism of Recolonization Theory has previously been published by McIntosh, Edmondson, and Taylor6, and another by Holt7.

The principal error of this view is that it starts from supposed scientific anomalies, such as the fossil record, rather than from Scripture. This has led to the proposals among some Recolonizers, but not all, that there must be gaps in the genealogies recorded in Genesis 5 and 11, even though there is no need for such gaps. Indeed the suggestion of gaps in these genealogies causes further doctrinal problems.8

Even the views of those Recolonizers who do not expand the genealogies contain possible seeds of compromise. Because the Recolonizers accept the geologic column, and because the Middle East has a great deal of what is called Cretaceous rock, it follows that the Middle East would need to be submerged after the Flood, at the very time of the Tower of Babel events in Genesis 11. This has led some of the Recolonizers to speculate that the Ark actually landed in Africa, and therefore, that continent was the host to the events of Genesis 11 and 12. This would seem to be a very weak position exegetically and historically. Such exegetical weaknesses led Professor Andy McIntosh and his colleagues to comment, “Their science is driving their interpretation of Scripture, and not the other way round.”

Conclusions

We must not be downhearted by critics and their frequent accusations against the Bible. We must not be surprised that so many people will believe all sorts of strange things, whatever the logic.

Starting from our presupposition that the Bible’s account is true, we have seen that scientific models can be developed to explain the post-Flood migration of animals. These models correspond to observed data and are consistent with the Bible’s account. It is notable that opponents of biblical creationism use similar models in their evolutionary explanations of animal migrations. While a model may eventually be superseded, it is important to note that such biblically consistent models exist. In any event, we have confidence in the scriptural account, finding it to be accurate and authoritative.10 The fact of animal migration around the world is illustrative of the goodness and graciousness of God, who provided above and beyond our needs.

David Taylor #fundie books.google.com

Cleveland, Ohio, 1998

It was 1998 and the ministry was growing during this awesome season. I was introduced to a great man, Bishop McKinney, and his wife Shirley, whom people affectionately called “Lady Bishop.” They invited me to Cleveland to conduct a set of revival services. In these services, we saw the Lord do awesome things and demonstrate glorious and great power. One night the glory of God came in during intimate worship. It was so heavy that I could not minister. It was so thick that all I could do was sit down on the podium steps. We had seen many dramatic miracles and awesome displays of God’s power, but this night was very special.

As I sat down on the steps, the people were still standing in the Lord’s presence, and all of a sudden Jesus appeared in front of me in the middle aisle. He smiled at me. I noticed Him when I sat down (for the service was out of my control anyway). He then appeared and started taking over the service completely. We must learn to yield more completely as ministers and move out of the Lord’s way! As Jesus stood there, I told the people that He was in the room, and I narrated what He was doing.

I could tell that a few people didn’t believe what I was saying. The church I was ministering in has an incredible worship team and has a lively congregation that is always ready for a move of God, so it may have been visitors that did not believe Jesus was there. After Jesus smiled at me, He turned to walk to the back of the audience and said, “Some of them don’t believe you when you said that I’m here on the earth and in this service with them in my glorified body.” There were about 1200 people in the service that night. As Jesus walked, I narrated His every move to the people. I told them that He was walking toward the back. When He got to the end of the last pew, He turned left and walked to the farthest end of the last pew.

Jesus Appears and Heals a Young Man With AIDS

Because I was sitting down and the people were standing, I could not see Him in the back of the church at this point, but I could still hear Him. Then suddenly He began speaking to me saying, “David, there is a young man who is a homosexual on the back pew. He came here to be healed because he has AIDS.” Now you have to understand that the service and atmosphere were charged with electricity and God’s presence through awesome worship. Jesus then continued and said, “David, I have My hands on this young man’s shoulders and he feels electricity going through his body because I’m healing him of AIDS and setting him free from homosexuality. Tell what I’m doing openly and call this out.” I didn’t know there was a homosexual in our audience or where he was sitting until Jesus turned left and pointed him out to me. Jesus said, “The people will believe you more—that I am personally in the room—when you narrate this and tell it openly.” Then I said it! I shared everything that Jesus had told me about the young man. I shared that God was healing him of AIDS and delivering him from homosexuality, and I pointed to him in the back of the church.

Then I said to the young man, “Come up here.” I was still sitting down. When the young man got up and came out of the back pew, he was trembling and shaking uncontrollably because of the power and electricity flowing through his body. I knew that this man was the homosexual that God told me about because he was the only one who came up to the front. Immediately, Jesus said to me, “David, do not lay hands on him; just point from where you are sitting.” He was about 30 to 40 feet away from where I was sitting. As He walked down the middle aisle alone, I did what Jesus said and I pointed my index finger at him. I felt and saw a bolt of lightning and electricity flow out from my finger and hit him. The power of God raised him up about 6 feet in midair and threw him so that he was flying backwards through the air. When he landed on the floor slain under the power of God, he was completely set free from homosexuality and healed of AIDS. That’s glorious power! The people saw this take place. The whole audience made an astonishing sound together: Whooo! They knew Jesus was personally there in the building when they saw this manifestation.

It Was Complete Glory

Jesus then came back down the center aisle again, passed in front of me, and stood at my left side. He looked at me and said, “David, even after this there are still some that don’t believe I’m here. Have all those who are skeptics come up here to where I am standing.” I had already narrated that Jesus had walked up to the front so then I said, “All of you that are having a hard time believing that Jesus is here personally, come up here and stand where He’s standing.” About 40 people came to the front to go to where Jesus was standing. When they got there, all collapsed under His power onto the floor. It was powerful! All skeptics hit the floor under the power of God for Jesus had touched them all without using me. I was still sitting down on the steps, just watching all of this and thinking about how powerful and how delightful it was! There’s nothing like watching Jesus minister! I love Him working with us!

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

When Satan came to tempt Jesus thrice in Matthew 4:1-10, each time the Devil misinterpreted the Scriptures to Jesus, trying to mislead Him. And each time Jesus overcame the temptation by quoting the Scriptures back at the Devil. It is critically important that we not miss this truth here. Satan misused the Bible in all 3 attempts to conquer the Lord, and all 3 times Jesus properly used the Bible to defeat the Devil. Satan never attacked without the Bible, and Jesus never fought back without the Bible. That is fascinating!!! Here we see the critical importance of the Scriptures in overcoming temptation and Satan in our daily life.

We also see the grave danger of Satan trying to give us his new versions of the Bible that have been corrupted. I would never trust Satan to give to me a Bible. Harper Collins, who owns Zondervan Publishing, also publishes THE JOY OF GAY SEX and THE SATANIC BIBLE. That should tell us something. If the Bible was important enough for the spotless Lamb of God to need in order to defeat the Devil, then don't make the deadly mistake of thinking that you can do otherwise.

Woe Unto the False Shepherds!

Furthermore, a pastor who errantly teaches his congregation that the King James Bible is not inspired has done them a woeful injustice! That pastor just poured a bucket of ice-water on his congregation spiritually. There went their zeal for memorizing the perfect, infallible, preserved, inspired Words of God!!! Who wants to memorize a Bible that isn't word perfect? I sure wouldn't! I mean, if it really doesn't matter how the Bible is worded, and God approves of all these hundreds of English Bibles that all say something different (in wording and doctrines), then why memorize anything?

It is the fact that I believe that the King James Bible I hold in my hand is INSPIRED, and perfect in EVERY WAY, that I cherish and memorize it daily! I love God's Word, because it is Word-for-Word inspired, Every Word is there because God wanted it there! Jesus said in Matthew 4:4, “But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” If I am to live by EVERY WORD OF GOD, then I absolutely must have an EVERY WORD BIBLE. Matthew 4:4 is a direct quote from Deuteronomy 8:3, “And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.” So I know that somewhere in this world every Word of God exists.

We do NOT have any originals today, anywhere! Psalm 119:89 tells us that the originals are in Heaven, settled forever! Those pseudo-scholars who claim that people must learn Hebrew and Greek to understand God's Word are thieves and robbers, robbing the average uneducated person of the inspired King James Bible which God preserved to the common-man, speaking the common English-language. God knew what He was doing when He had His inspired Words translated into the king's English, giving us His inspired Words in the English language.

English is already recognized as the universal language of the world. That's why God preserved His Words into the inspired King James Bible for these Last Days. There will NOT be another translation of the Bible before the Lord Jesus Christ returns at the Rapture. I have absolutely no doubt about that, because of the level of translating corruption we are witnessing today in these wicked times of apostasy, and the deterioration of the English language over recent decades into a dirty-minded, potty culture of verbal decadence.

Eric hyde's Blog #conspiracy ehyde.wordpress.com

I write very little in the area of Christian vs. atheist apologetics anymore, and for good reason.

It was in atheist chat-rooms and blogs that I first cut my teeth in theology many years ago. Since those days I have not heard anything new from atheists.

It seems that many atheists today (some like to use the title ‘New Atheists’ to distinguish them from the more profound philosophical atheists of yesteryear) have very little to add to the discussion. To be fair, the same goes with most Christian apologists.

However, I thought it would be fun to comment on the ten arguments I hear the most. My hope is that it will help expose some of the more obvious problems with them and maybe help both sides—atheists and Christians alike—to move on to more interesting debate material.

One additional note: another reason I do not enter into the atheist-Christian debate world much anymore is because of the sheer discourtesy that both sides tend to show the other. I will not delete any comments, no matter how uncivil or juvenile they become, because, for me, it is an important part of the article. The responses (if there are any) will demonstrate the current state of atheist vs. Christian banter. Also, I will not respond to rude posts. This is advanced warning so please don’t think me rude as well if I ignore them.

Okay, here we go:

1. There is no evidence for God’s existence.

There are a couple of problems with this line. Starting with the idea of ‘evidence,’ what exactly does one mean by evidence? What is sufficient evidence for one person is often not sufficient evidence for another. A court of law provides innumerable examples of how two parties can possess the same collection of data, the same power of logic and reasoning, yet argue for completely different interpretations of the data. The old saying is true: the facts do not determine the argument, the argument determines the facts.

When confronted with the charge that there is no evidence for God the Christian often does not know where to start with a rebuttal. It’s as G.K. Chesterton once said, asking a Christian to prove God’s existence is like asking someone to prove the existence of civilization. What is one to do but point and say, “look, there’s a chair, and there’s a building,” etc. How can one prove civilization by merely selecting a piece here and a piece there as sufficient proofs rather than having an experience of civilization as a whole?

Nearly everything the Christian lays eyes on is evidence of God’s existence because he sees the ‘handiwork’ of God all around him in creation. But this is hardly sufficient evidence in the court of atheist opinion, a court which presupposes that only what can be apprehended by the senses rightly qualifies as evidence (in other words, the atheist demands not evidence of God’s handiwork, but rather material evidence of God Himself). For the Christian who believes in a transcendent God, he can offer no such evidence; to produce material evidence of God is, ironically, to disprove a transcendent God and cast out faith. If one desires God to appear in the flesh, well… He already did. But even if one lived at the time and could touch Christ in the flesh, this would still not “prove” God’s existence in the scientific sense (science has no such categories).

The second part of the line is equally short-sighted. What does one mean by ‘existence’? If one means, ‘that which has come into existence,’ then surely God does not exist because God never came into existence. He always was; He is eternal. This was a famous assessment of the matter by Soren Kierkegaard (dealing with Hegel’s dialectic of existence). The argument is a bit involved, so for times sakes I’ll just have to state it and leave it there.

2. If God created the universe, who created God?

This is one of the more peculiar arguments I’ve ever come across. Those who use this charge as some sort of intellectual checkmate have simply failed to grasp what Christians understand as ‘eternal.’ It is an argument usually levied once a theist posits that God is required for the existence of the universe (a necessary Being upon which all other things exist by way of contingency). Some atheists then shift the weight over to the theist saying, “Well then who created God?” (which demonstrates a failure to understand God as the source and ground of being rather than God as simply one more being among other beings in existence, follow this link for more.) What is a Christian to do but smile at such a question? God is the antecedent of all things in creation and is eternal. If God had a Creator then His Creator would be God. God is God precisely because He does not have a creator.

3. God is not all-powerful if there is something He cannot do. God cannot lie, therefore God is not all-powerful.

Bang! Owned.

Not so fast. This argument would be fantastic—devastating maybe—if God was more of the ancient Greek god persuasion, where the gods themselves were subject to fate and limited to their specific roles in the cosmos. The Orthodox doctrine of God is much different. Christians (at least Orthodox Christians) view God’s ontology as subject to His perfect free-will. Why is He good? Because He wills to be good. Why does He not lie? Because He wills to be honest. Why does God exist as Trinity? Because He wills it. He could just as easily will to not exist. And yes, He could just as easily will to lie. The fact that He doesn’t is no commentary on whether He could.

(Note: Due to the immense amount of discussion that this point has raised, one clarifying statement is worth noting. An argument based on strict logical word games can render the idea ‘all-powerful,’ or ‘omnipotent’ self-defeating. When one considers the juvenile question, “Can God create a rock so big that He can’t lift it?” this point becomes clear. But in reality, such an argument winds up further solidifying what Christianity means by an all-powerful God. For the Christian it simply means that all power and authority are God’s. Following the logical word game above forces the believer to make a redundant proclamation in order to remain consistent: “God cannot overpower Himself.” But this fact is anything but confounding, it merely stresses the point that there is no power greater than God, so much so that one is forced to pit God against Himself in order to find His equal.)

4. Believing in God is the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

What I love about this well-worn atheist ‘argument’ is that it actually serves to demonstrate how vastly different a belief in God is to these myths and imaginations. When one honestly assesses the Judeo-Christian doctrine of God he will find multiple thousands of years of human testimony and religious development; he will find martyrs enduring the most horrific trauma in defense of the faith; he will find accounts in religious texts with historical and geographical corroboration; etc (these fact are of course not ‘proofs,’ but rather ‘evidences’ that elicit strong consideration). Pit this against tales of the Tooth Fairy, Santa, and Spaghetti Monsters and one finds the exact opposite: no testimony or religious refinement, no martyrs, no historical and geographical corroboration, etc. Instead, one finds myths created intentionally for children, for point making, or for whatever. It’s strawman argumentation at its worst.

5. Christianity arose from an ancient and ignorant people who didn’t have science.

Indeed, those ancient, ignorant people who believed in the virgin birth of Christ must have believed it because they did not possess the knowledge of how babies were born. Goodness. The virgin birth of Christ was profound and of paramount concern to the ancients precisely because they understood that conception was impossible without intercourse. Ancient man considered the virgin birth miraculous, i.e., impossible without divine action (and at the time most people scorned the idea), and the same could be said with every miraculous story in Scripture.

Indeed ancient people did not have the Hubble telescope, but they were able to see the night sky in full array, something almost no modern person can claim (thanks to modern lighting which distorts our ability to see the full night sky). On average, ancient people lived much closer to nature and to the realities of life and death than many of us moderners.

In terms of a living relationship with these things the ancients were far more advanced than we are today, and this relationship is essentially the nature of religious inquiry. If people lack religious speculation today, maybe it is because they spend more time with their iphones and Macs then with nature. Maybe.

But the claim that Christianity was viable in the ancient world because it was endorsed by wide spread ignorance is a profoundly ignorant idea. Christianity arose in one of the most highly advanced civilizations in human history. The Roman Empire was not known for its stupidity. It was the epicenter of innovation and philosophical giants. I would wager that if a common person of today found himself in a philosophical debate with a common person of first century Alexandria, the moderner would be utterly humiliated in the exchange.

6. Christian’s only believe in Christianity because they were born in a Christian culture. If they’d been born in India they would have been Hindu instead.

This argument is appealing because it pretends to wholly dismiss people’s reasoning capabilities based on their environmental influences in childhood. The idea is that people in general are so intellectually near-sighted that they can’t see past their own upbringing, which, it would follow, would be an equally condemning commentary on atheism (if one was consistent with the charge), but the idea is fairly easy to counter.

Take the history of the Jewish people for example. Let us say that to ‘be’ Jewish, in the religious sense, is much more than a matter of cultural adherence. To be a Jewish believer is to have Judaism permeate one’s thinking and believing and interaction with the world. But is this the state of affairs with the majority of the Jewish people, whether in America, Europe, Israel, or wherever? One would have to be seriously out of touch to believe so. The same phenomenon is found within so-called Christian communities, that is: many sport a Christian title, but are wholly derelict in personal faith. “Believing” in Christianity is a far more serious endeavor then merely wearing a church name tag. Indeed, being born in a Jewish or Christian centric home today is more often a precursor that the child will grow up to abandon the faith of his or her family, or at least be associated with the faith by affiliation only.

7. The gospel doesn’t make sense: God was mad at mankind because of sin so he decided to torture and kill his own Son so that he could appease his own pathological anger. God is the weirdo, not me.

This is actually a really good argument against certain Protestant sects (I’ve used it myself on numerous occasions), but it has no traction with the Orthodox Christian faith. The Orthodox have no concept of a God who needed appeasement in order to love His creation. The Father sacrificed His own Son in order to destroy death with His life; not to assuage His wrath, but to heal; not to protect mankind from His fury, but to unite mankind to His love. If the reader is interested to hear more on this topic follow this link for a fuller discussion.

8. History is full of mother-child messiah cults, trinity godheads, and the like. Thus the Christian story is a myth like the rest.

This argument seems insurmountable on the surface, but is really a slow-pitch across the plate (if you don’t mind a baseball analogy). There is no arguing the fact that history is full of similar stories found in the Bible, and I won’t take the time to recount them here. But this fact should not be surprising in the least, indeed if history had no similar stories it would be reason for concern. Anything beautiful always has replicas. A counterfeit coin does not prove the non-existence of the authentic coin, it proves the exact opposite. A thousand U2 cover bands is not evidence that U2 is a myth.

Ah, but that doesn’t address the fact that some of these stories were told before the Biblical accounts. True. But imagine if the only story of a messianic virgin birth, death, and resurrection were contained in the New Testament. That, to me, would be odd. It would be odd because if all people everywhere had God as their Creator, yet the central event of human history—the game changing event of all the ages—the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ had never occurred to them, in at least some hazy form, they would have been completely cut off from the prime mysteries of human existence. It seems only natural that if the advent of Christ was real it would permeate through the consciousness of mankind on some level regardless of their place in history. One should expect to find mankind replicating these stories, found in their own visions and dreams, again and again throughout history. And indeed, that is what we find.

9. The God of the Bible is evil. A God who allows so much suffering and death can be nothing but evil.

This criticism is voice in many different ways. For me, this is one of the most legitimate arguments against the existence of a good God. The fact that there is suffering and death is the strongest argument against the belief in an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving God. If suffering and death exist it seems to suggest one of two things: (1) either God is love, but He is not all-powerful and cannot stop suffering and death, or (2) God is all-powerful, but He does not care for us.

I devoted a separate article addressing this problem, but let me deal here with the problem inherent in the criticism itself. The argument takes as its presupposition that good and evil are real; that there is an ultimate standard of good and evil that supersedes mere fanciful ‘ideas’ about what is good and evil at a given time in our ethical evolution, as it were. If there is not a real existence—an ontological reality—of good and evil, then the charge that God is evil because of this or that is really to say nothing more than, “I personally don’t like what I see in the world and therefore a good God cannot exist.” I like what C.S. Lewis said on a similar matter: “There is no sense in talking of ‘becoming better’ if better means simply ‘what we are becoming’—it is like congratulating yourself on reaching your destination and defining destination as ‘the place you have reached.’”

What is tricky for the atheist in these sorts of debates is to steer clear of words loaded with religious overtones. It’s weird for someone who does not believe in ultimate good and evil to condemn God as evil because He did not achieve their personal vision of good. So, the initial criticism is sound, but it is subversive to the atheist’s staging ground. If one is going to accept good and evil as realities, he is not in a position to fully reject God. Instead, he is more in a position to wrestle with the idea that God is good. This struggle is applauded in the Orthodox Church. After all, the very word God used for his people in the Old Testament—“Israel”—means to struggle with God.

10. Evolution has answered the question of where we came from. There is no need for ignorant ancient myths anymore.

This might be the most popular attempted smack-downs of religion in general today. It is found in many variations but the concept is fairly consistent and goes something like this: Science has brought us to a point where we no longer need mythology to understand the world, and any questions which remain will eventually be answered through future scientific breakthroughs. The main battle-ground where this criticism is seen today is in evolution vs. creationism debates.

Let me say upfront that there is perhaps no other subject that bores me more than evolution vs. creationism debates. I would rather watch paint dry. And when I’m not falling asleep through such debates I’m frustrated because usually both sides of the debate use large amounts of dishonesty in order to gain points rather than to gain the truth. The evolutionist has no commentary whatsoever on the existence of God, and the creationist usually suffers from profound confusion in their understanding of the first few chapters of Genesis.

So, without entering into the most pathetic debate of the ages, bereft of all intellectual profundity, I’ll only comment on the underlining idea that science has put Christianity out of the answer business. Science is fantastic if you want to know what gauge wire is compatible with a 20 amp electric charge, how agriculture works, what causes disease and how to cure it, and a million other things. But where the physical sciences are completely lacking is in those issues most important to human beings—the truly existential issues: what does it mean to be human, why are we here, what is valuable, what does it mean to love, to hate, what am I to do with guilt, grief, sorrow, what does it mean to succeed, is there any meaning and what does ‘meaning’ mean, and, of course, is there a God? etc, ad infinitum.

As far as where we come from, evolution has barely scratched the purely scientific surface of the matter. Even if the whole project of evolution as an account of our history was without serious objection, it would still not answer the problem of the origin of life, since the option of natural selection as an explanation is not available when considering how dead or inorganic matter becomes organic. Even more complicated is the matter of where matter came from. The ‘Big Bang’ is not an answer to origins but rather a description of the event by which everything came into being; i.e., it’s the description of a smoking gun, not the shooter.

That’s it… my top 10 list. Thanks for reading. Cheers.

hivesguy #fundie answers.yahoo.com

[Question asks How many utter lies have been told about Darwin on R+S?

I have no idea, but I do know science is wrong more times in 1 day than the Bible ever has in it's entire life....

"There are 9 planets in our solar system. No wait, 8, no 9. (I can't remember if Pluto & it's moons count today or not).

"A rat has recently been found that was thought by scientists to be extinct for the past 11 MILLION YEARS"

"Drinking a glass of wine each day prevents cancer. Next day: Drinking a glass of wine has no effect. Next day, Drinking a glass of wine each day will kill you."

While evolution has some truth in it, I don't believe that is how the origins of life came to be. Of course some parts of the evolutionary theory are correct. Even a broken clock is right 2 times a day.

But I put my faith in God Almighty, not some flimsy scientific THEORY.

Aki--Tenraku #fundie comments.deviantart.com

Creation DOES have evidence. Its called THE BIBLE. and the bible has lots of proof of it being true too. In the bible (if you have heard of Noah's Ark) it says exactly how big the boat is and where it landed. TO THIS DAY, scientists have found a boat of the same dimensions in the mountains (in the bible the ark landed on a mountain) the boat was found underground.

More evidence - Evolutionists say that coal takes THOUSANDS even MILLIONS of years to form and yet, it has been created in labs by many scientists within a couple of DAYS even HOURS!

I am not rejecting "fact" when I reject evolution because it is still only a theory. I am not convinced one bit that evolution is real. they say that animals changed drastically from reptiles to birds, but there is no fossil evidence for these "missing links". However, there is such thing as Micro evolution. micro evolution is the only thing in evolution I believe because you can actually watch it happen. (not that I have to see to believe) but there is also fossil evidence for micro evolution.

I am in NO way trying to force my opinions on you, I am just proving that you are very wrong when you say the creation has 0 evidence.

Ted Jackson #fundie quora.com

“Are atheists more intelligent than believers?”

Actually, the evidence is that atheists are less intelligent than believers. Refusing to believe something does not require brains. True: doubting is an activity of intelligence, but very few atheists ever doubt anything. They simply withhold belief — which is not an activity at all, and not indicative of intelligence.

Refusing to believe, on its own, is connected with the stubbornness of the mule. Refusing to believe something, withholding belief, is not a behavior connected to rationality. Again: actively doubting and questioning is the behavior of intelligence. But atheists do not generally do this. They simply withhold belief — a behavior that does not require even understanding.

There are people who are deeply perplexed and questioning of dogma of all kinds. They actively question and examine all views, including their own. But these are not atheists or theists. These are agnostics. (And don’t give me any “agnostic atheist” B.S.)

One can very clearly see, using Quora as an example, that atheists are not a deeply rational lot, not very curious, not very inquiring. They are not investigators, worriers, skeptics. They are not analytical. They are not skeptical. They do not question. They are simply “withhold belief.” That, and ridicule others who don’t withhold belief.

And skepticism, questioning, analysis, wonder, as mental characteristics, are some of the signs of a truly intelligent person. And those characteristics are much more common among religious people, who, wrong or right, are deeply concerned with life and death issues. That fact alone justifies an inference that god believers are more intelligent than so-called “atheists.”

WorldGoneCrazy #fundie christiannews.net

"I'm not quite sure why that merits a smiley face at the end of it"

Because you have bounced back and forth denying, then affirming, Premise 2.

"Your premises and conclusions don't line up the way you think they do."

How so? Here they are:

Premise 1: If there is no God, then objective moral values do not exist.

Premise 2: Objective moral values DO exist.

Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.

"Yeah. That's called empathy and human decency, and it requires no God. And you somehow never state why you think it does."

Empathy and human decency are subjective. When you are crying out to Someone or Something Objective, you are denying the worldview of the atheist. There is nothing objective to cry out to. It is a slow cold dark death with no memory of anything on this pale blue dot, on your view.

"Quote Dawkins until your face turns blue. Lots of atheists disagree with him about MANY things."

Oh sure, but the consensus on this subject is that objective moral values and duties do not exist. You need to tell me why they are wrong and why the 3 additional reasons that I provided are wrong. Thus far, you have failed to do so.

"Strange, because I'm living (an atheist life) just fine. Ever ask yourself why God won't heal amputees?"

Haha - I love it! Now you are getting desperate, Valri. Here is your "logic:"

Premise: I do not know of any amputees being healed (outside of human involvement, that is).

Conclusion: Therefore, God does not exist.

You could pretty much put anything into your premise along those lines (why hurricanes, tsunamis, etc? Why did my ice cream melt too fast today?) but the conclusion does not follow based on any rules of logic, that is.

"You act as though you're quoting from the Atheist Bible or something which doesn't exist."

No, but the Atheist Creed does exist:

I, the atheist, believe:

1. That the universe miraculously popped into existence out of nothing uncaused by anything.

2. That life magically sprang forth from non-life when lightning hit some mud.

3. That minds and morals evolved from molecules through monkeys.

4. That there is no God, and I hate Him.

"I'm free to disagree with Dawkins and I don't have to turn in my Atheist Club Card."

Sure, you can disagree with him all you want, but when you cannot provide any rational reason for your disagreement, then don't go around thinking you are the "rational" one.

"What you don't seem to get is that I have no problem with objective moral values and still don't see why they depend on a God, because they don't."

Take it up with your fellow atheists - over 200 years. And consider the future of the universe, in which no matter how you behave - Hitler or Ghandi - it will not matter one whit. On that view, your life cannot have any objective purpose or meaning or morality. Some people win, some lose - it's all the law of the jungle and nothing else.

"No God worth believing in would make permanent, eternal torture and burning conditional on anything."

How come? Sounds like you think, like (another poster) pointed out, that you would make a better "god?" :-)

Dennis Lopez #fundie dennislopez.com

I recently watched a video posted by a YouTuber by the username of “Truth96130,” that is basically telling people Hell is not real and that it is a lie of the Devil that works for his benefit. Yes, seriously, Truth96130 really believes this. In the video a renowned and once respected Pastor by the name of “Carlton Pearson” claimed that God told him Hell is not real. I watched the entire video and gave it the complete chance to convince me that his claim was true. What it did convince me of is what the Bible had already warned me about, thanks to Jesus. I will demonstrate to you, the reader, with Bible verses that you can go look up yourself (not my philosophy), and the words of Jesus himself, how this claim is a full-fledged doctrine of demons.
“Now the Holy Spirit tells us clearly that in the last times some will turn away from the true faith; they will follow deceptive spirits and teachings that come from demons.” (NLT, 1 Timothy 4:1)

This verse by itself should be sufficient evidence for anyone to see that the “Hell doesn’t exist claim” is a trick of the devil to deceive those who are not strong with the Holy Spirit. The Bible warns us of false doctrines, false Prophets, and false Messiah’s. Did Pastor Carlton test the spirits? Did he pray on it and ask God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit for confirmation? I don’t think so, and neither did Truth96130. The devil is known for offering people things (sinful things) for instant gratification and happiness. God on the other hand is always patient and long-suffering, doing things at the right place and time. There is usually a lesson learned through a journey before you receive something from the Lord.
“Dear friends, do not believe everyone who claims to speak by the Spirit. You must test them to see if the spirit they have comes from God. For there are many false prophets in the world.” (NLT, 1 John 4:1)

Then you have Jesus telling you himself about hell, are the words of Jesus not sufficient? Truth96130 gave no credit to what Jesus said, and said that Jesus spoke in parables which are not historical events. So only the historical things that Jesus spoke about have value and not parables? Are you kidding me? Jesus was teaching lessons about Heaven and Hell, why would it need to be something that happened? Besides, hypothetically it was happening, people were going to Heaven and Hell after death.
It’s these type of people who cherry pick and choose what is convenient to fit their lifestyles, so that they can continue to do what they know is sinful and not feel convicted of it. They are only tricking themselves, but the worst part is they are trying to take others with them! (See Figure 1)
“So ignore them. They are blind guides leading the blind, and if one blind person guides another, they will both fall into a ditch.” (NLT, Matthew 15:14)

I refuse to let that happen, God ordered us to be the salt & light of the world.
“You are the salt of the earth. But what good is salt if it has lost its flavor? Can you make it salty again? It will be thrown out and trampled underfoot as worthless. “You are the light of the world—like a city on a hilltop that cannot be hidden. No one lights a lamp and then puts it under a basket. Instead, a lamp is placed on a stand, where it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your good deeds shine out for all to see, so that everyone will praise your heavenly Father.” (NLT, Matthew 5:13-16)

Here is another lesson about Heaven and Hell from Jesus Christ our Lord and savior.
“Jesus also told them other parables. He said, “The Kingdom of Heaven can be illustrated by the story of a king who prepared a great wedding feast for his son. When the banquet was ready, he sent his servants to notify those who were invited. But they all refused to come! “So he sent other servants to tell them, ‘The feast has been prepared. The bulls and fattened cattle have been killed, and everything is ready. Come to the banquet!’ But the guests he had invited ignored them and went their own way, one to his farm, another to his business. Others seized his messengers and insulted them and killed them. “The king was furious, and he sent out his army to destroy the murderers and burn their town. And he said to his servants, ‘the wedding feast is ready, and the guests I invited aren’t worthy of the honor. Now go out to the street corners and invite everyone you see.’ So the servants brought in everyone they could find, good and bad alike, and the banquet hall was filled with guests. “But when the king came in to meet the guests, he noticed a man who wasn’t wearing the proper clothes for a wedding. ‘Friend,’ he asked, ‘how is it that you are here without wedding clothes?’ But the man had no reply. Then the king said to his aides, ‘Bind his hands and feet and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ “For many are called, but few are chosen.” (NLT, Matthew 22:1-14)

Straight from the mouth of Jesus! This teaching illustrates how God sends his messengers and prophets to invite us to be saved, and to accept his Son, Jesus. We are constantly being invited to Heaven. The Bible is always referring to us (The Church) as the body of Christ and the bride of Christ, which is why this parable is about a wedding banquet for the King’s Son. The King being (God), the Son being (Jesus), the servants being (The Angels, Prophets, and Messengers), and the banquet representing (Heaven). I will let you guess who the invitees are.
Pay attention to the keywords, the servants were sent to notify “those who were invited.” This means not everyone is invited, so where do the uninvited go? I’m pretty sure they go to Hell. Let’s not forget “For many are called, but few are chosen,” that pretty much proves that some are chosen and some are not; meaning, some will go to Heaven and some will not.
Let’s continue on, the initially invited (The Israelites) rejected Jesus as the Messiah, some (The Pharisees) went as far as to kill him. From the beginning of the Bible all the way up to revelations, everyone that God has sent to warn humanity (His Prophets & Messengers) has been murdered or rejected all the way up to Jesus Christ and beyond. That covers the portion of parable talking about the invitees rejecting the invitation and some going as far as to murder the servants. Well, what about the King sending an army to destroy and burn their town?
I am glad you asked, throughout the Bible God turns his back on his people (The Israelites) when they reject him and rebel against him by doing such things as worshiping idols, breaking the commandments, and basically breaking their covenant with him. God removes his protection from them and even goes as far as to send other nations to attack them, as he did with King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. (The destruction and burning of the town also represents the end times in revelations). Of course, he was merciful and gave his people ample time to turn away from their sins and repent.
Moving on, the king sending his servants to invite everyone good and bad represents how the sacrificial death of Jesus enables everyone to be able to go to Heaven, without having to perfectly follow the Law of Moses. God knew we wouldn’t be able to do it. The Law of Moses was nothing more than just a long-term lesson to show us that even when facing the penalty of death and similar penalties, we would still break the law. He basically showed us that Humanity cannot govern itself without the help of God. We would need more than Laws, we would need a change of heart, and we would need the Holy Spirit.
Finally, the man not properly dressed illustrates how those that accept Jesus Christ (The Invitation), but continue to live in constant Sin, can lose their salvation. Just because you accept Christ does not mean you are guaranteed to go to Heaven, it’s only the start of your salvation. The Bible doesn’t say to run the race and fight the good fight for nothing. Now, Outer darkness, weeping, gnashing of the teeth, does that sound like Heaven to you? I think Jesus was speaking in a gentle fashion instead of being blunt and giving it to us straight; however, there is scripture which is not so nice, and for a good reason.
“And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life.” (NLT, Matthew 25:46)

Eternal means nonstop, no breaks, forever, everlasting. Some people try to claim it’s just the second death, meaning you don’t get eternal life, but clearly the scriptures say different. You get eternal life, but it’s not the type of eternal life anyone would ever want. This is why God designed this life to be experienced in time. Things in time begin and end. This teaches us what eternity is. That is how just and fair God is.
“They will be punished with eternal destruction, forever separated from the Lord and from his glorious power.” (NLT, 2 Thessalonians 1:9)

If there is no Hell, how can sinners be punished in eternal destruction or separated from the Lord? Where will they go if they can’t go into Heaven?
“Throwing the wicked into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (NLT, Matthew 13:50)

“If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It’s better to enter eternal life with only one hand than to go into the unquenchable fires of hell with two hands.” (NLT, Mark 9:43)

“But there were also false prophets in Israel, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will cleverly teach destructive heresies and even deny the Master who bought them. In this way, they will bring sudden destruction on themselves. Many will follow their evil teaching and shameful immorality. And because of these teachers, the way of truth will be slandered. In their greed they will make up clever lies to get hold of your money. But God condemned them long ago, and their destruction will not be delayed. For God did not spare even the angels who sinned. He threw them into hell, in gloomy pits of darkness, where they are being held until the Day of Judgment.” (NLT, 2 Peter 2:1-4)

That last verse is just blatantly clear that we will all pay for our sins, and that Hell exist, period! It is true that you can pay for your sins on Earth, but only to a certain extent. God knows that we will not be ultimately perfect without sin,
“Not a single person on earth is always good and never sins.” (NLT, Ecclesiastes 7:20)

“As the Scriptures say, “No one is righteous–not even one.” (NLT, Romans 3:10)

But this does not give you the green light to do whatever you want to. God’s mercy, grace, and forgiveness are determined and given accordingly. God knows when you are trying not to sin, compared to when you really don’t care and are trying to fall through the cracks. We should strive to have as little sin as possible, remember God knows what is in our hearts. He can see if your desire is not to sin, but you fall to it not by deliberate will, but by the evil we all inherited from Adam & Eve, there is a difference.

The devil knows this, which is why he uses clever lies to deceive people. Of course he will tell us that our sins are forgiven through Christ, so it doesn’t matter what we do once we accept Jesus, and OH’ yeah by the way, Hell doesn’t exist. That is not what the true Word of God tells us. The “There is no Hell” claim is a doctrine of demons, there is no doubt about it. If Hell isn’t real then why did Jesus go down to Hell for three days to console the spirits that were imprisoned there?

“Christ suffered for our sins once for all time. He never sinned, but he died for sinners to bring you safely home to God. He suffered physical death, but he was raised to life in the Spirit. So he went and preached to the spirits in prison, those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat. Only eight people were saved from drowning in that terrible flood.” (NLT, 1 Peter 3:18-20)

Truth96130 claimed that I am confusing the time of this verse. The verse above clearly states that Jesus went to preach to the spirits in prison (Hell) that disobeyed God during the time of Noah, basically all the people who died in the great flood; which by the way, is historically recorded in every culture around the world. If there is no Hell and I am confusing this verse, which I am obviously not, then why didn’t these same spirits go directly to Heaven? Why does the Bible say they are in prison? Why doesn’t the Bible simply say, “Jesus swung by the Prison (Hell) to bail these Spirits out?” Now let’s say there is no Hell, why are these Spirits in prison? What is this prison?
If you go back to (NLT, 2 Peter 2:1-4) which I mentioned earlier, you will see “For God did not spare even the angels who sinned. He threw them into hell, in gloomy pits of darkness, where they are being held until the Day of Judgment.” Key sentence “where they are being held,” doesn’t that coincide perfectly with the spirits in prison! You know, prison, jail, being held captive, I don’t know about you, but it sure makes sense to me. This is the perfect example of scripture backing up scripture. As the saying goes “the writing is on the wall,” and let’s not forget about the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. (See Figure 2)
And his soul went to the place of the dead. There, in torment, he saw Abraham in the far distance with Lazarus at his side. (NLT, Luke 16:23)

When I mentioned this to Truth96130 his response was, “well that’s just a parable, and it’s not a historical event.” That statement does not in no way, shape, or form prove that Hell is not real, in fact it diverts from the fact that Jesus used a parable to teach a lesson about Hell. Keyword, “lesson,” Let’s look at the definition of the word parable.

Parable –
A short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson.
A statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like.
Well there you go, a parable is designed to teach a lesson of truth. Just because it’s not a historical event does not mean it is not true. I recommend reading the entire chapter of Luke 16. All words out of the mouth of Jesus, let me remind you. Over and over again in the Bible Hell is spoken about, illustrated, and re-cautioned to those that would believe, keyword believe. The Devil would love for people to not believe in Hell, that way people would just live how they feel and do what they want without having to worry about the repercussions.
Finally, Pastor Carlton and Truth96130 argue that God is love and he wouldn’t do these things to us. I mean how could an all loving merciful God send his people to eternal torture, right? Well once again, directly from Bible verses and not my philosophy, I will show you how God is justified in everything he does. He is the genuine holder of truth, he sets the standards, and he uses fair scales, weights, and balances. We would like to believe we know more than God, we would like to believe our ways are just, we would like to believe we can replace his laws with our own, but the truth is God is the Creator and we are the created. God set the laws of the universe, not us. Who are we but mere mortals.
“For just as the heavens are higher than the earth, so my ways are higher than your ways and my thoughts higher than your thoughts.” (NLT, Isaiah 55:9)

Do we really expect to have the same mental capacity as the entity that created us and the Universe? Seriously? If that were the case then why would we even need God at all? We would be just like him, which is the exact claim the devil made before he was found with sin and casted out of Heaven. The devil claimed he would be like the most high.
“I will climb to the highest heavens and be like the Most High.” (NLT, Isaiah 14:14)

The created cannot expect to comprehend and know as the creator.
“How foolish can you be? He is the Potter, and he is certainly greater than you, the clay! Should the created thing say of the one who made it, “He didn’t make me”? Does a jar ever say, “The potter who made me is stupid”?” (NLT, Isaiah 29:16)

Furthermore, as I tried to understand why God would send people to Hell for not meeting his qualifications, I learned some important truths. God has a standard, the one and only true balance of justice, and he will not break it for anyone. He will not be a hypocrite and break his word. Anyone who breaks the law is subject to the consequences, even the Angels.
Example of Truth: Anyone that is truly honest with pure integrity would understand that it is justified for their child to go to prison for murdering someone. Only hypocrites and people without standards would argue different.

People that go to Hell choose to go to Hell. People that go to Heaven choose to go to Heaven. (See Figure 3) God did not make us robots, he gave us self-awareness. I ask the reader, what has more value? A living being that was programmed to be righteous, or one that wasn’t but chose to be and now is? (Causality) There is a reason for everything, which is not just a “saying.” You might not agree with the reason, but who are we to tell God what is and is not fair. I am 100% sure if Jesus Christ disobeyed God, God would have sent him to Hell too.

Another misconception is that it doesn’t bother God to send people to Hell. That is a lie of the devil. The same way it hurts parents to discipline their children with the rod, it devastates our Father to sentence us (his children) to Hell. God does not enjoy this which is why he sacrificed his only Son.
“For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” (NLT, John 3:16)

“The Lord isn’t really being slow about his promise, as some people think. No, he is being patient for your sake. He does not want anyone to be destroyed, but wants everyone to repent.” (NLT, 2 Peter 3:9)

There is no excuse, we are warned and given a lifetime to get it right.
Then comes the question? We’ll if God is all loving and merciful then why does he let such suffering happen on Earth? That one is easy. There is suffering on Earth because we have free will to do what we want to, and some of us want to continue to do evil things. Some of us want to follow the devil instead of God. Some of us love sin more than we love our creator.
“And the judgment is based on this fact: God’s light came into the world, but people loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil.” (NLT, John 3:19)

People judge God and they never even get to know him. We’ll what about the good people who have bad things happen to them? Why doesn’t God protect them? First of all, what good people? We are all born evil.
“For I was born a sinner–yes, from the moment my mother conceived me.” (NLT, Psalm 51:5)

We inherited evil from Adam & Eve. We have to be taught to be good. We have the knowledge of good and evil, but without the help of God we will always favor evil. We are self-serving and self-gratifying.
“For they loved human praise more than the praise of God.” (NLT, John 12:43)

Also, remember we are not just facing people with free will that choose to be evil. We are facing our adversary the devil, and we are also facing spiritual battles in the unseen world around us.
“We know that we are children of God and that the world around us is under the control of the evil one.” (NLT, 1 John 5:19)

“Stay alert! Watch out for your great enemy, the devil. He prowls around like a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour.” (NLT 1 Peter 5:8)

“For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.” (NLT, Ephesians 6:12)

And that my brother’s and sister’s is why there is pain and suffering in the world. Jesus made it very clear that we will suffer in this world, so why not suffer for him instead? Why not suffer to make it to the pearly gates?
“And all nations will hate you because you are my followers. But everyone who endures to the end will be saved.” (NLT, Matthew 10:22)

“Students are not greater than their teacher, and slaves are not greater than their master. Students are to be like their teacher, and slaves are to be like their master. And since I, the master of the household, have been called the prince of demons, the members of my household will be called by even worse names! (NLT, Matthew 10:24-25)

“Yes, and everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution.” (NLT, 2 Timothy 3:12)

Jesus did not promise life without problems once you start following him. He tells no lies and gives it to us straight. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is not about infinite happiness in this life, but it is about trials and tribulations leading to infinite happiness in the afterlife. Jesus never said we had to be perfect, nor does the Bible. The Bible tells us to turn away from Evil, stride to change; and most importantly, to ask God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit to help us do it. We are incapable of doing it on our own. So make no mistake of misunderstanding that only perfect people make it to Heaven, which is another lie of the devil. Name one person in the Bible, besides Jesus, that didn’t sin. You can’t do it. Do not try to earn your salvation, instead embrace it. Salvation is a gift from God, it is meant to be received and maintained.
“Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it.” (NLT, Ephesians 2:9)

Believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who sacrificed himself on the cross so that we can be forgiven for our sins, become reborn and move forward from there, and know that hell is a real place. Fear the Lord of Heaven’s armies and respect who he is.
“Fear of the LORD is the foundation of true knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.” (NLT, Proverbs 1:7)

“Fear of the LORD is the foundation of wisdom. Knowledge of the Holy One results in good judgment.” (NLT, Proverbs 9:10)

God can take our mistakes and help us correct them, he can help anyone, anywhere, anytime get back on the course he designed for them. It is never too late to turn to God through Jesus Christ. Simply lift your hands up to God and repeat “Jesus I repent of my sins and I accept you as my Lord and savior, Amen.” Then seek the kingdom first, read the Bible, continue to pray, and always talk to Jesus looking for guidance and answers, and remember we have the Holy Spirit to help us through it all.

“But when the Father sends the Advocate as my representative–that is, the Holy Spirit–he will teach you everything and will remind you of everything I have told you.” (NLT, John 14:26)

“Seek the Kingdom of God above all else, and live righteously, and he will give you everything you need.” (NLT, Matthew 6:33)

I encourage all my readers to fact check me, go look for yourself and make sure that I am not misleading you. Make sure that I am speaking from the lessons of the word of God and not from my own philosophy. Make sure that I am not twisting the word of God. I also invite my readers to comment and share your opinions down below in the comment section. May the Lord of Heaven’s Armies Bless you all!

I am currently reading and quoting from the New Living Translation version of the Bible.

Andrew Snelling #fundie arstechnica.com

“Alternative facts” aren’t new. Young-Earth creationist groups like Answers in Genesis believe the Earth is no more than 6,000 years old despite actual mountains of evidence to the contrary, and they've been playing the “alternative facts” card for years. In lieu of conceding incontrovertible geological evidence, they sidestep it by saying, “Well, we just look at those facts differently.”

Nowhere is this more apparent than the Grand Canyon, which young-Earth creationist groups have long been enamored with. A long geologic record (spanning almost 2 billion years, in total) is on display in the layers of the Grand Canyon thanks to the work of the Colorado River. But many creationists instead assert that the canyon’s rocks—in addition to the spectacular erosion that reveals them—are actually the product of the Biblical “great flood” several thousand years ago.

Andrew Snelling, who got a PhD in geology before joining Answers in Genesis, continues working to interpret the canyon in a way that is consistent with his views. In 2013, he requested permission from the National Park Service to collect some rock samples in the canyon for a new project to that end. The Park Service can grant permits for collecting material, which is otherwise illegal.

Snelling wanted to collect rocks from structures in sedimentary formations known as “soft-sediment deformation”—basically, squiggly disturbances of the layering that occur long before the sediment solidifies into rock. While solid rock layers can fold (bend) on a larger scale under the right pressures, young-Earth creationists assert that all folds are soft sediment structures, since forming them doesn’t require long periods of time.

The National Park Service sent Snelling’s proposal out for review, having three academic geologists who study the canyon look at it. Those reviews were not kind. None felt the project provided any value to justify the collection. One reviewer, the University of New Mexico’s Karl Karlstrom, pointed out that examples of soft-sediment deformation can be found all over the place, so Snelling didn’t need to collect rock from a national park. In the end, Snelling didn’t get his permit.

In May, Snelling filed a lawsuit alleging that his rights had been violated, as he believed his application had been denied by a federal agency because of his religious views. The complaint cites, among other things, President Trump’s executive order on religious freedom.
That lawsuit was withdrawn by Snelling on June 28. According to a story in The Australian, Snelling withdrew his suit because the National Park Service has relented and granted him his permit. He will be able to collect about 40 fist-sized samples, provided that he makes the data from any analyses freely available.

Not that anything he collects will matter. “Even if I don’t find the evidence I think I will find, it wouldn’t assault my core beliefs,” Snelling told The Australian. “We already have evidence that is consistent with a great flood that swept the world.”
Again, in actuality, that hypothesis is in conflict with the entirety of Earth’s surface geology.

Snelling says he will publish his results in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. That likely means Answers in Genesis’ own Answers Research Journal, of which he is editor-in-chief.

forever for Him &jazzie #fundie answers.yahoo.com

Question (by forever for Him) :Would you vote for me for president ?

Here are the things I would do ...

1.First thing I do is bring back prohibition...the wine the beer the alcohol all made by satan...this thing called wine beer alcohol have done bad things to make bad people .... i will make sure no one makes drinks one drop of beer wine and alcohol for it is very dangerous... in fact did you know that the bible speaks out against drink it ? have you notice it is the libs who want to make bad things like this legal ?

2.The second thing i would do is ban evolution from being teached anywhere,, from private schools to homeschools (no public schools when i become president..)thinking you are a monkey will send you to hell. have you notice its always the libs who think they come from monkys ?

3.The third thing i would do is keep on doing the death penalty... a lot more in fact... it is always the libs who want to protect the criminals...

4,the next thing i would do is ban abortion and give the prison to and death penalty for those who try to kill their babies by have abortion.more people have been killed by abortion then by war in fact... did you know that ?

5.next thing i would do is make california a place where all the homosexness go.... first i would take all of the NORMAL people out of california then place every bad people there like the homosexuals. put a 30 foot wall all around california.... in fact most of the homo people come from california anyway !

6.the sixth thing i would do is remove the liberal media... abc stands for already been condemned (by God). nbc stands for never been converted(to christian).the rest you can figure out !

7.number seven... i would make intolerance of christianity a hate crimem, anyone, who speaks hate against christians will be put in to prison... people like darwin, dawkins, christopher hitchens... just like libs make speaking out against homosex a hate crime i will make being against us christians a hate crime...

Answer(by jazzie):would you put prayer back in school?
put all atheist on a island and let them fellowship among themselves
serial killers on a different island

if you say yes you have my vote

Mark Jones #fundie markjones1388.esy.es

In Acts chapter 17 we read of a people called the Bereans. In this passage (verses 10-15) that they appear in (very little of the Bereans is mentioned in the Bible), it shows them take the words of the apostle Paul and examine them in relation to the Old Testament scriptures (quite possibly the Septuagint, certainly the Tanakh if not the Septuagint).

In verse 11 we read the following quote:
“Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.” Acts 17:11 (NIV)

The Bereans were the people who lived in the ancient city of Berea (also known as Beroea), the city is now called Veria and is situated in Macedonia in Northern Greece.

Many people will listen to something they are taught and will take that as truth. However the example the Bereans set in this verse is that we should check the validity of what we are told and examine those things and check that they are in line with what the Bible tells us. There would’ve been no doubt people in that time who reacted when they read this and expressed outrage, saying something along the lines of, “how can these people dare to doubt the words of the apostle Paul”. It may sound like a harsh response, but it’s often what we see happen today, in fact many atheistic arguments are based on similar logic, “who are you to disagree with the words of Stephen Hawking (etc)?”. That kind of logic in of itself proves that it is of man and not of God. The principle outlined here in Acts 17 with the the Bereans is an important one and it is something we can glean something from.
So in this post I’m going to outline a few ways we can test something said in the Bible or even an interpretation of a verse someone references or just simply the outlining of a belief that someone has, and test it in such a way that does justice by God’s word and doesn’t mire it in our eyes.

So without further ado, let’s get into it:

Go To God’s Word First:
You’ll have no doubt heard someone ask the question, why are there are so many contradictions in the Bible? This argument is actually rooted in a seed of deception that goes back to first century AD, in 2 Corinthians 4:4 we are told that the god of this age (who is Satan) has blinded the eyes of the unbelievers so that they will not see the light of the gospel. The word we see in the original Greek language where we see the word unbelievers is the word apistos. The word apistos means unfaithful, faithless, incredible, unbelieving or incredulous. So this statement in 2 Corinthians 4:4 almost seems to have a Ronseal principle to it (does exactly what it says on the tin), however I think it goes a little deeper than that. In John 3:16 we see the word pisteuo and it means to be persuaded of something or to completely trust in something. I think Paul is hinting at the reverse of this very principle outlined in John 3:16, so 2 Corinthians 4:4 isn’t just referring to those who haven’t committed their lives to Christ, but also to those who doubt the ways and the truth of God. This could be part of the reason why Paul tells the Church in Corinth a little later in the letter to examine themselves to see if they are in the faith (2 Corinthians 13:5).

But back to the “contradictions”. Any so-called contradictions that we run into in scripture are either born out of man-made teaching or simply out of a lack of understanding of scripture as a whole. What we need to do is cross-check with what the scriptures say and the Bereans had that principle nailed, they cross-checked a statement or a principle we now find in the New Testament with what was written in the Old Testament.
NB – Check out my post called “The 2 Timothy 3:16 Principle” for more on the subject.

Now this means a couple of things, first we actually need to read the Old Testament. Some people don’t like reading the Old Testament because they find it confusing, or they believe it paints a different picture of God than of the one we see in the New Testament. In response to that let me say this, the human mind is an incredible thing, but our heart is even more powerful than our minds. In fact the prophet Jeremiah tells us that the heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure (note this in reference to human works) and he asks the question who can understand it? (Jeremiah 17:9) However we read in Ezekiel 36:26 a promise from God where we are told that He will give us a new heart, removing our heart of stone and replacing it with a heart of flesh (not to be confused with the flesh Paul often speaks of). So if our hearts are polluted then it is entirely possible for our hearts to convince our minds of something that is contrary to what is the truth. This is part of the principle behind the words of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke when He told us to deny ourselves daily and to take up our cross and follow Him (Luke 9:23). Where we see the word deny in this verse in Luke it is the Greek word arnesastho which is very closely linked to a word we’ve discussed before on this blog, arneomai. As we’ve talked about in the past the word arneomai means to deny, disown or contradict, so in this verse in Luke it’s saying that we have to literally give up ownership of ourselves and take up our cross and follow Jesus. So we need to read the Old Testament.
The other thing we need to do is to see if it fits with the overall picture that scripture gives us (so reading the entire Bible). For example, does what we see in Psalm 1:2 where we are told that our delight is in the law of the Lord and on that law (the word of God) we should meditate on it day and night line up with other verses in scripture. We are told in Joshua 1:8 to meditate on the law of the Lord day and night, it’s the exact same principle. And just to show that this is not a ruse or anything like that, let me ask you what you’re reaction would be if I told you that there was over 400 years between the writing of these two verses. You see Joshua chapter 1 would’ve been written in about 1406 BC and Psalm 1 would’ve been about 979 BC, now if those two dates are exact (I have no reason to say they’re not), then that puts these two verses 427 years apart. But I’ll get into timelines a little later on.

What we need to do when a preacher preaches a sermon or a Bible study leader explains a passage or a verse is to go away and read the scriptures and check if it all lines up.

We Need To Read Into A Bit Of History:

Now, I know that history isn’t everybody’s cup of tea however when it comes to understanding the words of the Bible it can be quite key.

However please let me briefly explain why history is important when it comes to testing the validity of God’s word. You see what it simply boils down to is the fact that when it comes to the historical claims of the Bible (creation, Jesus, the ark, the exodus, etc), none of us who are reading this post were alive when those events occurred. So the question then is how can we know they’re true historical accounts? Is there evidence for such events in the Bible? Well to answer the first question, there is an amazing wealth of evidence for the events that the Bible outlines, we have found the ruins of the city of Jericho we also have massive evidence supporting the global flood recorded in Genesis 6-9 (you can see more on that here) and there’s a more than all of that, but I’ll leave you to do your own research (I’ll give some recommended sites to start with for doing that). And the answer to the second question, is yes, there’s lots of evidence supporting the Biblical accounts.

So let me encourage you to look into things such as Biblical chronology, and Biblical history. Some of the stuff you’ll find along the way is fascinating. For example I’m currently reading a book called “The Discovery of Genesis” by C.H. Kang and Ethel R. Nelson, the book looks at examples of how the Chinese language links in with the accounts of the book of Genesis. It is a truly fascinating book, in it we see examples such as the word for boat relating to the flood, when we break down the symbols that make up the word boat we can see that the word boat points to a vessel for eight people. So reading into some of this is not only fascinating but can help us to grow stronger in the faith.

...

History is important to the events of the Bible, because if the events of the Bible did not happen then the Bible is not infallible, and because of the claim of 2 Timothy 3:16 that all scripture is God breathed, then if even 1% of the Bible is false then the entire Bible is compromised.

However let me say that although history is important to understanding the validity of the Bible, by all means this does not mean you have to be an expert in the subject. One of the best things to know as a Christian when it comes to any question that arises in regards to the Bible is where to go to find answers to those said questions.

...

Little Bit:

Did you know that one of the most common objections that critics of the Christian faith make, is that the Bible apparently tells us that the world is flat? An example of where this comes from is found in Revelation 7:1 which makes reference to the “four corners of the earth”, however the Bible states in Isaiah 40:22 that the earth is a circle, remember though the obvious understanding (before some misinterprets the word circle) that a sphere is a 3D circle and the earth is spherical in nature.
Science tells us a lot about the truth of Biblical history, for example did you know that the mitochondrial (from the mother) and y chromosome (father) both trace back to a single ancestral sequence approximately 6,000 years ago (more on that here), this is something that you may not get taught in a science classroom today. Science is very important to know about in regards to defending our faith today, as it is highly likely to be one of the first areas you will be challenged on about your faith, bearing in mind the myth that is running around rampantly that says “science has disproved God”.

Again like in all of the other subjects, you don’t have to be an expert in the field, again I’m most certainly not although I do enjoy reading into science, but it is helpful to know a little bit on the subject and more importantly to know where to go to find answers to the questions you’ll get asked.

Now the Bible does make some scientific claims, such as we all come from two people, Adam and Eve. The thing we have to look into is whether or not science supports the claims made in the Bible, I touch on the Adam and Eve question a little bit a couple of paragraphs before this one. But looking into science is pretty important in this day and age to understanding the validity behind the Bible, but again you don’t have to be an expert on science but having a basic understanding of it and knowing where to go to find some great answers is definitely valuable.
One other thing I think is worth mentioning is that understanding the difference between historical and operational science, the reason why I say this is because very often at the minute the lines between the two get blurred particularly when you’re talking to evolutionists. We often see the claim that creation is pseudo-science and evolution is science, however both evolution and creation are historical science, they are versions of history that haven’t been observed through operational science that we either accept or don’t accept and then use operational science to look for evidence that supports the historical science that we accept. But in a basic way of saying it is historical science is conclusions that we form from things that we see from the past (historical records, archaeology, etc), whereas operational science is the testable repeatable and observational methods that we can use today, such as carbon dating for example (check out this article for more). So knowing enough about the difference between historical and operational science is of a great benefit in helping us tell the difference between the two, but again you don’t have to be an expert on the subject, but know where you can get the information from that you need to answer the questions.

In Closing:

So that’s all I wanted to say in this post eally. When it comes to testing what the Bible has to say to us, we need to start with the Bible and cross-check it with what it has to say in other parts of it. Look into a bit of history, look at what evidence we find that supports the accounts in scripture.
Read a bit into the original languages look at what the original words were in their original languages, find out what they mean and how they correspond to your understanding of what you’re reading. And finally look a bit into science, go and look into whether or not science supports the Bible or not. But don’t worry about being an expert in these things, you don’t have to be one, again I’m not one.

I hope you’ve found this post both interesting and helpful. I would love to hear your thoughts, as I mentioned I’m going to post some links below that may help with looking into some of these things, so if there’s any extra ones you can think of just drop them in the comments or send me them over through my Facebook page and I’ll update the list, I may even create a sub-page here on the site of useful links, let me know if that is something that you would want.

I’ll be posting again soon as I have a lot of posts in the draft que currently being edited.
But until next time I’ll leave you with the links below.

All the best,
Mark

cdevidal #fundie godlikeproductions.com

EvolutionVsGod.com has a free 38 minute film in which various evolutionists such as a PhD/associate college professor of Anthropology at UCLA, a PhD/professor of biological sciences and anthropology at USC, a PhD/professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at UCLA and PhD/associate professor of biology at Universiy of Minnesota Morris/famous blogger PZ Myers appear to be stumped by some challenging questions. It's an interesting movie and I recommend you check it out.

In observing responses to the movie, I saw lots of evolutionists mocking but I didn't see one person who answered the questions that apparently stumped the evolutionists. Accusations began to fly: The claim is that in his previous films, the evangelist had edited responses to questions to make the interviewees look bad. Thus the claim is that the stumped evolutionists in this film had simply been edited unfairly.

To which I replied, "OK, I'm sure we'll see a statement from PZ Myers soon explaining how he was misrepresented*, but what about you? Can you answer the questions?" The response often was, "What were the questions?"

Me: "I hadn't written them down so I didn't recall them. But you can see them again if you watch the movie."

Them: "No, I'm not watching that (blankety-blank)." (Which sounds dishonest, but I'll let that pass for now.)


* PZ Myers did claim he was misrepresented: [link to freethoughtblogs.com] But without substantiation. If he gave fuller answers during the interview, I'd like to see them, but he did not: [link to www.google.com (secure)]


So I promised to write down the questions from the film. And by the way, I don't pass any judgment on the quality of these questions. Maybe they're fallacious, and you can help demonstrate that. But before you answer, some simple rules to keep everyone honest.

RULES
* You must give a direct answer to every question or you've failed. Yes, some questions appear to be repeats but please answer them all as they are all slightly different.

* If you give an answer such as "It's not possible to know that" (or something similar) to any question you fail to demonstrate the validity of your worldview. Try harder before posting.

* You agree to the principles in this flowchart or you've failed: [link to www.jacoballee.com]

* You may not commit any logical fallacies or you've failed. Here is a list of some well-known fallacies. [link to www.informationisbeautiful.net] There may be others that I am not currently aware of.


If you don't agree with these rules, don't answer. If Darwinian macro evolution does occur in nature, these questions can be answered without resorting to cheating or underhanded rhetoric to uphold it. Right? I'm sure you'll agree these are fair rules.

Items beginning with an asterisk '*' are questions, and items beginning with an equal sign '=' are important statements which do not require an answer, but which inform the next question, so they must be read and understood.

OK, go!


= "Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence." ~Richard Dawkins

= "Live Science" says of Darwinian evolution: "It can turn dinosaurs into birds, apes into humans and amphibious mammals into whales."

* Do you believe in evolution?

* Do you think it's a belief?

* When did you start to believe?

* Are you a strong believer in evolution?

= A scientific method is based on "the collection of data through observation and experimentation..." ~Science Daily

* Could you give me some observable evidence that evolution is true? Something I don't have to receive by faith. Remember, events that occured 65 million years ago can't be observed. If you say "fossil record," please be specific: Give one example.

= "We are condemned to live only for a few decades and that’s too slow, too small a time scale to see evolution going on." ~Richard Dawkins

= "We see nothing of these slow changes in progress, until the hand of time has marked the lapse of ages..." ~Charles Darwin

* You've got the the canine 'kind' with the coyote and the domestic dog, and there's the feline 'kind' which is the cats, the tiger and the kitten and you've got humankind. So, Darwin said there would be a change of 'kinds' over many years so could you give me one example of observable evidence of a change of 'kinds'? I don't want something I have to accept by faith. I want it to be observable. I don't want to have to have faith in the experts, I want to observe it myself. Can you give one example of observable evidence of a change of 'kind'?

* Did we have lungs or gills when we came out of the sea?

* The scientific method must be observable and repeatable, so could you give me one piece of observable evidence for Darwinian evolution, not adaptation or speciation, but a change of kinds? If you say "stickleback fish", you must specify what other 'kind' have they become. These have remained as fish. Remember, Lenski's bacteria are still bacteria. The Galapagos finches are still finches. Their change in beak is adaptation, not Darwinian evolution. There's no different animal involved. I want something which shows me Darwin's belief in the change of kinds is scientific. Can you give me anything that I can see, observe, and test, which is the scientific method, for Darwinian evolution which is a change of kinds, so that I don't have to exercise faith?

* If you cannot offer any observable evidence for Darwinian (macro, change in 'kind') evolution, how do you know it's true?

* No professor or biology major in the film was able to give observable evidence of a change in 'kind'. Therefore, Darwinian evolution (a change in 'kind') is un-observable. You need millions of years. If Darwinian evolution is not observable, is it scientific?

* You're trusting that the biology majors and professors know what they're talking about and they can't even give evidence of a change of kinds. Do you realize that's called 'blind faith'? Remember, "Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence." ~Richard Dawkins

* Do you believe in intelligent design?

* How would you make a rose? A rose has a seed so you've got to start from nothing. Could you make a rose from nothing?

* No professor or biology major in the film was able to claim they were able to make a rose from nothing. For the purposes of this thread, I am going to assume you cannot, either. So if you say there is no intelligent design, where does that leave you on the scale of intelligence if you can't even make a rose?

= "The coccyx vertebrae is an extremely important source of attachment for tendons, ligaments and muscles..." ~Laser Spine Institute

= For years, the appendix "...was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults... Among adult humans, the appendix is now thought to be involved primarily in immune functions." ~Scientific American

= My note: This link discusses erector pili/most body hair and male nipples. [link to www.livescience.com] As a married man I have found a use for male nipples. If you know what I mean. (Ahem.) And I can certainly see that the organ would likely be present on a baby in the womb before its sex is selected with hormones, as the genetalia are identical before selection. Erector pili/most body hair I'm not so certain about. It's hardly earth-shattering evidence but I would like to read more. The first thought that comes to mind is that they're useful for sweat and a slight amount of warmth.

* So could you give me an example of vestigial organs? (I believe it is implied he is asking about human organs.)

* Skeptic websites often examples of famous atheists in an attempt to win converts. But more often than not, the famous personalities cited are not atheists. Aside from Earnest Hemingway (listed in the video), Can you think of any famous atheists which you can validate have never made a statement attesting to their belief in a deity? (At 18:32 in the video, quotes from Abraham Lincoln, Carl Sagan, Mark Twain, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Charles Dawrwin show clearly they are/were not atheists. For the sake of brevity I will not list them here.)

= No professor or biology major in the film was able to give an example of a famous atheist. Ray said, "It is important to know that even though some of these men claim to believe in God, that doesn't mean they are believers in the one true Creator revealed in the Scriptures, or that they're genuine Christians. However, when atheists use theists or agnostics to promote their godless agenda, they're being dishonest. Then again, coming from those who claim that morality is relative to each person, convenient dishonesty should not be a surprise."

* Do you believe in moral absolutes?

* Is rape always wrong?

= PZ Myers essentially answered yes, so the evangelist stated therefore there are moral absolutes.

* So who makes the rules?

* PZ Myers stated that we make the rules. I am going to assume you will say the same. If you did not, no need to answer this question, just ponder it: So if Hitler made the rules and he had the majority, he makes the rules?

= "Evolution is a very harsh and cruel process." ~PZ Myers

* Did Hitler put into practice survival of the fittest? Such as the lion eating the antelope.

* Your pet dog (or insert other beloved pet) and your rotten neighbor are drowning. You can only save one of them. Which would you save?

* The biology majors all chose to save the dog. I am going to assume you will say the same. If you did not, no need to answer this question, just ponder it: So you think dogs are more valuable than human beings?

= "Any fetus is less human than an adult pig." ~Richard Dawkins

* If you believe in evolution it's just a matter of survival of the fittest. Your neighbor's a primate and you've got a canine, and you like the canine more than you like the primate. If the grouchy neighbor drowns, he drowns. Survival of the fittest. Would that be correct?

* Are you an atheist who thinks God doesn't exist?

* An atheist in the movie stated that after we die we cease to exist. Ray Comfort said, "If you were a car and your motor were turned off that would be right, that's inanimate. But you're a living, biological human being with the life of God in you. .. Is there no life in you?" Atheist: "Yes there's life in me." "That's your soul." If you agree with the atheist, how do you know?

* Are you a good person? If there's a heaven, will you make it there?

* How many lies have you told in your whole life?

* What would you call me if I told lots of lies? You'd call me a liar, wouldn't you?

* So what does that make you if you've told lies?

* Have you ever stolen anything in your whole life even if it's small?

* That's called theft. So what are you?

* Have you ever used God's name in vain?

= That's called blasphemy, and it's very serious to use God's name as a cuss word. One atheist said he doesn't believe in God so it's not blaspheming. Ray responded, "Well, if I don't believe in certain laws and still violate them, ignorance of the law is no excuse. So we're still guilty even though we deny a law exists or even don't know about it."

* Jesus said that if you look upon a woman with lust in your heart you've committed adultery. Have you ever looked at another person with lust, such as with pornography?

= If you answered yes to those questions (and I don't know anyone who honestly can't answer anything but yes, myself included), to quote the evangelist, "then by your own admission you're a lying, theiving, blasphemous adulterer-at-heart, and that's only four of the Ten Commandments. Just not believing in hell won't make it go away. A judge must see that justice is done if he's a good judge, and it's the same with God. If we die in our sins God will give us justice. The Bible says that no theif, no liar, no fornicator, no blasphemer, no adulterer will inherit the kingdom of God. So if you died in your sins but God gave you justice, because He's holy and perfect morally, you'd end up in hell, and I'd hate that to happen to you."

* Would you sell one of your eyes for one million dollars? Both for 100 million dollars?

= Most would say "no." Your eyes are precious to you. How much more precious is your life?

= "Now let me tell you something you know intuitively. You know that creation is proof of the Creator, God has given you that inner light. So when you look at the genius of God's creative hand, you know God exists because of creation, and the reason you choose evolution is because it gets rid of moral accountability. Evolution lets you believe that lust and theiving are just primal instincts; You're just an animal. The Bible demands moral accountability and says those things are wrong and that's why it's not acceptable to you. That's why you're not seeking after truth. Am I wrong?" ~Ray Comfort (The biology major sighed, paused, and said, "I think you're wrong.")

= "You are a unique human being, made in the image of God with a sense of justice and truth and righteousness. God gave you a conscience. It's inherent. It's shaped by society but it's inherent. You know right from wrong. You've violated His law and I don't want you to end up in hell."

= To a struggling college student: "James, if you put your finger on it, and see if we can, your struggle at the moment is because of your love for sin, because of the pleasure that sin gives you and you don't want to give it up. You're like a man with a money belt filled with gold who's just fallen into the ocean. I'm saying, if you don't get rid of that belt which weighs 80 pounds it's going to take you under. Doesn't matter how much pleasure it gives you, it's not worth losing your life for."

= To a college professor: "You're not a beast. You're a human being created by God in His image with dignity and worth and purpose."

* Do you know what God did for guilty sinners so we wouldn't have to go to hell?

= "God became a human being 2,000 years ago, Jesus of Nazareth, and He suffered and died on a cross, taking the punishment for the sin of the world. You and I violated God's law and Jesus paid our fine. That means God can legally dismiss our case because of the suffering, death and resurrection of the Savior. God can say, 'You're out of here' because someone paid your fine." ~Ray Comfort

= "And then what God can now do is clothe us in the righteousness of Christ, so on Judgment Day you're safe from God's wrath and His justice, because of the death and resurrection of the Savior. If you repent and trust in Him, God will give you a righteous standing in His eyes. He'll wash away your sins in an instant, and He'll grant you everlasting life. His last words on the cross were, 'It is finished.' In other words the debt has been paid. He came to take our punishment upon Himself. So because our fine was paid by another, God can legally dismiss your case." ~Ray Comfort

* Does that make sense? (He was not asking if they believed it, just if the statements made a logical connection.)

* When are you going to die?

= "God knows the exact moment of your death. It could be today, it could be tomorrow. I'm not using scare tactics, this is just straight reality. 150,000 people die every 24 hours, and they were no doubt all making plans for next week, so please think about this." ~Ray Comfort

= "I'm not talking about a religion that says you have to strive to get to heaven, I'm telling you that the Bible says heaven is a free gift of God. You cannot earn everlasting life, doesn't matter how religious you are, how good you are. 'God commended His love toward us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.' And then he rose from the dead and defeated death." ~Ray Comfort

= "This is how the Bible puts it: 'For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.' So eternal life is a free gift of God, and it comes because of God's mercy not because of anything we do." ~Ray Comfort

* Does that make sense?

= "I've been reading the Bible at home for over 40 years. There's no mistakes in it. Any mistakes that we think are in it are our mistakes, and you can trust God's Word. Think of how you trust professors and science books that tell you you're a primate? You trust and believe that so how much more should you trust a God who cannot lie?" ~Ray Comfort

* Are you going to think about this?

= "Soften your heart. Don't have so much blind faith in what science tells you and it's left you without any knowledge of what was in the beginning anyway. You haven't got a clue where you come from, you don't know what you're doing here on earth and you don't know what happens after you die."

* Could you be wrong about God's existence?

= An atheist responded, "Yes, but could you be wrong about God's existence?" "No." "Well then I think you're rather closed-minded." "Well if I said to you, could you be wrong about your wife's existence you'd say, "No, I know her. Don't be ridiculous. I know her and love her. And I know the Lord and I love the Lord, and He transformed my life 41 years ago, instantly, overnight, forgave my sins and gave me new desires when I had no desires or thoughts of God for the whole 22 years before I was a Christian."

= "The problem with those who are unable to see evolution, I think, is they don't have imaginations." ~Gail E. Kennedy, PhD, Associate college professor of Anthropology at UCLA

= "Human beings are still fish." ~PZ Myers

* Are you a talking primate?

* Are you a cousin of bananas?

= "I'm accepting that they did their science correctly." ~Biology major

= "I'm going to trust what those experts did, those experts came up with." ~Physics major

= "Darwinian evolution rests on faith. And once again, according to Richard Dawkins, 'Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence.' Darwinian evolution requires great faith. The knowledge of God, however, is clearly seen by all mankind. 'For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools.' (Romans 1:20-22)" ~Ray Comfort

Note to newcomers Despite the name, this is not a Christian website. It is simply a good forum for discussion because one does not need an account to post. (You can remain anonymous.)

On Fire #fundie theologyonline.com

[A man walked into a bar tended by a robot. Robot asks man, "What is your IQ?" Man says 150, so the robot serves him a drink and starts talking about quantum physics, string theory, atomic chemistry, and relativity.

The man thought it was so cool, so he left, then came back in for another drink. Robot asks, "what is your IQ?" Man says, this time, 100, so the robot serves him a drink and talks about NFL, NASCAR, supermodels.

The man decides to really test the robot, and comes back in for yet another drink. Robot asks, "What is your IQ?" This time man says 50. Robot serves drink and says, "Isn't President Bush just unfairly attacked by the liberal media??]

quantumspirit walks into the bar and the Robot asks "You again?! Hit the road you drunken lie-beral faggot!!"

Bruce #fundie #conspiracy illuminatiwatchdog.blogspot.com

Why the Illuminati Hides the Flat Earth Truth

The Earth is flat and flat as a pancake for that matter. Forget what your science teachers and textbooks taught you as a child. They're aren't based in actual evidence, just what some "authority" told them to write. The true evidence isn't in what has been presented but by what is missing. The Illuminati continues to want to brainwash people into believing what it wants them to believe. A round Earth leads to the notion of an insignificant Earth. And an insignificant Earth equates to meaninglessness for the rest of us. When people are convinced that they have no meaning or no purpose, they are much more malleable to brainwashing.

For this article, we're not going to make the convincing case that the Earth is flat. There are tons of resources out there that can convey the wealth of evidence to support this theory. And yes, the evidence is more plentiful than that used support the theory of evolution. Those of us who believe differently, of course, are subjected to persecution and ridicule. The Illuminati dismisses us as stupid and does not refute our arguments. What we will discuss is what the order hopes to accomplish and hide from us by promoting a round Earth theory.

The reasons come from truth and spirituality as well as the ephemeral levels of our universe. The Illuminati knows that there are three levels sandwiched together like a hamburger. The topmost level is heaven and God's kingdom. This is where the messiah and the angels reside. In other words, all things good. The second or mid-level tier is our Earth. It is the meat, which surrounded above and below by spiritual forces. The lowest level is hell and the demons. It is fire and brimstone, not to mention suffering beyond all comprehension. The Illuminati knows this in-depth. That's why its sick and twisted rituals revolve around devil worship.

Simple geology can tell us all. Below the surface of our flat Earth, which is the battleground for infinite good and evil forces to fight for control, is unimaginable hell. Every time a volcano erupts, it's literally hell spewing forth on the planet. That's why the Illuminati wants to hide the truth. The order wants us to believe that everything is rooted in "science" and that we are just piles of biology eeking out meaningless existences with no hope and no future.

The truth is that we are living in a creation that didn't happen by accident and that good is battling against evil for control. The Earth is just the layer in between, but if we are to believe that it is round, then that is to acknowledge that hell has no reality. That's what the Illuminati wants us to think. They want us to believe in the secular and convince us that God is not real and that we have no reason for being here. They do this through media, pop culture, and education.

Remember, volcanoes are portals to hell, and the sun is a window to God's kingdom which is too pure to gaze upon with human eyes. This is the truth that the Illuminati doesn't want you to know.

Illuminati Watchdog #conspiracy #fundie #wingnut #dunning-kruger illuminatiwatchdog.blogspot.com

Why the Illuminati Hides the Flat Earth Truth
The Earth is flat and flat as a pancake for that matter. Forget what your science teachers and textbooks taught you as a child. They're aren't based in actual evidence, just what some "authority" told them to write. The true evidence isn't in what has been presented but by what is missing. The Illuminati continues to want to brainwash people into believing what it wants them to believe. A round Earth leads to the notion of an insignificant Earth. And an insignificant Earth equates to meaninglessness for the rest of us. When people are convinced that they have no meaning or no purpose, they are much more malleable to brainwashing.

For this article, we're not going to make the convincing case that the Earth is flat. There are tons of resources out there that can convey the wealth of evidence to support this theory. And yes, the evidence is more plentiful than that used support the theory of evolution. Those of us who believe differently, of course, are subjected to persecution and ridicule. The Illuminati dismisses us as stupid and does not refute our arguments. What we will discuss is what the order hopes to accomplish and hide from us by promoting a round Earth theory.

The reasons come from truth and spirituality as well as the ephemeral levels of our universe. The Illuminati knows that there are three levels sandwiched together like a hamburger. The topmost level is heaven and God's kingdom. This is where the messiah and the angels reside. In other words, all things good. The second or mid-level tier is our Earth. It is the meat, which surrounded above and below by spiritual forces. The lowest level is hell and the demons. It is fire and brimstone, not to mention suffering beyond all comprehension. The Illuminati knows this in-depth. That's why its sick and twisted rituals revolve around devil worship.

Simple geology can tell us all. Below the surface of our flat Earth, which is the battleground for infinite good and evil forces to fight for control, is unimaginable hell. Every time a volcano erupts, it's literally hell spewing forth on the planet. That's why the Illuminati wants to hide the truth. The order wants us to believe that everything is rooted in "science" and that we are just piles of biology eeking out meaningless existences with no hope and no future.


The truth is that we are living in a creation that didn't happen by accident and that good is battling against evil for control. The Earth is just the layer in between, but if we are to believe that it is round, then that is to acknowledge that hell has no reality. That's what the Illuminati wants us to think. They want us to believe in the secular and convince us that God is not real and that we have no reason for being here. They do this through media, pop culture, and education.

Remember, volcanoes are portals to hell, and the sun is a window to God's kingdom which is too pure to gaze upon with human eyes. This is the truth that the Illuminati doesn't want you to know.

Stephen Smith #wingnut santaclaritafree.com

The question I keep hearing from friends and family who follow current events is, “How did things get like this?”

Puzzlement is understandable.

Said about President Trump by the left:

There are vicious attacks on his policies and his requests of legislation for asylum and immigration laws, which are remarkably similar to liberal Democrat Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton.

He is charged with being the most divisive President in history, while his actions and policies reflect traditional American values more than any President in memory apart from Ronald Reagan. The division is being caused by the often repeated lies and out of context statements being made by his accusers. The media and Democrats speak in lockstep, using the exact same phrases attributed to Nazi Joseph Goebbels, “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.” Leftists use fascist tactics, not President Trump.

President Trump has been charged with the usual litany of sins chanted by the left. They are all based on race, class, gender and now sexual orientation. Those who know him best and have worked for him, refute these charges. It seems that those on the left, who live life with unreasoned hate, ignore evidence.

America’s Mandatory Re-Education and Indoctrination Centers
Communist countries have a history of killing, imprisoning or re-educating people who act against or don’t conform to their left-wing ideology. Conformity is expected, news is regulated and suppressed, and the media and educational systems are required to follow and promote the party line.

Democratic Western nations are moving toward the adoption of these policies. The United Kingdom now incarcerates people who violate their requirements for politically correct speech; for example, you may be imprisoned for referring to a man, who identifies as a woman, as a man.

Some American liberals claim this could not occur here. Moderate and conservative Americans generally believe that our principles will prevail. They are wrong. Not enough attention is given to what is happening at colleges and the rest of our education establishments.

Most of our colleges are run and controlled by left-wing radical “educators.” Many professors will acknowledge they are socialist, communist or otherwise left-wing. Any conservative teacher who speaks up, risks losing employment. Only ideologies of the left are tolerated.

Students are told what they must believe. Dissenters are ridiculed and bullied by their professors and fellow students. Their grades suffer, or they face expulsion.

California requires mandatory college classes. At first this was for the basics or reading, writing, mathematics and government. These were covered in the first two years of college. Then they added indoctrination classes. More recently, recognizing the need, more indoctrination classes were made mandatory in the second half of college. Of course, radicals will promote their philosophy whatever the class may be.

To complete college, one must take such indoctrination classes as American Racism, Disparity of Income and various others that are anti-capitalist, anti-American or promote the conversion of our country into some form of Socialist utopia. Many parents would be offended if they knew of all these classes, so restrictions were placed on the dissemination of college class catalogues and the classes being taken by one’s own kids.

Anyone wanting a career dependent on a college education has no choice but to submit to the process. It should be no surprise that the young and impressionable get radicalized.

To make matters worse, tuitions are enormous, student loans are readily available and many classes are useless. This makes the college graduate both dependent and resentful when they are burdened with paying off these debts. While the colleges promote student loan waivers or publicly paid college for all, they ignore the major factors in education costs. University of California professors get full time pay for 3-6 hours of teaching per week. Many professors supplement their income by requiring the purchase of an unnecessary text that they wrote.

You may think your pre-college kids are safe — teachers in grade school work much harder and you know what classes the kids are taking. Remember, teachers are educated at indoctrination centers.

Driving a wedge between students and parents, California has instituted and modified sex-education classes that require or encourage secrecy and non-disclosure to parents. These programs appear to advocate sex regardless of a person’s gender, and offer contraceptives and abortions without parental disclosure.

Rationally, one might thing that graduates ultimately would recognize that the propaganda classes should be replaced with practical courses such as managing personal finances, understanding investments or even home making. If the indoctrinators are successful, instead they will be advocating that everyone must conform to what they perceive as proper thought.

President Trump’s economic and foreign policies are demonstrably working. Income and employment for all races and classes are up, inflation is under control and 401ks are at record highs.

North Korea is in check, we are negotiating with China and the rest of the world for more fair-trade agreements, our relationship with Israel is the best in history and Iran will comply or collapse. Regardless, for some unknown reason all the Democrat Presidential candidates want to reverse the policies that are currently serving all American people so well.

Resigning Labor Secretary Alex Acosta has been viciously attacked by Democrats because they say that some 10 years ago, as a prosecutor in Florida, he had not adequately charged the vile sexual criminal Jeffrey Epstein. The Democrats were somehow trying to make this reflect on President Trump who had thrown Epstein out of his club, Mar-a-Lago, years ago. Unaccused was President Clinton, who was often a guest on Epstein’s private plane (Lolita Express) that was used to transport underage girls to his private island for sex. Over the years, John Kerry, Chuck Schumer and the Clintons all gladly accepted donations from the registered sexual predator. Crickets from the media.

These are but a few examples that reflect how America, our core values and rational thought are under assault by the most intolerant religion, the progressive left. It now dominates public education, corrupts the minds of our children and is in the process of re-writing our history in its own image. We are engaged in a great civil war. The battle is liberty and free market capitalism vs. the tyranny of socialism and fascism by the leftist progressives.

To begin engaging in this battle against the fascist/socialist left we must start with two things.

First – become armed with our foundational roots by educating ourselves on traditional American and Judeo/Christian core values. You may begin that process by watching the short videos at Prager University and taking the free online courses available at Hillsdale College.

Second – we must take back our educational system and put the brakes on the advancement of the left. We must support home schooling. We must transform our school choices to one where Americanism, traditional civics, western civilization and traditional values can be taught; rather than only the social agenda and revisionist history that are being taught now in our progressive dominated schools. Free market solutions can be found at www.SchoolChoice2020.org.

The revolution begins with you.

Dustin #fundie answers.yahoo.com

Most people that believe in evolution don't even know the facts.
People are taught that humans evolving from monkeys is a fact and they believe it blindly. Evolution is a THEORY for a reason. While evolution happens on a very small scale (adaptation), humans did not come from monkeys.

Prove that the world is more than 10,000 years old.....You can't.

but I can prove it is not:

If mankind has been on earth over a million years, as the evolutionists tell us, then why do the records of their activity only go back a few thousand years. The evidence agrees with the Bible account, not with the evolutionists. Evolutionary theory is a myth. God created everything; the evidence clearly points to it. Nothing else can explain the mountain of evidence

Man, whom the evolutionists claim to have come into existence over a million years ago, is said to have "stopped evolving" 100,000 years ago. Why then do we not have at least 100,000 years of civilizations, cities, and human remains?

Where are all those half man/half ape fossils which should be abundant in the earth's soil layers? They don't exist. This is what is known as the "missing link" by evolutionists.

Although evolutionists state that life resulted from non-life, matter resulted from nothing, and humans resulted from animals, each of these is an impossibility of science and the natural world.

The supposed hominids (creatures in-between ape and human that evolutionists believe used to exist) bones and skull record used by evolutionists often consists of `finds' which are thoroughly unrevealing and inconsistent. They are neither clear nor conclusive even though evolutionists present them as if they were. Nine of the twelve popularly supposed hominids are actually extinct apes/ monkeys and not part human at all. The final three supposed hominids put forth by evolutionists are actually modern human beings and not part monkey/ ape at all. Therefore, all twelve of the supposed hominids can be explained as being either fully monkey/ ape or fully modern human but not as something in between.

The God of heaven created our world about 6,000 years ago. Then, about 2348 B.C., a gigantic Flood covered the earth. Keeping in mind that we are dealing with very ancient events, all the evidence can be reconciled with these figures.


Many believe in evolution for the simple reason that they think science has proven it to be a `fact' and, therefore, it must be accepted... In recent years, a great many people...having finally been persuaded to make a real examination of the problem of evolution, have become convinced of its fallacy and are now convinced anti-evolutionists."
-- Henry Morris, former evolutionist.

How can evolutionists believe in evolution when science seems to go against so much of it?

Terry Hurlbut #fundie creationsciencehalloffame.org

Creationists are getting more scientifical . . .

A twist on circular reasoning

Any student of formal logic soon learns about the fallacy of circular reasoning. If one starts by assuming a fact of nature, one cannot try to prove that fact later. Any scientist knows this. For that reason, scientists always start with fundamental properties of nature that none can explain. Geometers start by assuming certain relationships (like the constant ratio of the circumference to the diameter of all circles) they cannot prove, but still know. Some things deserve to have someone assume them. Hence their name:axioms, from the Greek word axios meaning something deserving or deserved.
In circular reasoning, someone tries to prove an axiom. Formal logic does not work that way. And origins scientists often fall into a twist on this trap: “Your theory does not work under my theory (or the theory everyone accepts). So your theory must not hold.” Glen Kuban falls into this trap.
Observe how Glen Kuban takes issue with Walt Brown’s starting point: a subcrustal ocean, some fifty miles underground, and sealed for about 1600 years (at least) until the crust breaks and lets it out.
This precludes any significant earthquakes, meteorite impacts, or fissures in the crust anywhere on entire earth, even though such phenomena are well evidenced throughout the geologic record.
The trap: Kuban assumes age for the earth, and gradual, sequential settling of layer on layer of rock and soil. But suppose one event laid down all those layers in one year? And suppose the meteoroids that fell back as meteors (and meteorites) came from that same event?
The Hydroplate Theory also tells us that every earthquake in the historical record is an aftershock of the earthquakes that attended the breakout of the subcrustal ocean. Of course no earthquakes occurred before the Global Flood. The Flood event provoked the first such earthquakes! These made the Japan Earthquake feel like somebody dropping a bowling ball in the lane next to you. They easily reached Richter magnitudes of ten to twelve. That made them more than powerful enough, by the way, to produce the radioactive materials Glen Kuban’s sources rely on to “date” the earth.

Creation Week

Kuban does give a nod to Brown’s theory of the Creation Week itself. Here Brown scrupulously follows the Bible. Specifically he follows Genesis chapter 1 and 2 Peter 3:5. (He follows the original Greek verse. That verse speaks of the earth “standing together out of the water.”) Kuban thinks he found a weakness in Brown’s theory: whether the earth’s crust, if hot enough to deform, could have cooled off rapidly enough to avoid killing the life God placed on the earth later. The way Kuban expresses himself, makes one suspect he thought the life came before the buckling of the crust, the sealing of the waters under the earth, and the forming of the pillars. Of course, the Bible says different.
Walt Brown might seem to break one of his own rules, if only this once. “Brown’s Razor” says one must not invoke miracles to which the Bible does not specifically attest. But the Bible does attest to Creation Week and the events of it. The first matter formed in space, literally out of nothing. That alone qualifies as miracle enough. After that, life itself could only come by miraculous means. (Neither Glen Kuban nor anyone else has ever advanced a convincing model for abiogenesis or chemical evolution. Life does not come from non-life.) The exquisite sequence of the molding of the earth’s crust surely qualifies also.

How the Global Flood started

Glen Kuban seems to say Brown specifically said that God set the Flood off by direct Divine action. Brown never says that. He says the Flood was an accident waiting to happen after Man “fell” and turned his back on God. The Bible repeatedly says “all creation groans” under the effect of sin.
Furthermore, for all we do or can know, some person or company or corps of engineers set off a charge of high explosive (not nuclear or thermonuclear) in the wrong place, and opened a crack that compromised one of the pillars. Whoever did this, neither Adam nor Noah nor his sons ever recorded his name or the details of his act. The Flood did not begin with a miracle. But the Bible does attest to one: God gave Noah 120 years’ advance warning. He also gave Noah the design for a vessel that would withstand a rather violent launch and even more violent buffeting. (The favorable winds that blew the great life-ship into the “eddy cut off from the main flow” where it “rested” until the waters went down, likely came from the rise of the great mountain chains as the hydroplates settled to the floor of the old subcrustal chamber and literally wrinkled.)

A factitious heat problem

Glen Kuban talks at length about The Heat Problem. Brown himself calculates the energy release from the breakout at more than a trillion thermonuclear bombs. But when one releases a supercritical fluid from confinement, one relieves at once the “critical pressure” that kept it in that state. (Supercritical fluids consist of mutually miscible liquid and vapor.) The fluid expands, then cools. Rapidly. Refrigerators work that way.
Furthermore, much of that energy “cold-packed” itself as the earthquakes, acting on buried quartz, helped form the radioactive materials in the crust today. Everyone knows radioactive materials release lots of energy when they decay and especially when they split.
Last, and possibly most important: the energy that converts to the kinetic energy of the comets, asteroids, meteoroids, and trans-Neptunian objects (including Pluto), cannot remain as heat.


The starlight and time problem

Brown does try to make his work comprehensive. So sometimes he treats subjects that bear less on the Flood and more on how the earth can be young while the universe is so vast (13.7 billion light years in radium), yet we can see every object in it. Glen Kuban thinks he has done his job by pointing to the weaknesses in Brown’s specific sources on that point. But he never once considered another source (John Hartnett, Starlight, Time and the New Physics). Hartnett explains the seemingly inexplicable this way: when you stretch space, you stretch time. Hartnett can concede that 13.7 billion years’ worth of changes have taken place–at the edge of the universe. At the center of the universe, only seven thousand years need have passed. (And Glen Kuban fails to show, with his brief citations, that redshift is not quantized.)

"WTF?!" Award

Moses David / The Family International #fundie xfamily.org

Hong Kong Goolagong is believed by The Family to be a sexually ambiguous Australian Aboriginal hitchhiking demon who attacks Christian missionaries who bring the advances of Western civilization to dark-skinned people and Aborigines in particular.
The name “Goolagong” was revealed by David Berg in a coughing fit where “every cough was a word and … every word was shaped like a nipple with all the nerves running up to the nipple.” Berg described the 1981 “demonic attack” as similar to being overwhelmed by smothering female breasts.

image

Selected excerpts from The Battle Of The Bosoms follow

29. WE WERE LIKE A WHITE SAFARI GOING THROUGH THIS JUNGLE, & this thing attacked me with these words shaped like nipples. Isn't that peculiar? It was like I had to grab every one of them & conquer them, just like a woman. You know, there are female spirits, female devils, did you know that? (Maria: Yes!)

40. IT'S FUNNY, WE WERE LIKE A WHITE SAFARI GOING THROUGH THIS DARK JUNGLE & we kept being attacked by these bosoms, & I kept having to grab each one & squeeze it like I was conquering it. And they were like words.--And this big one I had the biggest trouble with until I learned its name. Each one was a word & it came up in the nipple, & you had to squeeze it to conquer it. See, we have to reach out by the hand of faith & really attack, you see? We can't just laugh it off or brush it aside & act like it's not important.

49. I TOLD YOU ABOUT THAT HORRIBLE HINDU TEMPLE IN CALIFORNIA that stood over the cliff where they had these evil spirit rites, but a girl out of that temple got saved in our church. So we went out & walked around it, & Grandmother just felt a terrible spirit off of that place, so she just rebuked it in Jesus' name! She quoted that verse, "You said, Lord, that if we have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say to this mountain be cast into the sea & it shall be done!" (Mt.17:20.) She said, "Lord, I've got faith that I should cast this mountain into the sea, in Jesus' name!"

50.--AND ABOUT TWO OR THREE DAYS LATER WE PICKED UP A NEWSPAPER & HERE WAS A PICTURE OF THIS HINDU TEMPLE SLIDING INTO THE PACIFIC! The whole cliff had collapsed & the temple was half-buried in the ocean! And my mother just jumped up & down with joy! It nearly scared me silly! My God! Whew! It made me realise those things are very real! I mean, you don't just play around with them or laugh at them or think it's some kind of a joke or foolish superstition!

53. WE WERE WALKING THROUGH THIS JUNGLE & THESE THINGS WERE ATTACKING US, these demonic nipples, words, till finally that one got in my throat, isn't that funny? I mean, it's not funny! (Maria: Oh yeah!--The words got in your throat!)--Till finally you prayed with me & I got that name. I guess in my sleep I must have rebuked it in Jesus' name, because that came back to me, you know? I told you after I woke up.

70. THANK YOU FOR FIGHTING THE BATTLE WITH ME, HONEY! I was really really having a battle! The Battle of the Bosoms! Isn't that funny? I wonder why that symbolism? The bosoms are what nurse the child & carry the milk, like the sincere milk of the Word. But these are all like lies, see? Like they were bosoms that were pretending to nourish but instead they were liars that damn, even the names of evil devils & evil spirits! I love you, Honey, TYJ!

110. "THE BATTLE OF THE BOSOMS"! I wonder if that's got anything to do with denipplisation? They were all cut-off bosoms! I remember one of them was trying to choke me! Come to think of it, I think they do have some jungles in Australia! There was jungle in that film we saw about the alligator hunting around Darwin, & up around the Darwin area are where most of the Aborigines live. The more I think about it, Goolagong was a female demon! We couldn't even dream up a thing like that, it's so far out!

Silas Reynolds #fundie therightstuff.biz

[From "A Current Year™ Listicle: The “They Had It Coming” Catalogue"]

Steve Otter is now dead. In a delicious bit of irony, the White communist and anti-apartheid activist was murdered by vibrant home invaders on December 16th (Reconciliation Day in South Africa). Naturally, the powers that be in the failed state of South Africa are both deeply concerned, but also in a state of profound grief. South Africa’s minister of culture, Nathi Mthethwa, delivered a sorrowful statement on the late anti-White agitator’s fate, “We are devastated and outraged to learn about the fatal attack which claimed the life of author and former journalist Steven Otter.”

[...]

But, in my honest opinion, Steve Otter sounds like he had it coming – if you catch my meaning. That’s not a clarion call for any would-be warriors to begin physical removal, but rather a sense of smug satisfaction in shitlibs (or I call them socialist-slash-communists because that’s what they are) and anti-White agitators receiving their just deserts.

It’s our Current Year™ now. The Old Right is in shambles and the Left has lost over a 1,000 legislative seats under President High Yeller. Purple haired and gender fluid SJWs are bravely and literally shaking from fear. Hate trumps love in the Current Year™ and any minute Vice President Pence will institute widespread and enforced electro-shock conversion therapy – starting with San Francisco. That being said, it’s worthwhile to dive into the (non-retconned) history books and celebrate a commie’s comeuppance on occasion.

Below is a Current Year™ listicle on now lionized, but thoroughly perverted Marxists and, occasionally and coincidentally Jewish, subversives that said sayonara.

5. This Machine Kills Fascists…Not Really.
http://therightstuff.biz/content/images/2017/01/Victor-Jara.jpg
Víctor Jara
– was supposed to be Chile’s next Woody (or Arlo) Guthrie (it doesn’t matter though, they were both equally shitbags anyway). He was a Chilean teacher, theatre director, lovesick poet, singer-songwriter and political hack. As we all know, Chile experienced something akin to a miracle in the early 1970s with the rise of Augusto Pinochet – a man with a penchant for sunglasses and physically removing communists via helicopter rides, along with his elite death squad called the “Caravan of Death.” Shortly after the anti-communist coup on September 11th, 1973, Jara was arrested, tortured under interrogation and eventually got a bullet in the head. Afterwards, his body was thrown in the street of a shanty town in Santiago. Good riddance.

Why Removal? Despite being labeled a peaceful singer/song writer, Jara was a dedicated communist and antagonist to the traditional and conservative Chilean people. He considered himself essentially a man of the people and the bard to the Popular Unity Government under Salvador Allende – who planned on making Chile a Soviet satellite state, after he converted the country to a leftwing socialist nightmare (inflation was at 150% prior to the coup with plans for land redistribution and social justice reforms). Early in his recording career he showed a knack (don’t they all) for provoking normal and religious Chileans, releasing a traditional comic song called La beata that depicted a religious woman tempting a priest at confession. The song was rightfully banned on radio stations and removed from record shops. Prior to being physically removed by Pinochet’s men, it was well known that Jara had made visits to both Cuba and the Soviet Union (including a concert in Moscow) in the early 1960s and he had officially joined the Communist Party. In addition, there were rumors that Jara was involved in unsavory sexual activities (think pedophilia).

The Happening: On the morning of September 12th, Jara was taken as a prisoner by the military and interned in the Chile Stadium. His body was later discarded outside the stadium along with other subversives who had been killed by the Chilean Army. Prior to being shot in the head, Victor Jara had his hands broken – either as a punishment for playing his guitar or something more sinister.

4. The Power of Poetry vs. El Caudillo
http://therightstuff.biz/content/images/2017/01/Miguel-Hern-ndez-removed.jpg
Miguel Hernández
- was an early 20th century Spanish poet and playwright associated with the Generation of '27 movement and the Generation of '36 movement. His fate was sealed as a member of the Communist Party of Spain since Hernández “fought” for the Spanish Republicans, the merciless bastards that wanted to destroy Catholic Spain during the Spanish Civil War. During the war he wrote poetry and propaganda. Fortunately, he was unsuccessful in escaping Spain after the Republicans finally surrendered (they hardly ever won a battle, unless it was murdering priests and nuns). After the war, he was arrested multiple times for his anti-fascist sympathies (think pinko commie signaling).

Why Removal? Eventually, Hernández joined the First Calvary Company of the Peasants' Battalion as a cultural-affairs officer, reading his propaganda poetry daily on the radio. He traveled extensively throughout the country, organizing communist cultural events and doing poetry readings for soldiers on the front lines. Like Jara, Hernández also traveled to the USSR, where he acted as a representative for the Spanish Republic (and likely got his marching orders from the Soviets). He also attended the II International Congress of Antifascist Writers which took place in Madrid and Valencia.

The Happening: After the Republicans and their communist allies were defeated, he was condemned to death in 1939 - he was described as, "an extremely dangerous and despicable element to all good Spaniards." The Nationalists gave him a pretty reasonable out - he was presented with an opportunity to renounce communism and apologize for betraying Spain. He refused, but his death sentence, however, was commuted to a prison term of 30 years, leading to incarceration in several prisons where he eventually croaked from tuberculosis in 1942.

3. "Muh Resistance"
http://therightstuff.biz/content/images/2017/01/Jean-Moulin1---Removed.jpg
Jean Moulin
– the French Resistance, for the most part, was extremely overrated by both the Western Allies (the Soviets had a different sort of involvement) and Charles de Gaulle – de Gaulle probably deserves his own Alt-Right dressing down, the man was a disgrace to both the French military and the Pied-Noirs. Thanks to de Gaulle’s involvement, Jean Moulin was propped up and became the face of the Resistance and idolized after the war. He is remembered today as the main emblem of the Resistance, owing mainly to his role in unifying elements of the French Resistance (think communists, trade unionists and, finally, patriotic Frenchmen) and his highly publicized death at the hands of the “Butcher of Lyon” Klaus Barbie.

Why Removal? For starters, Moulin was no soldier during the Fall of France in 1940. He was a prefect (think government administer with broad powers). He was arrested shortly after the German invasion because he refused to admit that French Senegalese colonial troops had massacred French civilians. To be fair, there is much of the Second World War that could be described as “murky” at best, but the Senegalese (African units both from the French colonies in North Africa and also many from sub-Saharan Africa) were known after The Great War (think "The Black Shame") and after World War II (their mass rape of Italian women) for grotesque horrors committed on the civilian population. After the massacre, the German Wehrmacht had many of the Senegalese executed and requested that Moulin sign-off on the action to prevent them from being accused of “muh war crimes.” Moulin refused. He even refused after personnel from the German army personally walked him to the site of the massacre and showed him the bodies of civilian men, women and children who had been butchered, raped and mangled.

Now, most of the history of the Second World War is shrouded in propaganda and most everything the Germans claimed (with respect to conduct) has been described as “lies” by the press (especially today). In Moulin’s case, the Germans claimed that while he was imprisoned in a POW camp with those Senegalese troops (likely quartered with Moulin as payback for not acknowledging the massacre), Moulin developed “a taste for blacks.” Per the Germans, Moulin was a homosexual and during a lover’s quarrel with one of his African comrades, the dindu slit his throat with a piece of broken glass. Moulin claimed that he attempted suicide, but that doesn’t really stack up – considering that rumors about Moulin’s homosexuality still exist today and his close “friendship” with (((Max Jacob))) being a blatant red-flag – Jacob was a well-known communist and homosexual poet and painter. Immediately after the war, Moulin was painted as the epitome of the Frenchman womanizer, but in the Current Year™ - it’s pretty well known in France that he was a homosexual.

Moulin was eventually released from custody (because that’s what the evil Nazis did) and joined the French Resistance.

The Happening: In reality, Moulin’s involvement in the Resistance was exaggerated at best – and, he overshadows brave men who did fight and die in the Resistance. Like the others on our list, Moulin was clearly a communist infiltrator (and by some accounts utilized by the Soviets to get close to de Gaulle). Moulin had been described as a “fellow traveler” due to his friendship with open communists and he had supported the Republicans during the Spanish Civil War (a recurring theme). Moulin was eventually betrayed by a fellow member of the Resistance - some historians, including Klaus Barbie, blamed communist (((Raymond Aubrac))). Rumors on Moulin’s death, along with Barbie’s interrogation “tactics,” are so outrageous that they demand a certain level of skepticism – like skinning Moulin alive or using bestiality as a torture technique. For a man labeled the “Butcher of Lyon,” it’s somewhat suspect that he was (again) rumored to have been recruited by the West German government to eventually assist the CIA with tracking down Che Guevara.

2. An (((Uprising))) Crushed
http://therightstuff.biz/content/images/2017/01/Rosa-Luxemberg-Removed.jpg
(((Rosa Luxemburg)))
- was a Marxist theorist, philosopher, economist, anti-war activist and revolutionary Jewish communist. A convenient piece of history that occurred in Germany after the First World War and is generally excluded in modern history books (at least in the US) – was that Germany was in the middle of a post-war revolution (called the November Revolution 1918 - 1919). The outcome being either the failed Weimer Republic or a Soviet Germany. The uprising was primarily a power struggle between the moderate Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) and the Communist Party of Germany, led by Karl Liebknecht and (((Rosa Luxemburg))), who had previously founded and led the revolutionary leftwing Spartacist League, along with (((Leo Jogiches))), (((Paul Levi))), Ernest Meyer, Franz Mehring and (((Clara Zetkin - honorary))).

Why Removal? The Spartacist Uprising (also known as the January Uprising) was a general strike, including armed battles in the streets, in Germany in January 1919. On Sunday, January 5th, thousands of armed communists gathered in the streets of Berlin. By the afternoon, Berlin’s train stations and the newspaper district were occupied by the communists. They also took over a police headquarters and demanded the overthrow of the German government – their vision – the destruction of an already weak and exhausted Germany and its transformation into a Bolshevik state (led by communist Jews).

The Happening: The German government eventually unleashed the Freikorps – a band of World War 1 veterans with a fondness for physically removing subversives and communists. In addition to crushing the January Uprising, they would also fight the communists in the Baltics and defeat the Bavarian Soviet Republic. It could be fair to call them one of the world’s first “death squads.” With respect to the militant Jewish uprising led by (((Luxemburg))) and her toady, Liebknecht – the men of the Freikorps quickly liberated the blocked streets and buildings and many of the insurgents were killed or surrendered. Unsurprisingly, (((Luxemburg))) and Liebknecht were found hiding in a Berlin apartment a few days later. They were arrested and handed over to the Freikorps unit - Garde-Kavallerie-Schützen-Division, led by Captain Waldemar Pabst. In the end, it probably didn’t matter how much the communists squirmed and tried to talk their way out of their fate – they were both shot in the head. Particularly fitting was (((Luxemburg’s))) demise, her body was unceremoniously dumped in the Landwehr Canal – it was discovered months later.

Her last known writing before she met the business end of a German 98 Mauser was “Order Prevails in Berlin.” It was written while she was hiding after the uprising was crushed. Here is the last line: ““Order prevails in Berlin!” You foolish lackeys! Your “order” is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will “rise up again, clashing its weapons,” and to your horror it will proclaim with trumpets blazing: I was, I am, I shall be!”

Sounds crazy. Sounds like she had it coming.

1. A First-Class Coincidence
http://therightstuff.biz/content/images/2017/01/Ruth-First---removed.jpg
(((Ruth First)))
- was a South African anti-apartheid activist and commie scholar born in Johannesburg, South Africa. Her parents were Latvian Jews that immigrated to South Africa in 1906. Predictably, as soon as they arrived in their new home they began the process of destroying it – they became one of the founders of the Communist Party of South Africa. Eventually, (((First))) would become a communist as well, with her mission being the overthrow of the White minority government and securing the country’s utter devastation. Just another coincidence in history – Jews immigrating to a new county and then advocating for said country’s demise through either radical leftist agitation or racial disunity (or both). She would later encourage mining strikes and communist subversion and found herself banned and exiled from the country. She was also married to another prominent anti-apartheid activist, proud communist and politician – (((Yossel Mashel Slovo))) – changed his name to “Joe” for easier infiltration (also a Jewish immigrant from the Baltics).

Why Removal? Do we still need to ask at this point? In March 1960, thousands of South African dindus essentially tried to destroy a police station in Sharpeville, South African. The White police officers, using Sten sub-machine guns and bolt-action rifles, along with armored personnel carriers, were eventually able to quell the crowd through deadly force. Today – the incident is called the Sharpeville Massacre. In South Africa the “official” story is that a peaceful and vibrant crowd of oppressed South Africans were brutally attacked by the evil and racist police state. In reality, less than 200 White police officer were being swarmed by 20,000 rioting blacks hurling stones at them – everyone in the Current Year™ knows the real score. It was fight or be torn limb from limb.

Anyway, (((First))) and her anti-White husband (((Slovo))) were doing what all Jews do – instigating and riling up the dindus against the White government (the government and people that created civilization in Africa). She and her husband had been the vanguard of anti-White rioting during the 1950s. (((Slovo))) had actually joined a communist and explicitly anti-White militia (designed off the Red Army). In addition, scores of White South African police officer had been assassinated, killed in raids or assaulted during the Jewish-led “soft” uprising during the 1950s.

By 1960 (and after the Sharpeville riot), her time in South African came to end. Back when governments actually cared for their people, the South African government came to the wise decision that this Jewish subversive needed to be exiled and removed from the country.

The Happening: Not content to live her life peacefully abroad, (((First))) moved to London and became involved in the British anti-apartheid movement. She would later move back to Africa (Mozambique) and continue advocating for the destruction of Whites in South Africa. Cue a man called Craig Williamson – quoted as once saying, “I respect a person who's willing to die for his country, but I admire a person who is prepared to kill for his country." Williamson, exposed as spy (and all-around “special operator”) in 1980, is accused of physically removing (((First))) in 1982. Evidently, she received explosive first-class prank mail – which ended her anti-White and communist campaigning.

[Each entry is accompagned with a photography of the subject on which is overwritten "Physically Removed"]

Jason Collins #fundie forum.myspace.com

"If you're going to debate religion, especially Faith vs. Non Belief, don't quote the Bible..."

I've definately had enough of this nonsense!

One of the anti-Christian arguments I hate the most is the one that says "the Bible can't prove itself" or "the Bible can't be true because the Bible says so". Anyone with half a brain and a serious curiosity for honest truth should know that it's silly to think the Bible actually and merely says "The Bible is true". The Bible is a collection of statements and works describing human nature and systematically explaining the Truths of internal spiritual reality by means of metaphor and allegory, not a statement written by one man that merely says "this statement is true". It's as ridiculous to say "the Bible can't prove itself" as it is to say "this mathbook can't prove itself" or even "this fictional storybook can't prove itself"--anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant, dishonest, or maliciously trying to make the belief in the ideas of the Bible appear stupid without giving any real argument against them.

Harold Camping #fundie charismanews.com

Harold Camping got it all wrong with his repeated end of the world predictions. And now he's admitting it.

The board of Family Radio posted the following letter from Camping, which should put an end to the doom, gloom and drama:

Dear Family Radio Family,

In this time of confusion and turmoil, God’s Word remains the only truth in which we can trust. God has shown us again the truth that He alone is true. In Romans 3:4 God declares: "Let God be true but every man a liar." Events within the last year have proven that no man can be fully trusted. Even the most sincere and zealous of us can be mistaken.

The May 21 campaign was an astounding event if you think about its impact upon this world. There is no question that millions, if not billions of people heard for the first time the Bible’s warning that Jesus Christ will return. Huge portions of this world that had never read or seen a Bible heard the message the Christ Jesus is coming to rapture His people and destroy this natural world.

Yes, we humbly acknowledge we were wrong about the timing; yet though we were wrong God is still using the May 21 warning in a very mighty way. In the months following May 21 the Bible has, in some ways, come out from under the shadows and is now being discussed by all kinds of people who never before paid any attention to the Bible. We learn about this, for example, by the recent National Geographic articles concerning the King James Bible and the apostles. Reading about and even discussing about the Bible can never be a bad thing, even if the Bible’s authenticity is questioned or ridiculed. The world’s attention has been called to the Bible.

We must also openly acknowledge that we have no new evidence pointing to another date for the end of the world. Though many dates are circulating, Family Radio has no interest in even considering another date. God has humbled us through the events of May 21, to continue to even more fervently search the Scriptures (the Bible), not to find dates, but to be more faithful in our understanding.

We have learned the very painful lesson that all of creation is in God’s hands and He will end time in His time, not ours! We humbly recognize that God may not tell His people the date when Christ will return, any more than He tells anyone the date they will die physically.

We realize that many people are hoping they will know the date of Christ’s return. In fact for a time Family Radio fell into that kind of thinking. But we now realize that those people who were calling our attention to the Bible’s statement that "of that day and hour knoweth no man" (Matthew 24:36 & Mark 13:32), were right in their understanding of those verses and Family Radio was wrong. Whether God will ever give us any indication of the date of His return is hidden in God’s divine plan.

We were even so bold as to insist that the Bible guaranteed that Christ would return on May 21 and that the true believers would be raptured. Yet this incorrect and sinful statement allowed God to get the attention of a great many people who otherwise would not have paid attention. Even as God used sinful Balaam to accomplish His purposes, so He used our sin to accomplish His purpose of making the whole world acquainted with the Bible. However, even so, that does not excuse us. We tremble before God as we humbly ask Him for forgiveness for making that sinful statement. We are so thankful that God is so loving that He will forgive even this sin.

So we must be satisfied to humbly wait upon God, and trust He will guide His people to safety. At Family Radio, we continue to look to God for guidance. If it is His good pleasure for us to continue on with our original mission, the proclamation of the Gospel, God’s Word, then we must continue to look to Him.

We consider you to be a real part of this ministry and the tremendous opportunities which God, by His unfathomable mercy and grace, continues to give to us. And, your steadfast involvement and support is so appreciated!

May God bless you,
Harold Camping and the staff of Family Radio

SilentKoala #conspiracy cosforums.com

Actually we are already in the 7-year tribulation period. Most people don't realize it though because the major events don't begin happening until half way through.

Anyone who thinks terrorism has anything to do with anything is either nuts or just plain stupid. You are actually more likely to get struck by lightning than you are to be hurt by a terrorist. In fact the whole bogus "war on terror" is actually what fulfills most of the wickedness in the last days - the Antichrist uses fear and people's irrationally ill-proportioned concern for safety and security in order to gain his absolute power. The 9/11 inside job (yes, the U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks) was the first of these such events.

What will basically happen next is they will create a catestophic natural disaster. Yes, the technology exists to create man-made disasters that appear to be natural disasters - in fact the 2004 tsunami was created using an earthquake weapon located in Russia, and Hurricane Katrina was created by a weather-manipulation station called HAARP located in Alaska. Anyway, as the result of this catestrophic event, martial law will be declared in basically every industrialized country and dissidents will be forced into internment camps where they will be executed, and the rest of the population will be injected with RFID chips.

Then the Lord's wrath will come upon all those who live on the entire earth, those who accepted the RFID chip implant (the Mark of the Beast), and such great devastation will come upon the earth that will absolutely dwarf the 2004 tsunami. Then the Antichrist will gather his armies and go fight for Isreal (yes if you actually read the Bible the Antichrst is actually pro-Zionist / pro-Israel) and the battle of Armegeddon will be fought.

Jesus will come back in 2013 and intervene in this battle and gather his few elect righteous followers, 144,000 in total upon the whole earth (I'm actually surprised it's that high), and will take them to go reign during the Millenium. For those who don't know the Millenium actually does not occur on earth, however there will be peace on earth during that time and the few survivors left over from the tribulation will rebuild and live at peace for 1,000 years.

Let's see, did I miss anything? By the way, there is no "rapture" despite what the Luciferian apostate churches are propagandizing in popular culture. The doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture is nowhere to be found anywhere in the Bible, yet the majority believe in it, which is actually one of the main contributing factors to why so many people who call themselves Christians will take the RFID chip (the Mark of the Beast), they figure since the rapture hasn't happened, it must not be the mark.

Well there you go! Repent, for the end is near!

Plaid shirt dude #fundie allaboutreligion.org

Christianity is not based upon evidence...but it is backed by evidence. Obviously anyone could “claim” to be God. The difference with Jesus is that His life completely backed those claims. Check out the history, check out the claims – it’s an absolutely phenomenal study.

OR
uddha didn't rise from the dead, nor did Confucius or Zoroaster. Muhammad didn't fulfill detailed prophecy. Alexander the Great didn't raise the dead or heal the sick. And though there is far less reliable information written about these “religious” leaders, they are believed in and followed by millions.

The Last Trump #fundie christiannews.net

Scientists across the globe are confirming that the data they are finding indicates that there is nothing random or “evolved” about the universe. It’s actually shaken some of them up to discover just how “fine-tuned” our universe is. In fact, all indicators point to a match with the order of events as listed in the book of Genesis.

The Bible for thousands of years has told us that creation began SUDDENLY when God proclaimed, “Let there be light.” Further, the Bible repeatedly states that God has “stretched out the heavens.” Interesting choice of words as it turns out. Scientists today are confirming that our universe indeed had a BEGINNING, a SUDDEN explosion of LIGHT followed by rapid EXPANSION. Yet, only a short time ago Albert Einstein and his peers, the greatest scientific minds of the twentieth century, were CONVINCED that the universe was a constant. That it just always WAS. And so the scientific "crowd" scoffed at Bible believing Christians with their ridiculous Creation account.
Until Hubble came along and with scientific measurement CONFIRMED the Biblical account of Creation. Einstein and the greatest minds of the twentieth century, WRONG. Bible RIGHT.

Only the truly ignorant and uneducated continue to claim "Creation" is a myth, with absolutely no scientific proof to support. Creation requires faith to believe in, not proof".
Time to catch up with modern science, you God haters. Time to catch up to the BIBLE.
Your ignorance just makes you look foolish.

Janet bloomfield #sexist judgybitch.com

A shit-faced drunk girl, a football star and a vigilante feminist. The makings of a fairy tale?
image

So back in August, in Steubenville, Ohio, a whole bunch of teenagers got together and did what teenagers will typically do when provided with tons of alcohol and little adult supervision: they got blackout drunk and acted like idiots.

People who will eventually need Ohio inpatient detoxification in the future.

One special girl, an honor roll student and athlete at a smaller, religious school joined the students from the local high school along with several close friends and had a wee bit too much to drink (that can happen). In fact, she got so drunk, she was slurring her words and stumbling about and eventually passed out cold and her friends packed her up safely in the back of someone’s car and drove her home and told her parents she must have the flu or something and she had a wicked headache the next morning and decided she was never drinking tequila again.

Oh, wait. Oops. No. That’s not what happened.

One special girl, an honor roll student and athlete at a smaller, religious school joined the students from the local high school and had a wee bit too much to drink (that can happen). In fact, she got so drunk, she was slurring her words and stumbling about and eventually passed out cold and APPARENTLY HAS NO FRIENDS OF ANY KIND.

This girl (you can find out her name if you like, but I’ll just call her Princess) somehow managed to find herself in the company of not just one, but TWO local football stars, who then proceeded to act like huge jerks, by taping themselves assaulting Princess, who was too drunk to protest and then posting the images on Twitter and sharing them using their phones.

Did I use the word “assault”? Yes, I did. What those boys did was clearly assault, but to describe it as “brutal rape” is a fucking insult to women who have been brutally raped. The boys deserve a slap and a good talking to about being decent human beings, but there is more to this story than is being reported. A whole bunch of things are being left out.

As Jezebel has noted, we wouldn’t even know about the story if it weren’t for a righteous blogger who decided that the “brutal rape” of the innocent Princess should result in some serious jail time for the boys involved. Vigilante feminism in action, where there is only one narrative, and only one possible outcome. The lady is 100% innocent and good, the young men are 100% evil and bad and the complete destruction of the boys lives is the only acceptable outcome, up to and including jail.

What is being left out? Oh, only the whole entire back story of history and psychology and deeply engrained motivations and desires. So Princess shows up at the party without a group of friends to protect her and drinks herself into catatonia.

Why doesn’t she have any friends? An honor roll student and an athlete and she has no friends? Bullshit. How about this? She went to a smaller religious school with a group of girls who know just what is going to happen at a testosterone fuelled drinking party loaded with football players and stayed home that night! Is that what happened? I don’t know, but if it did, it’s certainly a material fact. How can Princess claim she didn’t know what could possibly happen when her friends refused to accompany her? WHY would Princess go to a party without friends and then proceed to get blindly drunk?

Did she want to nail a football star?

football star

Bingo! And being a teenage girl, raised in a slut-walking feminist culture, she probably thought that giving herself some liquid courage and then blowing one of the players might land her a boyfriend. Wrong, Princess. It landed you a night with boys who had nothing but contempt for you. Jezebel and our vigilante feminist blogger would like people to think that the contempt the boys had for Princess is indicative of the hatred they have for all women, everywhere, all the time. Is it possible that the boys thought that Princess, specifically was a slut?

And so they treated her like one (surprise!). And for that they deserve some small punishment. Fingering a passed out, friendless, boyfriend-hunting slut and posting the pictures on Twitter was a revolting thing to do. Shame on those boys.


Everyone in this case behaved shamefully, but I take issue with the fact that only the boys are held legally or morally responsible for their actions. Deciding that ONLY the boys are responsible has some very damaging consequences. First of all, it’s completely infantilizing. Only men have responsibilities? Only men are held accountable? Only men can be charged criminally with sex crimes? At the very least, Princess should be up on charges of underage drinking, public intoxication and indecency. But no, she’s apparently just a victim and can’t be blamed for any aspect of what happened to her.

Second, it tells young women that it’s OK to go hunting high status males, to travel alone, to drink to the point of unconsciousness and to wake up the next morning with no memory and then place the BLAME on someone else. Hey look, shark infested waters! Let’s get super drunk, cover ourselves in fish blood and go swimming! What can go wrong?

How foolish. The fact that the boys in question were so utterly unfeeling and contemptuous towards Princess says something about them, to be certain. But it also says something about HER. And the fact is that no one’s life is going to be ruined by this, if we just leave things well enough alone. The boys have learned that there are limits to how callously they can act (no matter how slutty the girl) and hopefully, Princess has learned that heading out to drink with the big boys without some good friends to protect her from her own worst, most base impulses is also a bad idea.

But cue the vigilante feminist blogger. She won’t let this drop. She wants those boys ruined. Destroyed. Rotting in jail. Completely annihilated. One of the boys is countersuing for defamation, and good for him. But honestly, it doesn’t look good.

And that, my friends, is a problem. When young men, barely beyond childhood themselves are held responsible for their actions, but young women are not, we have tilted the field too far. I can’t imagine what kind of LAW could be passed to hold women accountable that wouldn’t be horrifically draconian and open to wide abuse. It has to be part of the culture. Women need to know that men are not women, and that they will respond in certain situations LIKE MEN.

How do young women protect themselves from men being men? They have friends. They travel in groups. They accept that their own decisions aren’t always going to be wise or accomplish what they hope to accomplish. THAT is girl power. Stick together ladies. If you end up shit-faced drunk at a football party chasing after boys way out of your league, you need some good solid girlfriends to take you home and tell your mom you suddenly came down with the flu.

If someone wants to post a picture of you barfing on Facebook, well, let them. Make sure your two besties are in the shot, holding back your hair and getting you to drink some water. No one ever charged their best friends for being friends.

And always remember, if you want to nab the star quarterback, you need to be a cheerleader. That’s how it works.


Lots of love,

JB

Believer21u #fundie atheistforums.org

Some of you said am going to prove that 2+2=5,but no am going to prove that 2+2=4

What reasons do we have to believe the bible is false?

The moon is not a source of light. (Some skeptic’s claim this is a problem,that the bible say’s that the moon emit’s light,this is thought to be in the verse.

“Let them [sun and moon] be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give [emit] light on the earth.”

But consider this,even when we know that we,know that the earth,revovles around the sun and rotates on it’s axies.We say that the star’s come out at the night time,even though we know they’re always there.So in appearance it seem’s as though the moon give’ light but the fact that it does so,by reflection rather than emission is not relevant to the biblical passage.You need remeber one thing the english version of bible is not the same as the hebrew translation’s,the english bible may miss some word’s or have a similar or same word,but the hebrew translation doesn’t,The Hebrew word used for emit/give light in this verse ('owr) can mean both “to be or become light” and “to be illuminated or become lighted up”.For example imagine that someone uses a mirror to reflect light in your eye’s,the ultimate source of the light is not the mirror, but the mirror appears bright to you because you’re on the receiving end of the reflection.We need remeber that not all bible verse’s can just be taken,out on it’s own becuase it won’t sound right or it may sound contradictory,so Taking this verse out of context can make it seem inaccurate, but when we step back (cf. Genesis 1:14–18), we understand more about the purpose of this passage. we understand more about the purpose of this passage.rather than how the light is given,god created everything,the sun and the moon to mark the season’s,days and years,which to this very day they are quit doing well.Take note that the bible does not provide technical and detailed chart’s on how this work,since God gave humans the ability to discover these through observational science,more info can be found online just do the research,as nothing is further from the truth.)Two individuals can't create a healthy species.(In the begining God created,everything very god,but according to hebrew translation it can also mean perfect,so for example adam and eve’s genes would have been perfect,but after they fell due to the after shock of orginal sin there gene’s and all there body lost,perfection but they did have the ability to create a fairly healthy offspring but not perfect as if they did not sin,so your right two individual’s won’t be able to create a perfect healthy of there same species,becuase they are fallen sinner’s of adam and eve.)
The world didn't start out as a ball of liquid water in empty space without a sun nearby.(Through faith we can understand that God created everything. God created things such as the earth (with water), space (which was empty, except for the earth), time, and light on Day One (GENESIS 1:1–2). None of these things existed before Day One (HEBREWS 11:3, COLOSSIANS 1:16). He created the atmosphere, by separating the waters, on Day Two (GENESIS 1:6–8). God separated the dry land from the sea on Day Three (see ). So, you are right that there was water on Day One, because God created water on that Day.)Noah's boat is both too large to function, and too small to house the number of animals and food it would take to get us to where we are.(Now am not going to waste time,explaining all that becuase it takes too long to explain and the information cannot be made small you can go google and type in “The Resource for Answering the Critics of Noah's Ark” and in there all these matter’s are explained.)You don't breed striped livestock by having the parents screw in front of striped poles.(Don’t understand what your talking about?) You don't cure leprosy by killing a bird and sprinkling its blood on a leper.(You haven’t read the verse properly,this not what it saying what it say’s is that,the proccess of sprinkinlg the blood of bird on leper,is a ritual cleansing proccess after the leper has been healed,this verse is found in the old testament,this ritual does not apply now see this is what happen’s when you put some verse on it’s own that it would not make sense,read verse.

Leviticus 14 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “These are the regulations for any diseased person at the time of their ceremonial cleansing, when they are brought to the priest: 3 The priest is to go outside the camp and examine them. If they have been healed of their defiling skin disease,[] 4 the priest shall order that two live clean birds and some cedar wood, scarlet yarn and hyssop be brought for the person to be cleansed. 5 Then the priest shall order that one of the birds be killed over fresh water in a clay pot. 6 He is then to take the live bird and dip it, together with the cedar wood, the scarlet yarn and the hyssop, into the blood of the bird that was killed over the fresh water. 7 Seven times he shall sprinklethe one to be cleansed of the defiling disease, and then pronounce them clean. After that, he is to release the live bird in the open fields.
Now at the time,God only sent leperasy to those who broke God’s rules,if you read on you will see that this spiritual cleansing was a confirmation to God’s ordinance, The priests could not cleanse the lepers; but when the Lord removed the plague, various rules were to be observed in admitting them again to the ordinances of God, and the society of his people.)
The amount of slaves stated to have been freed from egypt outnumbered the egyptians, and there's no historical record of such a mass exodus.(There really were Israelites in Egypt at a certain time. Evidence: There is a temple of Bene Israel in Egypt.this is not alone This alone will take page’s to answer but instead please go to youtube and watch video’s “ Israel in Egypt - Biblical Archaeology”,”EXODUS REVEALED!!- Hard Evidence in Red Sea of Israel's Escape From Egypt” on youtube.)
You could make a long list of things that just can't logically happen. You can make a lit of things that are blatantly morally wrong, like saying consenting same sex adults making love should be killed,(The Catholic church teach’s that gay people are to treated kindly,but there told not engage in the homsexual act but to live in chastaty as this is mortal sin against God and God’s word condem it and the catechism of the church) but treating people as chattel is ok as long as you don't kill your slave outright, or enslave your fellow isrealite male slave for life without giving him a wife first.(The bible does not say that slavery should not be allowed,as found in,(Deuteronomy 15:12-15; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1),So many people assume that the bible is allowing slavery to happen,but what many people fail to understand, is that the slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world.The slaverly according to bible was based on race,people were not enslaved becuase of their colour or their nationality.In the bible times slavery was based on economics,depending om social status,people sold themelves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or take care the need of their family’s.In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.The bible condems race based slavery as all are in God’s image.().The bible does give instruction’s on slavery how it should a slave be treated.)There are plenty of problems to be had with the bible.(Prove It!) Plenty of reasons not to follow it,(Prove It!) including the fact that we have evidence of Yahweh starting out as a lesser war god in a Canaanite pantheon(Nope,God never changes he was never a lesser God he was fully God as stated in the bible (Malachi 3:6)) , and Jesus' story not being original or unique to him.(Prove it!) Virgin births were all the rage at one point. We have reasons enough to disbelieve the bible, to the point that it's commonly said that reading the bible at face value is a sure road to atheism.?( For me it wasn’t for me reading the bible increased my faith)

There are events that can't logically happen without magic(God can do anything as God is omnipotent,my friend God isn’t restricted to the laws of science,since he is the law giver), which can't be proven to be real, as well as deeply immoral commandments(Prove It!) and actions by Yahweh and his followers.(Prove It!) Someone being at best slightly more progressive than the culture of the time is not worthy of worship.(Prove It!)

This does not convince me that the Bible is false,try harder.

There are 15 things the church Validates on the Bible

1.Manuscript Evidence.
2.Archaeological Evidence.
3.Eyewitness Accounts.
4.Corroborating Accounts.
5.Literary Consistency.
6.Prophetic Consistency.
7.Expert Scrutiny.
8.Leader Acceptance.
9.Global Influence.
10.Changed Lives
11.God’s character
12.Scientific accuracy
13.Claim of the Divine Authorship
14.Unity of the Bible
15.Fulfilled prophecy

Lets talk about one of them scientific accuracy,there are many things in the bible that are accurate with science for example this.

Scientific accuracy of the Bible Bible is over 1,900 years old.


Fact 1.At a time when it was believed that the earth sat on a large animal or giant(1500 B.C),it says in the bible.
“he hangs the earth upon nothing”(Job 26:7)

Fact 2.Only recently science discovered that everything is composed of things we can’t see..Atoms.The Bible says this:
“things which are seen were not made of things which do appear”(Hebrews 11:3)

Fact 3.The bible mentions that the earth is round way before it was discovered!!
“it is he that sits up the circle of the earth”(Isaiah 40:22)

Fact 4.Mathew Maury found paths in the sea & the Bible mentions this
“paths of the sea”(Psalms 8:8)

Fact 5.it was a scientificial discovery that light can be sent and manifest itself into speech.God asked Job this in the Bible
“can you send lightnings,that they may go,and say to you,here we are?”(Job 38.35)

Fact 6.It was scientifically discovered recently that the earth is weraing out,this can be found in the Bible in the following,(Isaiah 51:6,Psalm 102:25-26, Hebreews 1:11)

Fact 7.Mississipi River dumps 518 billion gallons every day into the Gulf of Mexico.where does it go?The Clouds.the Bible took’s about condensation verse:
“if the clouds be full of rain,they empty themselves upon the earth.”(Ecclesiastes 11:3)

Fact 8.the First Law of Thermodynamics says “neither matter nor energy can be craeted or destroyed”The Bible says:
“The heavens and the earth were FINISHED”(Genesis 2:1)No creation or destruction of them since!

Fact 9.In Genesis 6,God gave Noah the dimentions the ark.This revolutionized ship building! EVERY large ship on the high seas was inclined toward the proportions of thw Ark.

This is not it,there are more than 50 fact's in the bible but am not going state them all,unless you want me to.

Vitalux #conspiracy shroomery.org

For quite a few years I have been an advocate for the removal of fluoride from public drinking water systems.

Even though there is a preponderance of information available to show the harmful affects to the brain from fluoride, the mass population, which is consuming the sodium fluoride adulterated water, refuse to take action for it;s removal.

It is my personal opinion, based on both study of documentation, as well as observation, that fluoridation of the drinking water is both harmful and causes brain impairment.

One of the obvious observations of this brain intelligence impairment is that when those that are exposed to the soidum fluoride poisoned drinking water
are shown the evidence that they are drinking rat poison which has been put in the drinking water to make them into a dummy, they refused to acknowledge it, and immediately go and drink another glass of water from their poison water dispenser.


One does not have to look too far to see this sort of mentality abundantly prevalent in mainstream society today.

Why do they put rat poison in our drinking water and tell us it is good for us?
Why do we fall for such a ridicules poisoning of our drinking water hook line and sinker?

My hope is that others will watch this video, awaken, and share some of their thoughts about how they feel about drinking poisonous sodium fluoride in their drinking water.

Myself, I have taken major steps over the years to reduce intake of this poison. My home has a total filtration system which removes this poison by reverse osmosis. I avoid products as much as I can that contain sodium fluoride.

What are the thoughts of others?

I welcome members into the discussion that have not been affected by sodium fluoride poisoning, as well as those that have.

For those reading this thread, perhaps you can spot which ones have been drinking a lot of fluoridated water

Glen #fundie slashfood.com

Hey Just Sayn[another commenter]. There are 2 types of wine mentioned in the Bible. Fermented wine which contained alcohol and non-fermented wine which was plain grape juice. Jesus never drank fermented wine. His miracle at the wedding feast turned water into grape juice. If you read and understand the Bible you will find out that Jesus forbids drinking alcohol.

David J. Stewart #sexist jesus-is-savior.com

Last week in India a 23-year-old female student was brutally gang-raped by at least four males on a bus. She was admitted into the the hospital and listed in critical condition. The attack has caused public outrage and riots in Delhi, India...

India gang rape: Delhi bus driver held after attack
December 17, 2012

Indian police have arrested a bus driver in connection with the gang rape of a 23-year-old student on a city bus in the capital, Delhi. A police spokesman said other suspects had been identified from CCTV footage. The student and a male friend she was travelling with were beaten, stripped and thrown out of the bus in the attack on Sunday evening.

The attack has sparked outrage in Delhi, which is often seen as unsafe for women. The capital's rape figures are higher than for other Indian cities of comparable size, correspondents say.

Critical condition

The woman and her friend had boarded the bus from Munirka area and were on their way to Dwarka in south-west Delhi. They were returning after watching a film in a shopping centre in south Delhi, police said. The couple were attacked by "at least four men", police said. The couple have been admitted to hospital, where the woman is said to be in a critical condition.

On Monday, senior police officer Chhaya Sharma appealed to the public to help identify the owner of the bus. Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit has promised "strict action" against those responsible.

SOURCE: 23-Year-Old Female Student Gang Raped In India

I heard an angry woman protestor in the news say, “It doesn't matter how women dress” in India, men shouldn't rape them regardless of how they dress. I agree that men ought to be men, regardless of external influences. But the reality of the situation is that men aren't always going to do the right thing. There are evil men and good men in every place in the world. Good and evil always co-exist. May I say, IT DOES MATTER HOW A WOMAN DRESSES!!!

Certainly all forms of abuse are wrong and sinful. I am not defending evil men who prey upon the weak and vulnerable. Those men in the preceding tragic news story should receive the death penalty for their crimes. My heart goes out to the victims. However, it is apparent from all the fuss over the way the woman was dressed that it was indeed an issue. In any society where women dress immodestly, sexual immorality is commonplace, as well as sexual crimes. Any idiot can figure it out. Yet, feminists demand their rights, wanting to dress like sluts and still safely walk down the street at 2 AM in the morning.

The Bible teaches in 1st Timothy 2:9 that women should dress in “modest apparel.” The word modest means “of good behavior.” Hence, the manner in which a woman dresses conveys a messages to others of the type of character she has. There's no way around it. If you dress whorishly, then men will think you are loose morally and don't posses a high moral standard. A full-length dress on the other hand, says that you care about morality. Women who dress modestly are laughed at, ridiculed, and made fun of by wicked people. The question is, do you want to please God? Revelation 4:11 says that we were all created to please God. Hebrews 11:6 teaches that only by faith can we please God. Faith is obeying the Bible. All that we do (or don't do) because we fear God is by faith. A lady who has faith in God (or not) shows it by the way she clothes herself. Clothing speaks 1,000 words. A woman who takes her clothes off to sell a music album cannot be trusted. She has shady character, willing to hurt others morally to make money. IT DOES MATTER HOW YOU DRESS!

In May of 2011 feminist women across America and Canada went ballistic, angry over a police officer's honest statement that immodestly dressed women invited attackers. Women who have been Americanized have unrealistic ideas of what freedom means, and how the real world works. America is absolutely plagued with sexual sins and heinous crimes because of the prevalence of lewd MTV music videos, filthy-minded television programming, sex-ed in public schools and sexual-suggestiveness advertising everywhere we turn these days. Fool-headed feminists don't listen to helpful police advice, just like they don't listen to God in the Bible.

The Lord commands all women to dress in modest apparel (1st Timothy 2:9). That means you if you're a woman. The Police chief in Delhi knows that women who dress immodestly attract the wrong kind of attention from men. Ridding the earth of men is not the answer; but women putting their clothes back on (and keeping them on) in public is good advice and certainly will reduce the level of sexual crimes. Women who demand the right to dress whorishly, but still don't want to be attacked, are living in a fantasy world. I'll bet the women who was gang raped will wear clothes from now on. It shouldn't have to cost a person something to realize that they were wrong, but that's life. We all learn things the hard way to some extent.

Taylor Swift Is Pulling On The Same Rope As The Devil

I saw a 60-minutes special yesterday featuring Taylor Swift. The interviewer called Taylor Swift “a spiritual leader” in America to millions of youth. Miss Swift agreed and said she feels that it's her responsibility to recognize her tremendous power of influence as a role model over kids today. I've been saying that for a long time, that is, that young rebels like Taylor Swift, Miley Cyrus and Katy Perry have a massive influence on children and teens today, especially young girls. “A SPIRITUAL LEADER”... that's exactly what 60-Minutes called her, and it's very true. 60-Minutes praised Taylor Swift for not ending up in the tabloids for wrong doing; yet Taylor Swift needs to be publicly reprimanded and exposed for exposing herself bodily in her music videos and concerts. One of Swift's most popular songs is titled, FEARLESS. Evidently Taylor Swift is FEARLESS, because she certainly doesn't fear the God of the Bible who told her to dress modestly (1st Timothy 2:9). It's all about the love of money (1st Timothy 6:10).

Roosh Vörek #fundie emj.bmj.com

Date Rape Druggings Are A Myth

Almost every girl I know has told me a “Some guy at the bar put something in my drink” story. And I never believe them.

The purpose of date rape drugs is to render a girl unconscious. But to isolate the girl where he can rape her, a guy has to pick her up on his own and leave the bar or club with her. If he is already able to leave the club with a girl, he doesn’t need drugs to have sex with her because she’ll have sex with him anyway. Do girls honestly think a random dude they never met is drugging their drinks so she will pass out randomly on the dance floor, making a discreet rape impossible?

A few months ago I was with three other friends at a bar when one of them was accused by a white girl—who he didn’t exchange a word with—of putting a roofie in her drink. Even though no pill was found, the bouncer kicked him out because their policy states that the accusation alone is enough. But this only applies to men because I reverse accused the same girl of putting a roofie in my drink and she got to stay. There was a policeman there and I told him that if my friend really did that then why doesn’t he investigate and arrest someone. His response: “Get out of my face or I will arrest you.” Girls don’t hesitate to make up false accusations because they always get the benefit of the doubt (they are honest angels) and there is no punishment if they are caught lying.

“I think I was drugged” is just a convenient excuse for girls to binge drink and lose self-control. The girls you see stumbling in the bar and vomiting on the street are victims, not morons. Well now we have a study which proves these girls are not getting drugged:

Women who claim to be victims of ‘date-rape’ drugs such as Rohypnol have in fact been rendered helpless by binge-drinking, says a study by doctors.

They found no evidence that any woman seeking help from emergency doctors because their drinks were allegedly spiked had actually been given these drugs.

Around one in five tested positive for recreational drugs while two-thirds had been drinking heavily.

Next time a girl tells you she thinks she was drugged because she passed out or can’t remember anything, remind her that those are side effects of alcohol. Then watch as her face fills with contempt because you don’t agree that deep inside every man is a rapist. Women want to be seen as equals but they are not willing to shake the “I’m a helpless victim” mentality.

theophilus #fundie iidb.org

The theory of evolution is held to be 'tenable' only because it offers a possible naturalistic (read anti-theistic) explanation of origins. The theory was not arrived at as the only reasonable explanation for the evidence; indeed much of the 'evidence' did not exist when the Greeks first came up with the idea.

Aschlafly #fundie conservapedia.com

[Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge - Observation of the Wave Function]

The second chapter of the Gospel of John describes the conversion of water into wine by Jesus at a wedding reception. John 2:9 states: "When the host of the wedding feast tasted the water, it had been made into wine." This passage implies that the drink was not wine until it had been tasted, or observed. Possibly, the drink was a superposition of the state of wine and the state of water until it was observed as wine.

Alia_Harkonnen #sexist reddit.com

Female Personality Evolution

Despite most of them being fuckable, women have to compete too. Every woman wants to not be like other women but her ability to climb up the ranks of uniqueness depends on many factors, such as her intelligence, looks, environment, inborn personality, creativity, and more. This list is quite simplified but it helps define female evolution from its simplest forms to the most complex ones.
Goal is simple and universal to all but the last type: “To maximize number of sustainable high quality orbiters and to obtain the greatest possible appreciation and commitment level from the best available Chad.”
LEVEL 1: Basic Stacy
Life revolves around being validated on social media, make up, identifying with Beyonce's songs, and Chads cock. When eventually too old for Chad to keep on fucking, she sells herself to the highest bidder, has kids, gets fatter, dies.* Chad of Choice: Justin Bieber
*keep in mind, if attractive enough, she doesn’t have to compete with anyone below level 8. Especially in Gym Stacy version, which is Basic Stacy attending gym.
LEVEL 2: Basic Stacy Deluxe
Same exact script but with some thought put into rationalizing and romanticizing it to sound deeper than it is. For example, social media obsession is actually her networking or being artistic, and the top 40 songs she identifies with are ballads sang by crap female singers with great vocal range such as Adele, which in her social group counts as having a taste. Will finish college and have some type of career in something like education, and if she ends up purposely unemployed with kids, she'll base her decision on research. She likes Chad because of his confidence and personality and when she gets pumped and dumped she'll actually overcome an abusive relationship. Chad of Choice: Christian Grey
LEVEL 3: Good Girl
Average in every single way, and less attractive than her Stacy friends without actually being ugly, she usually went unnoticed. She appeals to men by being decent and stable, which is what many look for especially in comparison to her friends who can get sponsorships just for fucking around. Often from religious or at the very least overprotective families. She doesn’t drink, doesn’t do drugs, doesn’t sleep around, is average in school, wants to marry and be a mom, and soon enough when removed from school setting where she’s surrounded by more flashy girls, she finds men who are very happy with this offer. What these husbands to be don’t understand is that they bore her to tears, that she dreams of the same Chads who fuck her best friend she’s living vicariously through, and that the only reason she isn’t living it up is fear. She’s a ticking time bomb that will blow up and result in an especially shocking affair, divorce, and sexual exploration (drunk orgies) later in life. Chad of Choice: Her beta boyfriend’s alpha best friend or her best friend Stacy’s Chad
LEVEL 4: Basic Tomboy
Can range from attractive to ugly, this one is just smart enough to perceive than despite all the attention, men don't really value basic Stacy and her "interests", especially once in a relationship with her. Being interesting doesn’t come naturally to her due to complete lack of original thought, so instead of copying basic Stacies from her circle, she copies basic Norman/Chad in an attempt to get an edge over other girls by being more fun and in tune with the male brain. So she passionately follows sports, denounces anything fancy and girly, wears only natural looking make up, and forces herself upon a group of male friends who accept her because she lets them fuck her. The other part of her personality focuses on desperately trying to please every stereotypical male desire that stereotypical Stacy stereotypically fails at. This one is a treat for the right kind of guys since in her endless quest to prove how non difficult she is and how much she gets the male mind, she tolerates being cheated on, makes sandwiches, embraces porn, and takes it up the ass. Chad of choice: male best friend who is alpha in her pack - this one doesn’t annoy men with celebrity crushes, and they aren’t masculine enough for her anyway
LEVEL 5: Quirky fat girl
Unattractive enough when compared to 50% of Stacies around her, and not athletically or socially talented enough to be one of the guys, this one is under the impression she developed a personality. That means putting a lot of thought into standing out. Usually this is achieved through elaborate and irritating fashion choices such as wearing something from the 50ies or making a certain colored lipstick her thing. She also reads. Young adult fiction, of course. Thinks she's a bit of a geek cause she talks to her more nerdy male friends about Harry Potter and acts like she too has a crush on Emma Watson. Attempts humor a lot, think Amy Schumer. Men actually can't stand her but is a relatively easy fuck during her younger days which leads to resentment and turning to popular feminism later in life. Then she becomes a typical twox/askfemales poster explaining how women wear make up for themselves and how objectified she felt that one time when a drunk guy catcalled her although/because she knows he was actually addressing her friend. Has an office job and cats. Chad of Choice: supporting vampire character from Twilight whose fantasy gay relationships she writes fanfictions about (she knows the saga sucks but it’s her “guilty pleasure”)
LEVEL 6: Tomboy Deluxe (also known as The Gamer Girl)
Good looking and a bit smarter than the average tomboy, she doesn’t have to sell herself short to get an edge over basic Stacy. Claims to get along better with men but makes sure to look cute during. She wants her beta orbiters to really worship her and finds she can get more adoration from the romantic “nerdy” crowd. There she can also find Chads with better earning potential and more willingness to commit than when fishing among average jocks. Since she perfected the formula of mixing universally popular geeky interests (as long as they don’t require too much effort getting into) and cleavage, her ego is over the roof. This also makes her get bored of most men (never the attention though) which makes her sadistic until the right Chad comes along and makes her his bdsm bitch. Chad of Choice: The Joker
LEVEL 7: The Intellectual
Smarter than Gamer Girl, this one is actually able to read a book that isn’t young adult fiction and watch a three hour long black and white European movie where everyone smokes and feels unhappy. She gets some form of personal pleasure from it although mostly just because she knows she’s one of the rare ones who get it. Got into a decent college and will never miss the chance to mention her degrees, including during online arguments. Normally tries to get at least a few of those because being a college student is important to her identity. Is a more advanced level feminist, environmentally and politically aware, liberal, likes to think she’s cynical but is really just sarcastic when applicable. Worked hard to obtain resting bitch face and to appear as disinterested with everything as possible, including sex. Has few friends with benefits among her philosophy student male friends who validate her as a fascinating, smart and witty individual she’s not. Once they turn exclusive men tend to develop deep loathing for her, which is fine because she loathes them back. Chad of Choice: Her philosophy or English literature professor, at least until they finally have sex
LEVEL 8: Manic Pixie Dream Girl
Very beautiful face that always made men idolize her over slutty big tittied Stacies. Never really felt overly pressured to compete with women in her surrounding because men always fell in love with her whenever she smiled at them. Isn’t completely dumb but her energy is mainly focused on unproductive self analysis because everyone convinced her she's fascinating. What she needs validated is that this is really true, because on some level she knows that she is actually pretty boring. Her challenge is picking the right Chad worth settling for, and in the process she breaks many men’s hearts and egos. She doesn’t really know what to focus on and doesn’t like to feel like a bad person, so she deals with her hypergamy by creating a very flaky, inconsistent personality that mirrors adored and special types of women in popular culture. Often turns to drugs out of boredom but without seriously committing to them either, and develops existential depression every time she gets too settled into anything, because she is never sure if she’s missing out on something better. She looks for artistic talent Chads to provide what she herself can’t in her hopeless, exhausting attempts to be creative. Her taste in art boils down to her appreciating whatever is pretentious enough to make her think she doesn't get it. Chad of Choice: Lead singers from hipster bands such as Arctic Monkeys
LEVEL 9: The Unicorn
Had at least one big trauma or unhappy childhood which fucked her up, combined with receiving extreme adoration from men later in life. This created a fun mix of insecurity and ego, and a few mental disorders. She is usually a very sexually conflicted asexual. She has a good ability to at least subconsciously read people and she adapts her personality to mirror the fantasies of the men she is talking to. This is because she is always looking to be everyone’s everything. Her introductions are great, after which she enters a depressive phase and then goes into total destruction mode. Because she wants to leave a lasting impact without restricting herself to one person or one life, she does it by leaving scars so that they think of her even in her absence. She can’t fall in love with individual men, and is mainly solipsistic. Thinks of herself as completely emotionally empty and most likely is an addict, but can keep on bouncing back for a while due to everyone in the world wanting to support her. Chad of Choice: N/A
Level 10: Level 9 that manages to murder you and through it become the most significant person in your life while also being free of you and able to play the same crucial role in other people's lives. Role only reserved for a small percentage of female psychopaths, but if you're searching for one, places like this is where you find them so don't stop believing....

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Although I don't agree with all of his theological positions, the more I read the insightful writings of a dear saint named, Dr. Peter S. Ruckman (1921-2016), the more I love this courageous man!

Read for yourself my friend what Dr. Ruckman has to say about, what has become, one of the most dangerous institutions in American history—BOB JONES UNIVERSITY—and the incredible damage they have done to the cause of Jesus Christ! ...

“King James Onlyism” was a cliche (like “Ruckmanism”) invented by the faculty and staff of the school where I got my M.A. and Ph.D.: Bob Jones University in Greenville, S.C. After placing a hidden placard on the pulpit of their chapel platform saying, “Use only the King James Version from this pulpit,” and declaring at “The World Congress of Fundamentalism” (1990) that the only English version used there would have to be the King James Version, this desperate bunch of professional deceivers decided that “King James Onlyism” was a deadly heresy that came from a “cult.”

Bob Jones Jr. and Bob Jones III (1960-1980) thought it cute to add an “ism” on both the expressions above to scare Bible-believing Christians out of their faith in the Book. Then they would be accused of “following a man” and be identified with a “cult.” Very few Christians stopped to THINK for a moment about the innovative expression, for the only substitute for “King James Onlyism” for an American would be “SCHOLARSHIP ONLYISM.” I mean, a Christian is supposed to have some final authority by which he makes decisions and settles issues. If it was NOT the King James Bible, what would it be? Few American Christians stopped to think about this crucial question; and it was absolutely crucial, for it dealt with FINAL AUTHORITY which, from the dawn of recorded history (Gen. 3), has been THE ISSUE with mankind.

To cover up their devilment and their true designs, the apostates offered the Bible-believer a substitute for his Book. They offered him a pile of lost scattered pieces of paper (“original autographs”) written in a dead language that he could not understand unless he attended ($$$) a school like theirs ($$$). Thus “SCHOLARSHIP ONLYISM” became his substitute for the Holy Bible—the Authorized Version of the English Protestant Reformation. This threw the hat of final authority into the ring for “grabs,” because scholars vary from demoniac atheists and unsaved agnostics to Roman Catholic monks and Conservative “Evangelicals.” Final authority was reduced, by Bob Jones University, to opinions and preferences, with the arbitrator of conflicting opinions and preferences being the opinions and preferences of the scholars who conflicted with each other. Anarchy, Relativism, pragmatic humanism. (If you want some “isms,” there they are.)

This booklet shows you how the cult of “SCHOLARSHIP ONLYISM” operates (and has operated for one hundred years) in order to destroy the Holy Bible as the final authority in YOUR life. In this book, all of the conservative scholars assume the seat of final authority, and all sit in judgment on the BOOK. This Alexandrian Cult is composed of “gods” (Gen. 3) who partook of “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” so they freely question what God said (Gen. 3:1), subtract from what He said (Gen. 3:2), and add to what He said (Gen. 3:3). Their final authority is their own opinion. This shows the FRUITS and RESULTS of this type of “Funnymentalism.” At the end of the book, “Scholarship Onlyism” is applied in a real situation, and you see it in actual operation as carried out by a saved “Fundamentalist.” Its fruits are one hundred percent error, while professing to have the ability to find error in ALL translations and ALL Greek texts.

SOURCE: Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, the introduction to his book, “King James Onlyism Verses Scholarship Onlyism.”

I HIGHLY encourage you, dear web reader, to read the entire 68-page book by Dr. Ruckman (.PDF format), and prepare to be angered at what Satan has done to infiltrate, corrupt and destroy America's churches through a bunch of self-styled, reprobate, cowardly, arrogant, mammon-loving, deeper-life, college professors and dried-up dead theologians, aka, the Bob Jones University, Dallas Theological Seminary, Faith Baptist Bible College And Theological Seminary, Moody Bible Institute, and HUNDREDS of other theological preacher's cemeteries! I SAID CEMETERIES!!! These institutions have betrayed the inspired Word of God.

“God has a special rebuke, again and again and again in the Bible,
toward those people who keep their neutrality in the work of God!”
—SOURCE: Pastor Jack Hyles (1926-2001), a quote from the needful and precious MP3 sermon titled: “Where Were You In The Battle?”

And I'm going to say it, I am leery of any preacher who denies the inspiration of the King James Bible. I cannot change how I feel and what I believe. I mean, there's just something very wrong with a preacher who thinks that God only inspired the original autographs, which NO LONGER EXIST! So if only the originals were given by inspiration, then we do not have a perfect Holy Bible today! I am not talking about The Book that someone thinks could have been translated better, I am talking about God's Word!

THE REAL BATTLE (MP3 by Dr. Jack Hyles: “Bob Jones... they make light on the verbal inspiration!”)

Psalms 119:140, “Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.” Let me ask you an important question: “Would David have still loved God's Word with such passion had it been impure?”; not on your life! David loved God's words because they weren't just pure, they were VERY PURE!!!!!!! Folks, either we still have God's very pure words today in 2018, that He Promised to preserve unto every generation in Psalms 12:6-7 (if you have a reliable King James Bible), or we don't!!! Psalms12:6-7, “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” What does “them” refer to? Why, to the “pure words” in verse 6.

Now take a look at how the modern scholarship-produced perversions (100% sanctioned by Bob Jones University) all change God's promise in Psalms 12:6-7 to preserve His “very pure” words unto every generation. Here's a comparison of Psalms 12:6-7. Look how all of these new satanic Bible revisions totally butcher, change and remove God's PROMISE to preserve His Words. Instead of preserving God's “very pure” words, all the new versions change it to say that God preserves the saints instead...

King James Bible (KJB)
Psalms12:6-7, "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

The Common English Bible (CEB)
Psalms 12:6-7, "The LORD's promises are pure, like silver that's been refined in an oven, purified seven times over! You, LORD, will keep us, protecting us from this generation forever."

The Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)
Psalms 12:6-7, "The words of ADONAI are pure words, silver in a melting-pot set in the earth, refined and purified seven times over. You, ADONAI, protect us; guard us forever from this generation."

The Message Bible (MSG)
Psalm 12:6-7, "God's words are pure words, Pure silver words refined seven times In the fires of his word-kiln, Pure on earth as well as in heaven. God, keep us safe from their lies, From the wicked who stalk us with lies."

Good News Translation (GNT)
Psalm 12:6-7, "The wicked are everywhere, and everyone praises what is evil. Keep us always safe, O Lord, and preserve us from such people."

...AND ON THEY GO, THE NEW VERSIONS JUST KEEP COMING TO CORRUPT THE CHURCHES!!!

READ MORE: The Ugly Truth About Today's Bible Versions

Doesn't anyone have a problem with what I just showed you? I agree with Dr. Gail Riplinger that the men behind the modern corrupt Bibles are sincere, truly believing that they are doing something good; but Satan in very subtle and clever and is the driving force of darkness behind the entire Bible revision movement. You can hear Dr. Riplinger (I love this dear lady) talk about these things, and much more: NEW AGE BIBLE VERSIONS (a 1:23 hour MP3 interview with Dr. Gail Riplinger; You must hear this!).
“That book [King James Bible], sir, is the rock on which on republic rests.” —U.S. President Andrew Jackson (1767-1845)

Where is Hyles-Anderson College?

I know exactly how Peter Ruckman felt, because my own Bible college from which I earned my Bachelor's degree (HYLES-ANDERSON COLLEGE, 1985-1993) in Crownpoint, Indiana, has bailed-out of the battle for the inspiration of God's Word. By openly denying the inspiration of the King James Bible in 2008 (and since), one foolish man destroyed the lifetime work of Dr. Jack Hyles at the First Baptist Church of Hammond (FBCH), Indiana. Ecclesiastes 9:18, “Wisdom is better than weapons of war: but one sinner destroyeth much good.” First Baptist Church of Hammond (who owns Hyles-Anderson College) are AWOL from the battle. I'm sick of standing alone, but I WILL continue to do so by God's grace for as long as I can! I thank God for the few HAC graduates who do stand—I praise God for BOTH of you! Where are the 7,000? “It's Time To Come Out Of The Closet” (Dr. Jack Hyles; The Bible's under attack—where's the 7,000?).

Where Were You During The Battle? (MP3, Dr. Jack Hyles; The sin of neutrality in the Work of God!)

FBCH made a wonderful tribute online to honor Brother Hyles, but if FBCH really wants to honor Dr. Hyles, then why don't they uphold the truths that he so fervently fought to uphold? Folks, was Dr. Hyles a fool? Why is FBCH totally abandoning THE TRUTH that Dr. Hyles preached? There is a deafening silence heard from FBCH and HAC! Satanic Bible versions are flooding into the churches!!! What were those truths that Dr. Hyles thought were so important, which HE HIMSELF in 1994 called...

their number long before I did! I am so sick and tired of these neo-evangelical, dead, lukewarm, lifeless, fuddy-duddy churches today, like the Harvest Baptist Church on Guam! Did I mention that they forced me out and banned me from returning! Yes, it is true! Do you know why? It is because I AM RIGHT AND THEY ARE WRONG ON THE HOLY BIBLE. They are all shameful Bob Jones graduates! The truth hurts, don't it! I mean, I couldn't put it any simpler. This is what happens when light meets darkness, when a real Hyles-Anderson College graduate (back when HAC graduates still believed what Dr. Hyles actually taught) meets the neo-evangelical Bob Jones University camp!!! I wouldn't give you a dime for that mess at Bob Jones, nor their sorry graduates. What a shame to the cause of Christ. The gloves are off!
THE TRUTH MATTERS! THE TRUTH MATTERS! THE TRUTH MATTERS! THE TRUTH MATTERS! THE TRUTH MATTERS!

Unnamed comic genius. #fundie tektonics.org

You may be a fundy atheist if....


25. You claim that evolution and the big bang are two entirely separate theories that explain different aspects of the universe, yet, in what school of learning can you find any real separation or distinction between the two?
31. You think that humans are products of chance but when it comes to human reason we can believe in logic! (Think about it !)
48. You are a person who absolutely believes that life came from nonlife, yet absolutely deny the possibility of anyone rising from the dead.
60. You insist that "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", then claim that Jesus never existed.
78. You refuse to use the word "excruciating" because of its origins in describing the agonies of crucifixion. (ex crucis - "from the cross")
123. You're convinced that people only believe in God because they're afraid of going to hell...despite the fact that if there is no God, then there's probably no hell either
157. You think God was cruel for killing all of those innocent babies in the flood, and that Christians are cruel for opposing a woman's right to abort her baby
162. You spell America "AermiKKKa" and Christian "KKKristian
168. You have not seen "The Passion of the Christ," and you don’t know anyone who has seen it
180. You become upset when a Christian says that not everything in the Bible should be taken literally.
210. You insist on capitalizing "atheist"
264. You think eating bread and drinking wine is cannibalism
281. Last of all -- you write this website a letter which includes a rebuttal to the above listing!

Grace Kim Kwon #fundie christianpost.com

No, we just know the Catholics must read the Holy Bible to be normal Christian. The West's unconditional support of Sodom is abnormal in every sense. You guys must have been drinking bad water or something. Children must be raised by moral and normal people, and those who oppose immorality must not be oppressed by anyone. Where is common sense? The Western nations start doing totally weird things when you guys derail from the Holy Bible. When will you learn from history? These Catholics are not only Bible-illiterate but also even disobedient to the Church. So sad.

jairuswtsn #fundie imdb.com

Actually, evidence does exist of a worldwide flood!
It is the interpretation of that evidence, indeed the interpretation of all fossil evidence, which support the truth of the bible and the lie of evolution as the source of all life.

You think millions of years created the Grand Canyon? I suggest that it could have been created in one year and flow dynamists have proven it is a distinct possibility. Many years to lay down the sedimentary layers seen in the sides of the canyon but only one year of erosion is needed to actually cut the swath with the power and force of water should Teutonic plates shift.... (Interesting)

How did sea fairing and formerly existing proven fossils get at the great heights of the Himalayas? Teutonic plates shift and raise those mountains into position! Interestingly enough... this might correspond with the end of the worldwide flood... (Interesting)

Fossils. How do fossils exist? Bacteria and other living creatures consume most living flesh very quickly. Kill a pig in the forest and come back a year later. Very little evidence exists and most scientists know that this is the criterion to consider when a fossilized remains is discovered. Why was it preserved? Something has to have covered that remains in order to preserve the creature. A worldwide flood would stir up sediment like nobodies business and that sediment would cover many organisms very quickly. A plethora of dead organisms worldwide will and are very apparent and if you search, you will find this to be true.
Unfortunately, Satan knows this fact very well. Much of the truth of the Great Flood has been covered up and held back or diluted through misinformation and lies.

You are given a mind that can search out the truths and separate the lies from the truth. God is truth. I suggest you check the facts before jumping to any conclusions.

Cardinal George Pell #fundie abc.net.au

George Pell sentenced to six years' jail for sexually abusing two choirboys

Cardinal George Pell has been sentenced to six years' jail for sexually abusing two choirboys when he was Catholic archbishop of Melbourne in the 1990s.

Pell, 77, was found guilty by a jury last December of sexually abusing the choirboys after a Sunday mass in December 1996 and then assaulting one of them a second time two months later.

The man who was once Australia's most powerful Catholic sat in the dock dressed in a black shirt and a grey blazer, without a clerical collar, as County Court Chief Judge Peter Kidd delivered his sentence.

The chief judge described Pell's abuse of two choirboys in the sacristy at St Patrick's Cathedral as "a brazen and forcible sexual attack on the victims".

"The acts were sexually graphic, both victims were visibly and audibly distressed during the offending," he said.

"There is an added layer of degradation and humiliation that each of your victims must have felt in knowing that their abuse had been witnessed by the other."

"There was a clear relationship of trust with the victims and you breached that trust and abused your position to facilitate this offending," the chief judge said.

"I would characterise these abuses and breaches as grave."

Pell will serve a minimum of three years and eight months in jail before he will be eligible for parole.

He continues to deny he sexually abused the boys and has lodged an appeal against his conviction on three grounds, including that the jury verdict was unreasonable.

'Breathtakingly arrogant' offending

Chief Judge Kidd said the power imbalance between the victims and Pell as a senior church official was "stark".

"The brazenness of your conduct is indicative of your sense of authority and power in relation to the victims," he said.

"You may have thought you could control the situation by reason of your authority, as archbishop, whether or not that belief was well-founded.

"Such a state of mind would have been extraordinarily arrogant, but the offending which the jury has found you have engaged in was in any view breathtakingly arrogant."

The chief judge said Pell's abuse had had a "significant and long-lasting impact" on the wellbeing of one of his victims, whom he referred to as J.

"J has experienced a range of negative emotions which he has struggled to deal with for many years since this offending occurred … he has found it difficult because of issues of trust and anxiety.

"I take into account the profound impact your offending has had on J's life."

The chief judge said he did not have the benefit of a victim impact statement from his other victim, referred to as R, who died of a heroin overdose in 2014 and never reported the abuse.

"However on the basis of J's account at trial I am able to say your offending must have had an immediate and significant impact on R," Chief Judge Kidd said.

"Whilst it is not possible for me to quantify the harm caused, or articulate precisely how it impacted on R in the long run, I have no doubt that it did in some way."

The chief judge gave permission for the hearing to be broadcast live by media outlets and the court room was packed with abuse survivors, advocates and journalists.

[...]

Pell's crimes committed at cathedral

The court heard that Pell abused the choirboys, who cannot be identified, after celebrating one of his first Sunday masses as archbishop at St Patrick's Cathedral in East Melbourne.

He caught them drinking altar wine in the priest's sacristy, which was off limits to the choir.

One of the former choirboys gave evidence Pell had planted himself in the doorway and said something like "what are you doing here?" or "you're in trouble".

The then-archbishop moved his robes to expose his penis and forced one of the boys' heads down towards it.

The trial heard one of the choirboys asked: "Can you let us go? We didn't do anything."

But instead Pell moved onto the other choirboy. He pushed the boy's head down to his crotch and orally raped him.

After a few minutes, Pell ordered the boy to remove his pants and then molested him as he masturbated.

Pell abused that boy a second time two months later, after another Sunday mass when he pushed him up against the wall of a corridor in the back of the cathedral and groped him briefly.

Evidence of the abuse came from that former choirboy alone, who was the victim of two assaults.

The Court of Appeal is expected to hear Pell's appeal over two days in June.

vexic929 #fundie vexic929.deviantart.com

Disclaimer: These are all my own, personal thoughts. I do believe that they were given to me by God but I acknowledge that I may be wrong in some areas and will gracefully accept that IF IT IS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION IN A RESPECTFUL WAY. I do not claim to be a prophet or a preacher or some fancy, famous, decorated scholar—I’m just a 21-year-old Christian with a passing interest in sociology, psychology, and apologetics. I do not think I am holier-than-thou and I do not think any sin is greater than another. All sin is equal; I do not think I am better than you. I don’t know how else I can put that so, please, you have already begun seeing my side; if you find it offensive there is a back button, most likely in the top left corner of your screen—please use it because I will not be changing my opinion no matter how many curse words and insults you throw at me. I acknowledge that I stink at arguing my points so, if you find anything unclear, please feel free to ask for clarification as long as you do so respectfully.

WHY HOMOSEXUALITY BOTH IS AND IS NOT A SIN

“Attraction is not a sin!”
You’re absolutely right. Attraction, in and of itself, is not a sin. Wait—what? Yep, you’re right. Why? Because we, as humans, have the ability to be attracted to either gender to some degree. Think about it; you have friends, right? People you talk to, people you get along with—you find them attractive in some way; perhaps not physically but mentally/emotionally/etcetera, if you didn’t, you wouldn’t be friends. Chances are you have at least one friend—or someone you just get along with—from both genders. We are designed to be attracted to people; we are very social creatures but if we weren’t attracted, we probably wouldn’t give them the time of day (just think of that resident annoyance in your life). Attraction is not just physical—but, of course, you know this I’m sure. Now, we’ve established attraction is not a sin. It is what you do about that attraction that determines whether or not it is a sin.

“What you do? What does that mean?”
Let’s look at that a little further, shall we? “It is what you do about that attraction that determines whether or not it is a sin.” This means that it does not become a sin until you decide to act on it. The moment you decide to pursue that relationship that becomes a sin. Why? Because typically that relationship is pursued with the intent of becoming physical at some point. In cases of heterosexuality, it only becomes a sin if the intent to become physical comes before marriage (yes, this includes during the engagement but that is a whole other animal we are not going to get into today). In the case of homosexuality, it does not matter whether or not this intent is before or after marriage, it is still a sin.

“That’s not fair! Why is it still a sin even if I’m doing it ‘right’?!”
This is a question that comes up a lot and Christians need to be able to answer if they’re going to argue it. I could say “because the Bible says so” and give a list of verses; I could say “because God says so” and leave it at that, but do these explain why? No, not really. So, why? Because it is outside of God’s intent. God has a plan for each of us, most of whom he has included and set apart a specific person for the intent of us to be in a strong, loving, Godly relationship with. Anything outside of that plan is sinful because it is not of God, no matter how good it seems.

“Well, why should I care about God’s intent?”
You may or may not be a Christian, I don’t know, that’s between you and God. There is one thing I do know for sure; anything God has planned for us is 100 times better than we could ever even imagine. Being a Christian is not about blindly agreeing with everything God says and following like good little sheep. We can say “alright, God, I don’t get this, I don’t like this,” as long as we add after, “but I’m going to trust You because I know that what You have for me is better.” That’s what faith is, that’s what being a Christian is. So before you yell and scream at us Christians for being stupid, blindly following, being bigoted, being intolerant; remember that not all of us totally agree with everything God says. I, personally, would be perfectly fine with homosexual relationships if I were not a Christian and didn’t know that God has something better planned for everyone. I just want everyone to live their life to the fullest extent in the happiest way possible; that’s why I want people to find God and turn from their sinful ways—whatever they may be—and follow the better path God has in store for them, because I know it will be so amazing. So, no, I don’t see a reason for it to be a sin; but, yes, it is a sin, and there’s nothing I can do about that but say, “I’m going to trust You, God, because I know You have something so much better and it’s just going to be totally awesome.”

But it's also true that you cannot control attraction, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because the people were participating in homosexual activities. Note that the verse you quoted states "men who practice homosexuality". Lust is wrong no matter who you are lusting after so that is irrelevant. I don't think you understood what I said, I know that homosexual activities are wrong and fantasizing about performing said activities is also wrong just as it would be wrong to kill someone or fantasize about killing someone. There are two definitions of homosexuality--simply being attracted to the same gender which you cannot do anything about and participating in homosexual activities which you can do something about. One is entirely subconscious and the other is a conscious action. You cannot stop yourself from being attracted to someone, it is not possible. I'm really not sure how I can make this any clearer but if you're still confused, please let me know.

Yeah, the thing that hacks me off the most is the radical "you must agree or you're a terrible person" mentality they seem to have nowadays. It's so frustrating because it goes exactly against the freedom of beliefs/religion and speech we have in America--even more so because we're basically letting them act that way. It's pretty dang ridiculous, if you ask me. People are so touchy and easily offended.

In conclusion
Homosexuality—the act of being attracted to someone of the same gender—is not, in and of itself, a sin. Homosexuality—the act of having relations with someone of the same gender—is a sin.

[ ai! ^.^ I have no idea how I found this, but I've read it and the first comments page; frankly, I couldn't help posting my opinions on this. :3 Please don't take it offensively - I just want to make sure it's out there.

Firstly, I totally agree with your first point - homosexuality isn't a sin. However, I serious disagree of your second point.

I understand that you believe practicing Homosexuality is a sin because God said so, but
WHY does he say so?

I cannot actually think of any decent anti-homosexuality reasons myself. In any case, I am a firm believer in freedom of sexuality, within reason. If you're female and fall in love with another female, then what's wrong with that? Is the world going to end? Probably not. Are you going to drop dead? It's unlikely. Will a random person develop, say, cancer simply because you're dating someone of the same sex? I highly doubt it. Besides, the planet's population is rising rapidly and whilst we have no serious problem right now, we will when it doubles. With deforestation, loss of farmland to housing estates and desertification, among other things, then frankly we will run out of resources at some point. Soon. If, say, 5% of the population is gay/lesbian, then that's 5% less kids every year. That's a few years left on the timer. More time to solve the dilemma. Oh, and it means that more of the poor kids in foster homes can have a family. I know how that feels, I was there once.
Besides, if the government was to make homosexuality illegal, then that is a direct breach of the Human Rights.

UN Human Rights;
Article 2 -- Freedom From Discrimination
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex or sexuality, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Putting someone in prison because they love and want to be with someone of the sex? That's just sick. And we're supposed to do this becuase of what it says in a book? There are many opinions from Christians that certain aspects of the bible are outdated. Aren't women supposed to be evil or something? Nowadays, if ANYONE said that in a commonwealth country they'd be called sexist.

Anyway - 'God is omnipotent' to quote practically every Christians I've ever brought this subject up with (I grew up in a religious family/area/school, so there's quite a few). Therefore, if he has an intent for us, then maybe it's for us to be gay?
I am actually an atheist, so the 'God's intent' thing, for me, isn't a valid reason. A good number of my friends are lesbian/gay and are currently dating a person of the same sex. What harm has it done to me? None. What harm is it doing you? None.

(Looking back at this, it looks like a full-out attack. Lol. Sorry about that. >.<)
]

You make some very interesting points and bring up some good questions but I believe I touched on most of them either in the comments or in the actual article (it's not really an article I guess but you know what I mean) but I will respond to a few of them.

Why does He say so? The truth is I don't know, no one does--if they claim to they're probably lying. I just know that He does and that's enough for me and should be enough for any Christian.

Putting someone in prison for homosexuality is ridiculous, the government should not interfere in religious matters and vice-versa. As far as the Bible being outdated, anyone who has told you that is not a Christian even if they claim to be. You cannot be a Christian and not believe the Bible is the Truth, it doesn't work that way. There is no passage that says women are evil or anything like that, I suggest reading the book for yourself even if you have no intention of becoming a Christian. It's quite interesting to see the parallels from the Old and New Testaments and the perfect preservation and lack of contradictions without taking anything out of context, even from a purely historical and analytical standpoint.

His intent would not be for anyone to be gay considering He says homosexual relations are a sin although he may use someone identifying as gay as a challenge or a way for them to have a better witness to other people.

I don't expect anyone who is not a Christian to agree with or follow my beliefs but that doesn't mean that I won't call someone out on something I know is wrong because I don't want them to make a mistake. It's purely about caring about people. I am currently dealing with my younger sister's recent coming out as pansexual and she knows I am on her side even though she also knows I believe she is doing the wrong thing. We have had many discussions on the issue but I still love her and would not wish anything bad on her.

Anonymous Coward #fundie #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Coronavirus is deceiving Christians

- FALSE FEAR, FALSE AUTHORITIES, AND CONTEMPT OF BIBLE PROPHECY

I have been following with concern the reactions of Christians corona virus pandemic. Here are a few key points:

(1) Blind and unconditional submission to WHO (World Health Organization) or UN rules.

Unfortunately, for example, Pekka Reinikainen has verbally stated in his TV7 program that the best and most professional knowledge of the current situation should be taken by submitting to the WHO. He also supports taking vaccines. This is a serious delusion, since the WHO, established in 1948, is part of the UN system of the world, which, by its very principle, also regulates the world's population, by maintaining "peace." WHO also supports abortion and sterilization because of the overpopulation of the world. The highest authority must be the God of the Bible, and HIS Word, not a secular organization (not even a secular authority) or institute. Wisdom - for every future situation - must now be prayed to God the Father in the name of Jesus. Observance of authority must be done only by God's will, not against it.

(2) News or rules made by the media or society must not be criticized: it is the dissemination of conspiracy theories.

The media is clearly biased, and here too propaganda. Thus, false news also circulates in the mainstream media. If we prohibit intrusive free thinking, then we will support the media's propaganda-dominated rule, which clearly involves lies and sin. The rules of society are made to be obeyed, but blind submission - beyond the will of God - signifies supremacy in the life of a believer. The so-called conspiracy theories are also often the wrong "stamp ax" to ban criticism and especially the questioning and exploration of "images" created by the media.

(3) Christians should unite and forget all doctrinal issues: the ecumenical goal

A parishioner (online publication) called on Christians to place a prayer front against the coronavirus in Rome. This is a great sign of error. The corona panic has blinded Christians to deeper involvement in ecumenical deception. The Pope himself is praying to the Virgin Mary - which should be a clear indication that one who is not in the Bible faith cannot be involved in such a "prayer front". TV7 has also called "prayer front" in its programs, led by Benny Hinn. Benny Hinn continues to represent success theology and is a deceiver here. Blind "prayer" is thus partly a deceiver. In the Bible, God looks for those who pray in the Spirit and in the truth. The Church of God is ONE, only by the truth of the Word. Ecumenism is thus a delusion and a lie, out of biblical faith. Now the bible is to separate the lie from the truth, the darkness from the light - and not blindly enter into the wrong religious "prayer front." Then our prayer rises from the truth - in faith in Jesus, in the Holy Spirit of God.

(4) Criticizing vaccines is a contempt for human life and thus an antichristic activity: false accusation and prohibition on the pharmaceutical industry

The Bible does not require a believer to submit to the "forced" vaccine rules. On the contrary, biblical faith originates in faith in an almighty God and in the corresponding sanctification of the body (healthy life and diet). The purpose of biblical faith is eternal life, not eternal worldly happiness. The Lord Jesus has overcome death, so the fear of death must not be part of the believer. Vaccine designs are very unclear in their background, and the effects of vaccines have also been shown to be dangerous. That being said. is not wrong - or against the love of one's neighbor - against a critically placed vaccine "boom." On the contrary, it is the true love of one's neighbor - to critically evaluate the operations of pharmaceutical companies, their financial aspirations, and drugs that are dangerous to their health. Believing in God's love and mercy in the Lord Jesus must be greater than the "blind" confidence in medicine.

(5) Indifferent and Making the Situation Ridiculous: Banning and Underestimating Bible Prophecy

Bible prophecy clearly speaks of times of tribulation, as well as of plagues - as part of end-time events. If we despise the words of the Lord Jesus, and all of Bible prophecy, then we will be spiritually blinded by the flesh. Bible prophecy is a lamp that should shine a light on our feet as a special revelation from God: to provide comfort, hope, faith, and keep us in God's love. The omnipotence of God is at the heart of Bible prophecy, and the love of God - warns us of delusion, and of times of tribulation - that confronts the world because of sin. The prophetic word of the Bible is God's love for us.

(6) Wrong doctrine, and prohibition of clear world situations

False rapture doctrine is a heresy that suggests - that the antichrist will not come until after the church is captured. This is not the case. There have already been antichrists, and - the rapture, the salvation of the church from this world time, is clearly not until after the appearance of the child of perdition. If we get lost here, we may think that the forthcoming NEW WORLD ORDER is a manifestation of the power of "Jesus" on earth. World news, and its political-economic plan, are already talking about a new world order. Therefore, this is not a "conspiracy theory" or any "hoax" thing. If we deny this, we will close our eyes to clear developments in the world, where there should be a warning voice. The New World Order is the antichrist system, and the place where the child of perdition appears. The Lord Jesus will destroy this system, as well as the child of perdition, in His coming.

God's omnipotence, and faith in God's power and love must be above all earthly. Then also the Word of God will be loved and safe for us, in the midst of the end.

These are briefly written. I did not attach Bible verses to it now - which I could have done - but made a shorter essay.

Test the text with prayer and the Word of God.

He Had Mercy #fundie rr-bb.com

It's not the atheist's point of view that matters on homosexual marriage, its God's word that has already decided it.
And lets call abortion what it is, baby murder.
Christians want the right for unborn babies to live and not be murdered.
You say that is wrong, so I ask you, what is right about murdering innocent babies in the womb?
And atheists do care what Christians think or they wouldn't put up ridiculous bus adds that there is "probably" no God, but they aren't even sure of that!
Atheists want unbelievers and Christians to not believe in God and instead believe that he "probably" doesn't exist?
How long has the Bible been around? And atheists have yet to prove that one, single, solitary word of it is untrue! They can't prove that God does not exist because all evidence and scientific facts support the fact that he does!
Atheists have a lot of faith in nothing. Like being the god of their own lives.
Ridiculous.

Leon Elshout #fundie #crackpot vixra.org

Was Troy an archeological or theological issue?

Leon elshout, 19 march 2019, aurichalcum2018 (at) protonmail.com https://roodgoudvanparvaim.nl/, http://flipsnack.com/roodgoudvanparvaim/ & https://www.wattpad.com/user/roodgoud & https://roodgoudvanparvaim.wordpress.com/

Turkish Hisarlik?

According to the tradition Troy was situated near modern Turkish town Hisarlik. Due to a play of fate the Biblical town of Troas in Acts 20 was close to Hisarlik.

But wait: the key actors in Homer’s Troy Epic were no human beings at all. Paris was a son of King Priamus (Paris (mythologie), z.d.) who was on his turn a son of Laomedon who was married to Strymo. She was the daughter of some river god (Laomedon, z.d., kopje Legende). Have you ever met someone who was a son or daughter of a river God? Well I did not. While Odysseus was probably derived from Babylonian Gilgamesh. Both would marry Calypso or Ishtar. Their marriage was a marriage with the death (Abusch in Louden, 2011, p. 132).

If the key actors in the Troy Epic were non human beings, then who or what were they? Psalm 96:5 says they were demonic entities. In the Greek myth they took human masks. Circe or Helen of Troy were no charming women. They were demonic entities, pretending to be humans. But they were not. So had there been a Trojan War at all in a remote past? The Bible keeps silent on this. At best there had been a local war that was upgraded to a mythical Trojan War. So what is Troy?

Troy is in essence a palace surrounded by walls and built upon a hill. It is a kind of an archetypal image that we see here. This reminds me of the palace of Baal Tsaphon on the Mount Cassius – the Jebel Aqra – in Norther Syria. According to the Caananite Baal and Anat Myth it was the Canaanite God Baal Tzafon who wanted to build him a house on a mountain. Baal Tsaphon is a well know pop star in the Bible. In Exodus 14:1-2 he is the sphinx. He was a clone of Babylonian God Marduk. In Greece he becamse Zeus. Anat was Athena of Atlantis. In the Bible she was Astarte, the goddess of the Sidonians (1 Kings 11:5). The Gods of the Olympus were cloned from the Canaanite Gods. Heracles was a clone of Melqart who was the God of Tyrus. Poseidon was cloned from Dagon. He was the God of the Philistines of Crete. But he found a new life among the Canaanite Gods and became even the father of Baal.

Mount Tsaphon, Mount Cassius

As the Greek Gods were clones of the Canaanite Gods, I believe that all mythical mountains like the Olympus, the hill in Troy or Asgard were clones of the Mount Tsaphon in northern Syria. It was not for nothing that the ministry of the apostle Paul started here. The city of Antioch (Antakya) on the banks of the river Orontes became his headquarters. The story does not end here. Because the Canaanite Gods were clones of the Babylonian Gods. Canaanite god Baal was the same as Babylonian Bel in Isaiah 46:1 (Bultema, 1981, p. 453). Marduk was the same as the Roman God Jupiter (Bultema, 1981, p. 356). Jupiter was on his turn a clone of the Greek god Zeus. In Jeremiah 51:25 Babylon is metaphorically called a mountain.

Mirrors

But more: Dr. Lucas Rösli wrote that Troy and Asgard were somehow mirrored (Rösli, z.d., paragraph mirroring spaces). I believe that Troy was not only a Greek version of Babylon but morely of Endtimes Babylon. In Zacharia 5:11 we read about the rebuilding of Babylon. In Revelation 17-18 we read about the rise and downfall of Endtimes Babylon. How did Homer know? Whoever Homer was; he could have heart some prophecies in Jeremiah 50-51 regarding Endtimes Babylon. Also the python spirit in Acts 16:16 could have triggered Plato and Homer to write their Troy Epic or Atlantis story. This python spirit mirrored all Biblical symbols in an opposite way. While Babylon was located eastern of Jerusalem, the python spirit created a contra creation story that originated on a mysterious island on the western horizon. Thematically, Troy and Atlantis were the same islands. Both were mirrored from Babylon and the Mount Tsaphon. This python was carved as a cobra snake on the forehead of the sphinx (Geru, 2003, verb 34; Matheny, 2011, p. 142).

Jerusalem

One more thing. The blueprint for Babylon was the pre-Flood city of Enoch that was built by Cain in Genesis 4. But there was another archetypical blueprint for Babylon, Troy and Atlantis. I believe this is Jerusalem. The City of David was surrounded by walls and stood on the Mount Sion (Psalm 2:6; 48:2, 13). David’s song Salomo added a palace and a temple to the city. In the Endtimes we will see at least the temple being rebuilt (https://www.templeinstitute.org/). Jesus was born later than Adam. But in Genesis 1:27 we read that Adam and Eve were created in His image. In the same way could a future city of Endtimes Jerusalem have been a blueprint for Homer’s Troy. Homer could have used many historical events in his Troy Epic like the downfall of Jericho. But also the city of David and the temple of King Salomo could have been a blueprint for Troy. Again should we not exclude the possibility that the python spirit in Acts 16:16 mixed End times Jerusalem with End times Babylon and the City of David to make a Troy epic out of it.

Literature

Laomedon. (z.d.). In Wikipedia. Geraadpleegd op 10 september 2018, van https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laomedon

Louden, B. (2011). Homer's Odyssey and the Near East. Cambridge, Groot-Brittannië: Cambridge University Press.

Paris (mythologie). (z.d.). In Wikipedia. Geraadpleegd op 10 september 2018, van https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_(mythologie)

Rösli, L. (z.d.). From Troy to Scandinavia – Old Norse topographies. Geraadpleegd op 12 september 2018, van https://www.unibas.ch/en/Research/Uni-Nova/Uni-Nova-124/Uni- Nova-124-Old-Norse-topographies.html

Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

(=A rant against a Progresisve Christian Website=)

That you are not a Christian is illustrated by this post.

From PATHetic thEOS

1. "We embrace the many variations of the view expressed by many great Christian thinkers that “We take the Bible too seriously, to read it all literally.”

Really, this sounds like an excuse to make up your own opinion as to what is good and bad rather than accept what the Bible says.

2. "We don’t think that God wrote the Bible. We think it was written by fallible human beings who were inspired by (not dictated to by) the Holy Spirit. Hence, we don’t consider it to be infallible or inerrant."

Then why bother with the Bible at all? After all, you are so much more clever than those who wrote it and know so much more. You even know more than Jesus who clearly did regard the Bible as infallible.

3. "While we’re aware of the many inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible; and while we’re abhorred by, and reject, the various instances of horrible theology that appear here and there within the texts (e.g., passages that posit God as wrathful, vindictive, and condoning of slavery, and even “ordering” rape and genocide, etc.), they don’t cause us to reject the Bible, rather, they endear us to the Bible. Not because we agree with those passages, but because we recognize that they are fully human – they’re authentic, they’re down to earth, and they flat out convey the desperate and very real frustration, lament, and anger that are part of the human condition. The fact that such passages were allowed to be written into our holy scriptures are evidence of a mature people who realize that it’s best not to hide our dirty laundry or to deny our very real human feelings and passions. If the Bible were all about PR propaganda, they would have edited out those passages. We view those passages as exceptions to the over-arching message of the Bible of promoting unconditional love and the full inclusion and acceptance of all of God’s children. Indeed, while we wish those passages weren’t there, they actually help us to grant authority to the Bible in that we can see that was written by fellow humans who are struggling with real life and death matters of injustice, oppression. And since they make space for our need to vent and rage – we honor the Bible all the more for it honors our shadow sides – and that honoring is what allows for the possibility of our shadows being transformed and integrated in healthy ways."

So in other words, as above, you take out the bits you like and reject those you don't like. You seem to think that all mankind is God's children, reading the Bible should have taught you that this is not so. Would you consider Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot God's children? And BTW there are no " inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible".

4. "We read the Bible prayerfully. We agree with our conservative brothers and sisters that the Holy Spirit helps us to interpret what we need to read as we read."

To read the Bible in this way you first have to be a Christian, you have to be willing to listen to God. Your previous points have demonstrated that this is not the case so you cannot claim to receive the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

5. "We seek to apply full attention to Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience (and that includes the insights of contemporary science)."

Remember, much of contemporary science is just the opinions of fallible men. It is not without reason that it is spoken of as the best current understanding, tomorrow it might be different. And when it becomes different, you will have to change your theology. What you really mean is that you place your opinion as the authority and accept anything in Scripture that matches up to that.

6. "We realize that there is no “objective, one, right way” to interpret a passage – and we recognize that there is no reading of any text – including the Bible – that doesn’t involve interpretation. We also realize that each person interprets the text via their own personal experiences, education, upbringing, socio-political context, and more."

In other words you can make the Bible mean whatever you want.

...

7. "We do our best to read the biblical texts in their original languages (Hebrew and koine Greek) – and consult scholars and others to assist us. We also tend to look at several English translations – and by no means limiting ourselves to the King James version – which, while the best English version in conveying the beautiful poetry of the original languages, is based upon inferior manuscripts."

That's pretty pointless when you are clearly manipulating the text to mean what you want it to mean. Indeed, why bother with the Bible at all?

8. "We consider the best available Biblical scholarship from those who study it academically and professionally (and they’re generally fellow Christians and/or Jews)."

And by best, it seems, you mean those who agree with you.

9. "We seek to read passages in context – within their chapter, within their book, within their genre, and within the over-arching thrust of the Bible."

Doesn't this conflict with your need to be the master, or is it that you manipulate the context to fit what you want it to mean.

10. "We seek to read the passages with consideration of the historical socio-political contexts, frequently of oppression, which they were written in."

This, of course, manipulates 9, above. What you mean is that you use all sorts of unproven ideas to modify what the text says so it suits you.

11. "We employ a hermeneutic of compassion, love, and justice. (Which Jesus utilized). A hermeneutic is “an interpretive lens” and intentional filter. The hermeneutic of love seeks to see the forest for the trees and that allows the spirit of the law to trump the letter of the law (which Jesus modeled[sic])."

And what hermeneutic was Jesus using when He said:

And then will I declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.
(Matthew 7:23 [ESV])

And this is just a way of modifying the meaning to fit your prejudices.

12. "We also tend to employ a “canon within the canon” lens whereby we give greater weight and priority to certain texts over others. A canon is an officially established collection of books that are revered by a given community – for Protestants, that refers to the 66 books of the Bible. In my case, I give greatest weight to Mark, Luke, Matthew, John (in that order), certain letters that Paul actually wrote (as opposed to the Pastoral Epistles which he didn’t), the Prophets, and the Psalms. I interpret the other books of the Bible according to how they jibe and are in sync with these primary texts. Many progressive Christians refer to themselves as “Matthew 25 Christians” (referring to the test for who Jesus says is in or isn’t in the Kingdom by what they do or don’t do), “Sermon on the Mount Christians” (stressing their seeking to prioritize those teachings as central); or as “Red Letter Christians” (indicating that they give greatest weight to the words attributed to Jesus)."

So in other words, you place the books that say things you don't like low down on the list. What a dishonest way of reading the Bible.

13. "We also seek to allow “scripture to interpret scripture.” Here’s an example regarding how to interpret “the sin of Sodom”:
The Bible interprets itself regarding the story of Sodom in Ezekiel 16:49 “‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. And Jesus himself supports the view that the sin of Sodom was their lack of hospitality and hesed (loving-kindness) in Matthew 10:9 “Do not get any gold or silver or copper to take with you in your belts— no bag for the journey or extra shirt or sandals or a staff, for the worker is worth his keep. Whatever town or village you enter, search there for some worthy person and stay at their house until you leave. As you enter the home, give it your greeting. If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.”

And the result of Sodom's sin was that they were sliding down that slippery slope we see in Romans 1:18-32.

14. "We follow Jesus’ example in being willing to reject certain passages & theologies in the Bible and to affirm other ones. (He did it a lot)"

Really, would you like to give us an example?

15. "We do as much of the above as we can with fellow Christians in community with others. We avoid doing it solely as a solo endeavor. (We also tend to be open to doing this in community with Jews and Muslims, as fellow “people of the Book” whose insights are often invaluable)"

So you don't seek the opinions of those who love God, but rather look for people who agree with you, even unbelievers.

16. "We repeat these steps frequently as new information and scholarship comes in. Knowing that we will always find something that we hadn’t noticed before each time that we do this."

And always ensuring that we look for those in agreement with us.

Disciple #fundie teens-4-christ.org

[At my school, a new girl has come. .. She visits a local homeless shelter, dresses modestly, hasn't ever had a boyfriend and wants to save herself for marriage, does her homework, and is really kind and considerate. She doesn't drink or do drugs, and doesn't like parties. The only problem is, she's atheist.]

Being an atheist, she has no real reason to stick with her moral beliefs, yet it seems as if she's doing a good job at it so far. With peer pressure and without God, it's very likely that she could fall into sin, but it's a lot less likely if you're there to be a good Christian influence in her life.

Patrick Henningsen #conspiracy globalresearch.ca

On July 17, 2014, flight MH17 traveling east from Amsterdam, Netherlands to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia – crashed near the village of Grabovo, and on the outskirts of the town of Torez just outside of Donetsk in eastern Ukraine, approximately 40 km from the Ukrainian-Russian border.

To call this situation volatile would almost be an understatement. A pivotal event such as this could easily be used as a pretext for escalating not only a New Cold War between the West and Russia, but also a hot war. Only six months previously, the Ukraine found itself in the throes of a western-backed coup d’état in Kiev which tore the country apart. This was quickly followed by a snap referendum in Crimea, where voters opted for secession from the Ukraine and into the relatively secure arms of the Russian Federation. The west cried foul and so began a new grudge match. Arguably, tensions between the west and Moscow have been at their highest since the apex of the Cold War during the east-west Soviet era. Needless to say, with MH17 the stakes could not be any higher, and regarding the west, it was obvious who would be assigned the blame for this tragedy.

More than any other incident, this one was flushed out firstly through public relations channels, and then secondly through official government bodies. From the onset the West took its position by claiming it had “proof” that ‘Russian-backed rebels’ were responsible for shooting down the passenger airliner. Immediately after the incident took place, the western government-media complex insisted that the murder weapon was a Russian-made BUK Surface to Air Missile system.

Western mainstream media outlets wasted no time in disseminating this government-issued conspiracy theory, backed-up by a number of other clams of “evidence” coming out of the Washington-backed regime in Kiev. At the time, US Secretary of State John Kerry claimed to have a“mountain of evidence” convicting ‘pro-Russian separatists’ and Moscow. Unfortunately, Kerry’s mountain was no more than a mole hill. Nearly all of those claims have since been debunked and exposed as fraudulent – but from a public opinion perspective, the damage was already done.

Within 48 hours, News Corp and other pro-war rags ran a series of loaded headlines including, “Putin’s Missile”, “Putin’s Victims” and “From Vlad to Worse”. Vladimir Putin and his government in Russia were already convicted in the Kangaroo court of public opinion under the guise of guilt by association with Russian-speaking rebels fighting Kiev’s military forces in the east.

However, upon closer examination of the facts surrounding this case, an alternative set of conclusions can be drawn from this event – one which points to the very strong possibility that what the world really witnessed last year was a classic ‘false flag’ event – an attempted slight-of-hand bit of military trickery designed to cast blame on one party for a crime that was really committed by another. It wouldn’t be the first time that this type of sub-plot was put into motion to advance a world power’s geopolitical objectives.

Revelation of the Method: A ‘False Flag’ Attack

The term false flag, or “black flag”, is most common in naval battles, and describes the historic covert, military use of a flag other than the perpetrator’s true flag colors as a type of ruse de guerre - designed to deceive and confuse in order to provide a fake ‘moral high ground’ in the theater of mass public opinion.

The classic blueprint for MH17 was not dreamt-up by Russian war planners, but by the Pentagon – over 50 years earlier. A clandestine plan known as Operation Northwoods, was similarly conjured in 1962 by the US Department of Defense’s Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) and the CIA in front of a Cold War backdrop pitting the United States against then Soviet ally Cuba, led by Fidel Castro. The plan was signed off by then JCS Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer and detailed how spooks would use prepositioned explosives to blow-up a passenger airliner over Cuba, blaming it on Cuba and by extension – Washington’s arch-nemesis the Soviet Union. This ‘false flag’ attack would then be used as valuable leverage in a global public opinion campaign against Washington’s existential and ideological enemies. They also talked about developing a “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington”. Fortunately, the deceptive plot was eventually rejected by the Kennedy administration.

It’s important to note that had the US been successful in framing Moscow for the downing of MH17 in 2014, it would have given Washington a bright green light to intensify its efforts in destabilizing neighboring Ukraine, and later in Georgia, then in Estonia, and so on. As the MH17 false flag began to crumble, so did any prospects of a Washington geopolitical takeover in the region.

Isaac Weishaupt #conspiracy illuminatiwatcher.com

Hello and welcome back to IlluminatiWatcher.com! I’m your host, Isaac Weishaupt, and we’re going to take a look at the phenomenon known as Pokemon…

WHAT IS POKEMON?…

If you’re like me then you aren’t quite sure what this is. I had to read around several articles online before coming to my conclusion that Pokemon is merely another tool of the Illuminati and the occult…

Pokemon is translated as “Pocket Monsters” and it was introduced to us in the mid-1990s. It has remained popular ever since, and the release of the Pokemon Go app boosted its popularity to unbelievable heights as users search for these monsters with their smart phones (and news media outlets fear mongered us into believing that it will inevitably lead to getting robbed or hit by a car, as these things have indeed happened to a few players).

THE MONSTERS OF POKEMON

The Pokemon are basically a collection of monsters that players can use to fight one another. The list of monsters reads like the list of 72 demons from the Goetia; all with various powers and abilities that the player can strengthen in order to become a stronger competitor. The whole purpose is to train your Pokemon to become stronger in their abilities and evolve into more powerful monsters.

One such example is Haunter; a ghost with the ability to levitate and haunt others. Its more evolved form is Gengar which has more attributions one would find with an actual ghost (e.g. lowering the temperature around itself and laying curses on others).

What I find curious about these few “ghost” Pokemon is that they are all the color purple. This color represents the “Mauve Zone”- an area where one can find the hidden demons of qlippoth in the shadow realm on the dark side of the Kabbalah Tree of Life…

The Mauve Zone is described in Kenneth Grant’s Beyond the Mauve Zone in terms of contacting other worldly entities with supernatural powers:

Access to the Mauve Zone has been facilitated in more recent times by the use of magical systems developed by occultists such as Austin Osman Spare and Aleister Crowley, both of whom established contact with inter-dimensional entities possessed of transhuman knowledge and power. Both systems involve the use of sexual magick to open hidden gates that have remained sealed for centuries.

Indeed, upon further inspection of the other worldly Pokemon known as Gengar, we find it to be described as one of the “Shadow” Pokemon…

EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS AND THE MAGIC CONSPIRACY

Other controversial characters of Pokemon are the monsters known as Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam. The Evangelical Christians raised a fuss about these characters, and though I typically try to keep a level head and avoid siding with over-paranoia; I’ve got to say they may be correct! Hear me out…

The characters were intended to be introduced as Hocus and Pocus; but were changed to Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam in honor of the spell incantation (as per Wikipedia). Those of you that read SACRIFICE: MAGIC BEHIND THE MIC already know that Abracadabra is part of the occult belief of shaping the universe to the practitioner’s will (fulfilling the desires of Aleister Crowley, Paulo Coelho, The Secret, etc.):

Given the importance of wordplay in the rap genre, it shouldn’t be that much of a stretch of the imagination to think that musicians are using actual magic to create their art. Art in and of itself is magic because you’re creating something out of nothing. The term Abracadabra has Aramaic roots and literally means “as I speak; I create.”

It’s a magical belief system that projects an illusion and makes the viewer believe it, which makes it a reality. It’s no different than the concept of the media or entertainment industry repeating a false theme (e.g. an illusion) to the viewers until it becomes an accepted “reality.” You see pharmaceutical companies pushing advertising of new ailments until you believe it affects you. They are making something out of nothing: abracadabra.

Abracadabra is a term used by witches and magicians alike; with origins of praise to the gnostic deity known as Abraxas (as per Texe Marrs’ Codex Magica) and early physicians used to use it for healing powers; which is of no surprise since the beginning of the Hypocratic Oath starts out with talk of swearing to Apollo and other pagan deities.

So we find that Pokemon employs this same practice here with these three linked characters. They have the expected supernatural abilities such as ESP, teleportation, and other psychic abilities. In fact, it turns out that magician Uri Geller sued Nintendo over these characters because he believed them to be modeled after him with his “supernatural” powers to bend spoons with the mind!

Looking at the actual characters we can see symbols that suggest they may indeed be occult in origin.

The lines on Kadabra’s chest appear to look like the lightning bolts of the Nazi party’s S.S. Schutzstaffel, which could link us into the lightning symbolism of Lucifer; the fallen angel.

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen entertainment geared towards children that uses magic and lightning bolt symbolism…

Another explanation for these lines are that they are actually waves taken from the Zener cards used to test one’s mental powers. Zener cards are part of the Spiritualism movement that sought to unite scientific principles with religion through parapsychology- and many figures who have delved into occult ideas have played a part in this movement (e.g. Carl Jung).

In the opening sequence of Ghostbusters we see Bill Murray’s character testing out psychic abilities with the use of Zener cards (even more precisely- the waves card that we see on Kadabra).

The red star is also an occult symbol when you consider that the Communist movement is tied into occult desires such as the destruction of religion and the increasing influence of government (e.g. New World Order). The red star symbolizes Communism, but it could very well be the symbol of Lucifer; the blazing star and recipient of adoration from occult groups.

You’ll also recall how the highly occult-connected Charles Manson and Family murders took out Sharon Tate who was infamously known for her racy photo shoot in which she wore the red star of Lucifer (*note that she was tragically murdered after the release of Rosemary’s Baby– a film about a satanic cult that sought to create Crowley’s “moon child” demon through sex magic rituals; AND Tate was originally supposed to play the role of the mother of the demon spawn):

CHANNELING POKEMON ENTITIES

So it appears the purpose of the Pokemon phenomenon (especially Pokemon Go) is to make contact with these monsters. These entities can then be used for their powers and they have a mutual contract with the player/magician.

In fact, the lyrics to the Pokemon song support this type of idea:

Pokemon, (gotta catch them all) a heart so true
Our courage will pull us through
You teach me and I’ll teach you
(Po-ke-mon) Gotta catch ’em all

This contract between the monster and the practitioner is no different than what we’ve seen from ceremonial magicians such as Aleister Crowley and Jack Parsons who attempted to contact various spirits and entities in order to learn from them. In fact, all of Crowley’s Thelema religion is derived from his contact with the spirit known as Aiwass!

“Teach me and I’ll teach you” is indeed the axiom of any good occultist magician…

EVOLUTIONARY INDOCTRINATION

Similar to other superhero tales we are being spoon fed; the concept of Evolution plays a crucial role in Pokemon. The entire game is built upon first making contact with these monsters and then trapping them (which would be conducted by the magician as they trap the entity in a magic-triangle). After they trap them, they must train them and make them evolve into the next higher powered character.

They lyrics to the Pokemon theme song also support this kind of thinking:

I will travel across the land,
Searching far and wide.
Each Pokemon to understand
The power that’s inside

This is one of the biggest aspects of occultism in the early 2000s as we are bombarded with various ideas and themes of evolution in our entertainment. We are being conditioned to accept the idea that mankind can evolve into beings with supernatural powers.

Feminist Heretic #sexist feministheretic.wordpress.com

image

BROGRESSIVE MAN ~ He's Logical

Creationist: "God exists and he created the world in six days!

Brogressive: "Cool story, bro. Come back when you've got some actual evidence."

Anti-vaxxer: "I give my children organic kale instead of having them vaccinated."

Brogressive: "Then you're a terrible parent. Go read some proper medical journals."

Info Wars Fan: "Muslims are all violent terrorists!"

Brogressive: "Dude, there are like 1.6 billion Muslims, if they were all terrorists we'd be dead already."

Misogynist: "Look, sexual diamorphism simply proves women's brains aren't suited to science."

Brogressive: "Oh please, all that guff about "brain sex" has been completely debunked!"

Flat Earther: "I think the Earth is flat!!!"

Brogressive: "Oh, get in the sea you idiot!"

Trans woman (drawn as a fat bald neckbeard with a "Kill Terfs" shirt): "My name is Harmony Sparkle. I was assigned male at birth, and choose to present as male. But internally I am a lesbian woman. With a penis."

Brogressive: "Oh, okay. Need help finding the ladies room?"

BROGRESSIVE MAN Questioning all the issues, except one.

Judgybitch #fundie judgybitch.com

So two of the boys involved in the Steubenville “rape” case were found guilty and will now face imprisonment and a lifetime membership on the Registered List of Sex Offenders. That is a tragedy for the boys, for justice and for the victims of actual rape. As we go through this case, ask yourself who benefits from this verdict, and why.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/17/justice/ohio-steubenville-case/index.html?hpt=hp_inthenews

Most of the facts in this case seem relatively incontrovertible: a young woman, who was not part of the regular social group, went to a football party, in a town mad for football, got trashed out of her mind, voluntarily accompanied two of the biggest football stars to another party, passed out and then got treated like a whore.

http://judgybitch.com/2012/12/18/a-shit-faced-drunk-girl-a-football-star-and-a-vigilante-feminist-the-makings-of-a-fairy-tale/

In a moment of mind-numbing stupidity, the boys opted to film their “assault” on the girl, which involved fingering her while she was passed out. Rather than leave her in a ditch somewhere, they carried her around to different locations, none of which had any adult supervision.

What the fuck, Steubenville? Where are all the goddamn grown-ups?

The law in Ohio states that ANY penetration, however slight, constitutes rape. Let’s start there. Comparing a stupid, drunk, helmet-chasing whore who gets fingered while passed out to an actual rape victim is completely and utterly absurd.

This is rape:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/indian-gang-rape-victim-dies-hospital_n_2377717.html

So is this:

http://haysfreepress.com/2012/05/07/florida-man-extradited-in-hays-county-brutal-rape-case/#axzz2NtuPnHlh

And this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_Jogger_case

Now, the girl in Steubenville is claiming she didn’t actually drink all that much, and someone must have drugged her! Toxicology tests? NEGATIVE.

Oh my! You mean she’s a lying little tramp desperately trying to avoid ANY culpability for what happened to her? Well color me shocked.

Defense attorneys say a toxicology report performed a day later showed no signs of drugs.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/steubenville-rape-trial-witness-testifies-recording-alleged-assault/story?id=18738378

The most telling thing about this whole case is that multiple people saw the little tramp passed out and carried about by a couple of douchey guys, and make no mistake, those boys behaved shamefully. Part of having the adulation and admiration that comes along with being a small town football star is not to abuse that power when the little gold-digging status whores come a-calling, and those boys failed.

Punishment > Crime

That girl had no friends at the party, not one person had enough respect for her to step in, she was not part of the social tribe and there is no way in hell she did not know that. She went to that party to nab herself a football player, and lo and behold, the football players didn’t really like such an obvious grasp at their glory.

Find yourself another wagon to hitch to, little star.

The saddest thing is that the boys sobbingly admit that they ruined her life! They are accused of having “no moral code”! Oh, and the girl had an impeccable one, did she?

RUINED HER LIFE?!?!

Are you fucking kidding me? They are going to jail! They will be registered sex offenders! They are convicted criminals! One night of behaving like assholes will follow them the rest of their lives, and HER LIFE IS RUINED!!

Her life is not ruined in the slightest. LittleTramp is free to go about her life, getting as drunk as she likes, chasing after any high-status males she likes, and securing criminal convictions against men who treat her like the whore she is.

God help the varsity athletes at whatever college campus she ends up on, and no doubt LittleTramp will get back on her feet after suffering a little humiliation and continue on with her life because SHE’S RUINED.

The young men in this case will never escape the disgustingly unfair consequences of a night of acting like dicks, while the young woman will carry on, unless she feels she isn’t getting quite enough sympathy, of course. Cue the Prozac and therapy!


You know what we need? We need a Drunk Whore Registry. If sex offenders are registered for the protection of all women, then why not register drunk whores for the protection of all men? It’s true that men could protect themselves by not acting like dicks, but combine small-town celebrity with lots of alcohol and no adult supervision, and you WILL get men acting like assholes and women acting like sluts.

When we only punish one side on that equation, we have a serious cultural problem. Men are held to account for their irresponsible decisions made while young and stupid and drunk, but women are not? Most crimes acknowledge explicitly that mitigating circumstances create different categories of crime with correspondingly progressive punishments. Why is rape different?

The punishment these boys face, which will be in effect for THE REST OF THEIR LIVES is way out of proportion to the “crime”. The definition of rape in Ohio is so broadly defined that the act of being a dickhead is now as serious as the act of fucking a woman forcibly and against her will. And if you don’t think there is a material difference between getting fingered and getting fucked, you are probably a feminist.

Getting drunk and chasing after football stars demonstrates level of stupidity and disrespect for the humanity of the men in question (who are valued only for their status), and that disrespect was returned. But only the boys are held responsible for that.

I say bullshit. No one got raped in Steubenville. Someone got humiliated, and she participated willingly and readily in her own humiliation. Turning stupid decisions made by high-school students into criminal acts with consequences that will follow only ONE party for their rest of their lives is deeply unfair, and when fingering a slut at an alcohol fuelled party is put in the same category as violent sexual assault, the real victims are drowned in a chorus of pathetic mewlings of women who didn’t get to bag the star.

Who thinks that if the young woman had woken up the next morning next to the football player, his arms wrapped around her in a loving embrace, she would have considered that the price she had to pay to land the big fish?


Steubenville: sour fucking grapes.

Not just sour, bitter, too. But only for the men.

How is that justice? Who is served when those boys are locked up? Who is protected? Who wins? How ironic is it that the adults who were NOT present to lend some sanity to what their own children were up to are now fully involved to make certain only the boys are punished?

People make stupid decisions. Especially when they are young. They act like idiots. They treat other people with a lack of respect. They behave shamefully. It happens. Holding boys, and only boys responsible, moves justice from being blind to being blatantly sexist. When justice can only see one sex as guilty, it’s time to put out her eyes again.


Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind.

Lots of love,

JB

Niall Kilkenny #fundie reformation.org

Of course the evilutionists deny that the present Geologic Record was created during the year of the Great Flood. They are COMPLETELY IGNORANT of anthropology, geology, biology, chronology and the real history of the world... Their motto is:

"Where ignorance is bliss, 'Tis folly to be wise".

Before the coming of Christ, Satan raised up GIANTS to prevent the Messiah or Redeemer from coming into the world. After the Resurrection of the Redeemer, he raised up a giant "church" to prevent the world from coming to know this Redeemer and to steal the New World from His chosen people!!

"As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the days of the Son of man, They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all (Luke 17:26-27)."

According to the Bible there is nothing wrong with eating and drinking, marrying etc., etc., but these people who lived before the Great Flood were doing something which caused the Lord to drown them all. They were creating genetic monstrosities and polluting the human race with Satanic bloodlines in order to prevent the Messiah from having pure human blood.

[...]

The Bible says that before the Great Flood, human women married the "sons of God" and they produced GIANTS in size and in iniquity. All nations have legends about giants. That is where the Greek demigods like Prometheus, Atlas and Titan came from. The only true account of that tragedy is found in the Book of Genesis which was written by Moses. We can get an idea of what Satan did back then by studying his methods in subsequent history. All the universe and history is circular in aspect. God declares the end right at the beginning.

What happened before the Great Flood?

When Adam and Eve died, Satan introduced the theory of evilution into the world that teaches that man and animals are genetically related. He downplayed the story of the creation and fall of man by the sin of Adam and Eve. Then women began to assume a dominant role in human affairs. Satan downplayed the command of God that women were to be in subjection to their husbands.

These fallen angels must have introduced their scheme as an evolutionary advance for mankind. They promised the women that if they married and bore their offspring they would not have to be in subjection to their husbands. As a result, the world was overrun by half human half animal genetic monstrosities and God decided to destroy the entire world except for Noah and his family.

image

The pre-Flood world was a zoological nightmare. From left to right, a grypon, a manticore, a ferocious human-headed carnivore with 3 interlocking rows of teeth, a basilick, a unicorn, an Assyrian human headed winged bull.

God got rid of these half human half animal monstrosities by drowning them all. All the billions of humans and animals were turned into fossil fuel —coal and petroleum . The only survivors were Noah and his family who were not contaminated by these Satanic bloodlines.

Memories of these monsters were preserved in Egyptian and Greek mythology. The Bible gives the true account of what really happened while corrupted versions were handed down in myths and folklore:

[images of the Egyptian deities Khnum and Bast, the Great Sphinx of Giza, Bellerophon riding a lion with a goat's head and a serpent's tail and the Greek deities Atlas and Prometheus]

Mack Major #fundie facebook.com

This is for all of my 'woke' folks, who've turned their hearts away from God and back towards Egypt and its gods: the land of their captivity. The Bible says God has placed a deep sleep on you; a type of stupor that clouds your mind from being able to truly see.

"For the LORD has poured over you a spirit of deep sleep, He has shut your eyes, the prophets; And He has covered your heads, the seers. The entire vision will be to you like the words of a sealed book, which when they give it to the one who is literate, saying, "Please read this," he will say, "I cannot, for it is sealed." Isaiah 29:10-11

Even when you try to read the Bible it doesn't make any sense to you: because God has kept its secrets and hidden knowledge away from you since you've turned your heart away from Him. This is why you hate the Bible: because it doesn't compute in your cerebral cortex!

"As the Scriptures say, "God has put them into a deep sleep. To this day he has shut their eyes so they do not see, and closed their ears so they do not hear." Romans 11:8

So if you're running around chasing after any other god beside the God of the Bible: you're not really woke at all. You're actually sound asleep; snoring away on your pillow like a drunkard. And that's where you will remain until you are ready to wake up and possess true spiritual knowledge.

One of the most frustrating things is trying to wake black Americans up to who they really are. This includes all the descendants of the Transatlantic Slave Trade: Caribbean black folks, Central and South American black folks, the ones who immigrated to France and England from those island territories, etc.

Most of them are running around blind as a bat, completely unaware who they are and who their real God is. And when you make attempts to enlighten them with REAL knowledge and understanding: these rebellious-hearted jokers will fight you, slander you, call you stupid and treat you like you're talking to them in Greek!

"Son of man, you are living among a rebellious people. They have eyes to see but do not see and ears to hear but do not hear, for they are a rebellious people." Ezekiel 12:2

"This is why I speak to them in parables: 'Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand." Matthew 13:13

It's time out for being willfully blind! How much longer will you embrace other gods that have done nothing for you but left you in bondage, poor, destitute, blind, dispossessed and disenfranchised?

Jesus has already shown His superiority over those other gods. What do you think the last 2000 years has been about? You're trying to go back to serving defeated, whipped, loser gods who couldn't even prevent you from going into slavery!

If they couldn't keep you out of slavery then, what makes you think they'll be able to help you out of your condition today? Why on Earth would you want to serve gods like that? Return to the Lord your God - your true God - and He'll turn back towards you!

"Return, Israel, to the LORD your God. Your sins have been your downfall!" Hosea 14:1

"As surely as I live, says the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of wicked people. I only want them to turn from their wicked ways so they can live. Turn! Turn from your wickedness, O people of Israel! Why should you die?" Ezekiel 33:11

"Don't tear your clothing in your grief, but tear your hearts instead. Return to the LORD your God, for he is merciful and compassionate, slow to get angry and filled with unfailing love. He is eager to relent and not punish." Joel 2:13

It's time to wake up Israel! The time for slumber and sleep is over! Wake up and embrace your God once more: the true and living God.

Turn to your Savior: Jesus Christ the Righteous and True. I'm not talking about the image presented to us of Cesar Borgia! I'm talking about the true and living Christ: the One with the outstretched arms who's ready to receive you back, right now, today.

But as long as you insist on turning to the gods of the heathens, worshiping their demons, icons and idols: you'll continue on your path towards being broke, disgusted, angry, sick, diseased, deprived of justice, enslaved and ultimately destroyed.

"The LORD will also bring on you every kind of sickness and disaster not recorded in this Book of the Law, until you are destroyed. You who were as numerous as the stars in the sky will be left but few in number, because you did not obey the LORD your God." Deuteronomy 28:61-62

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

You'll never hear Pat Robertson, Ray Comfort, nor Kirk Cameron speak evil against the hellish Catholic religion. Catholics believe in being born-again. Did you know that? Albeit, their understanding of the term is totally unbiblical, flawed, and a false gospel. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are publicly silent about Catholicism. I'm not. The Catholic Church is straight from Hell, and you're going to Hell if you think keeping sacraments, getting wet in a baptistery, or confessing your sins to some heathen priest saturated with sins himself will get you into Heaven when you die!

I don't condemn anyone, for the Bible condemns all mankind as guilty sinners (Romans 3:19; 14:10). The Devil is working relentlessly to bring damnable heresies into our churches, to corrupt people's minds and lead them into apostasy away from the Lord. I hate all modern Bible versions for that very reason. Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort use corrupt Bible versions, so it's not surprising that their doctrines are also corrupt. Corrupt Bibles lead to corrupt teachings, which leads to corrupt living, and eventually Hell if that person doesn't get born-again!

Kirk Cameron is without question an awesome actor and has starred in some amazing movies, like Fireproof. But the bigger picture is that all these ecumenical ministers and celebrities turned Christian, are supportive of the New World Order's agenda to unite the world's various religions into one. By remaining silent about the evils of the Catholic religion, they are all part of the problem. Kirk Cameron won't criticize the Pope nor the Catholic religion, which is blatantly a false religion one billion strong. Everyone is afraid to speak out against the Catholic Church. Pope Benedict XVI said in 2005 that people can be saved even without having any Biblical faith. It's sad, but true, in my opinion Ray Comfort is just trying to make a living, having found his niche in the religious world; but they won't tell the real truth, i.e., that Catholics are all going to Hell in their unbelief.

In The Evidence Bible, Ray Comfort says that there are millions of unsaved people amongst Catholics and Protestants. The false implication is that some Catholics are saved within the Catholic religion. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are weak-kneed when it comes to standing up against the almighty Catholic religion. You don't have to wonder where I stand... the Catholic Church is Satanic!!!

Lest he should offend any Catholics, on pg. 1358 Ray Comfort states...

“There are millions of Catholics and Protestants who have never been born again and need to hear the gospel”

SOURCE: THE EVIDENCE BIBLE, by Ray Comfort, pg. 1358; 2003, Bridge-Logos Publishers, Orlando, Florida

Although that is a true statement by Mr. Comfort, the fact of the matter is that Catholics by doctrine are ALL going straight to Hell, because they are trusting upon a works-based salvation (i.e., self-righteousness). In sharp contrast, most Protestant churches hold to a Free Grace view of the Gospel. I just don't understand why, or how, Ray Comfort would bring Protestant believers down to the same level as the damnable Catholic religion. The fact of the matter is that there are millions of saved Protestants; but there are NO SAVED CATHOLICS if they are genuine Catholics.

Why doesn't Ray Comfort speak the truth... there are over ONE BILLION unsaved Catholics in the world!!!

Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron Use Modern Corrupt Bibles

Romans 10:9 in the New International Version (NIV) deceitfully teaches the hellish doctrine of Lordship Salvation. Instead of teaching “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus”; the NIV says you have to “confess Jesus is Lord” to be saved. Blasphemy! So you see, the Bible that you are using means everything. The NIV preaches an entirely different Gospel than the inspired King James Bible does. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are using corrupted Bibles, as are John MacArthur, Max Lucado, Rick Warren, Pat Robertson, Billy Graham and all the other apostates and enemies of God today.

My goal is not to be unkind against Mr. Cameron. I did not publish this article to attack him on a personal level. I love everywhere, including Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron; but I love Jesus first and foremost and I must expose false prophets who corrupt the Gospel message. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron teach the heresy of Lordship Salvation. Cameron promotes John MacArthur's Study Bible on his website, Mr. Lordship Salvation himself. MacArthur is an unsaved Modernist.

The common denominator between all these men are that they all use modern corrupted versions of the Bible. I only trust and use the precious, preserved, and inspired King James Bible. They all use either the hellish New International Version [NIV] or the demonic New King James Bible [NKJB], which are BOTH based upon the heretical Greek text of Westcott and Hort (upon which the Jehovah's Witnesses demonic cult also base their New World Translation). The truth is in plain site if you want it. Most people don't want THE TRUTH.

Most of the false prophets teaching the heresy of Lordship Salvation are from California (John Mac Arthur, Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron, Jack Chick, et cetera). California is a hotbed of false prophets! Lordship Salvation is the teaching that a person must stop living in sin to be saved. In Jack Chick's case, he's a bit more subtle, teaching that it's not enough to admit one's sinnership to be saved; but a person must also be willing to stop living in sin to be saved. These are all damnable heresies that destroy the gift of God. You don't give up anything to be saved; Jesus gave up everything to pay for our sins. Jesus came into the world to SAVE SINNERS! If you want to be saved, then repent toward God by placing your faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, to forgive your sins. It's that simple. God will take care of the rest from there.

The issue is not about Kirk Cameron; but rather, the corrupt Bibles, corrupt religious teachers, corrupt plans of salvation, corrupt organizations, corrupt televangelists, corrupt Contemporary Christian Music [CCM] singers... as with most religious people today, kindly but truthfully said, Kirk Cameron is CORRUPTED!

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

One of the biggest lies sold by Satan to most churches today is that the new Bible versions are better because they are “easier to understand.” What they won't tell you, the truth, is that ALL modern Bible versions have been translated from a completely different Greek manuscript than the trustworthy King James Bible. The only thing that they have made easier to understand is error, changing the Word of God into a lie (Romans 1:25).

In reality, they have given today's churches an entirely different manuscript under the disguise of making the King James Bible (which came from the Textus Receptus) easier to understand. It's a whole different Bible version full of lies and gross doctrinal errors which attack Christ's deity, the plan of salvation, the blood, Christ's preeminence and the Godhead.

But wait there's more, the reprobate fathers of all modern corrupt Bible versions are Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, of which Mr. Westcott was a devout occultist who founded the Hermes Club and was a custodian of the ancient mysteries (world government, aka, the New World Order). The average church member today is woefully ignorant of the satanic nature of all modern Bible versions, which have been translated from the “New Testament In The Original Greek,” compiled by Westcott and Hort.

Tony Zirkle (Campaigning for congress) #fundie tonyzirkle.com

My historical research has lead me to conclude that porn-prostitution is the most effective implemented weapon of mass destruction throughout history.

[Later in the thread, trying to defend this he says)

Revelation 14:8 (Whole Chapter)
And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. (PORN in Greek)

Of all the ways to define the dragon, this writer chose to point out that his modus operandi is to make all nations drink the wrathful (porn promotes violence) wine (porn deceives) of her porn. The dragon is an international porn peddler.

Osiris #conspiracy subvertednation.net

The main secret about the moon may be that it’s an artificial alien satellite, parked in Earth orbit millions of years ago to stabilize the Earth’s rotation and precession in order to allow intelligent life forms to evolve. Prior to the moon’s arrival, the Earth’s rotation and precession may have been too unstable, leading to periodic cataclysmic pole reversals which wiped out all evolving life forms. Also, it’s well-known that the moon regulates the Earth’s tides. What were the Earth’s tides like before the moon arrived in orbit? Possibly unpredictable and tsunami-like?

Supposedly, seismic tests done on the moon have revealed that it is hollow, which isn’t possible with a real moon or planet. Adam’s comment about how unlikely it is that only one side of the moon ever faces Earth turned on a light bulb for me. Although I knew that was the case, I had never really thought about how unlikely it is.

I also agree with the comment that the “Cold War” explanation for the moon hoax doesn’t cut it, because the Jews have controlled Russia since 1917, and the United States since at least 1913, when the “Federal” Reserve was forced upon us. So, it doesn’t make sense that they would stage such a risky, expensive, and elaborate hoax just to make one puppet hand (the U.S.) “fool” the other puppet hand (the Soviet Union). The military, intelligence, and scientific directorates of the Soviet Union were surely intelligent enough and had enough espionage and technical capabilities to easily figure out that the moon landings were hoaxed, yet they never called the U.S. on it – they played along.

I don’t agree with the idea that the moon landings were hoaxed just as a way of funneling more money to Israel, because there would have been much easier and less risky ways for the Jews to do that. Imagine the risks they took to pull off multiple moon landings hoaxes – what if something went wrong, and their hoax was suddenly exposed to millions of TV viewers? There has to be something about the moon itself that they don’t want people to know, and therefore they took the huge risk of hoaxing the moon landings so that, as Adam said, NASA could later say, “Been there, done that. Nothing more to see on the moon – move along.”

Here’s an article about how NASA has issued orders to the private companies wanting to explore the moon to stay away from the Apollo “landing sites.” Most likely, because there’s nothing at those sites!

http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=20051

Or, on a more hopeful and somewhat less “far-out” note, it could be that the Jew-created, German-bashing spoof movie “Iron Sky” is a reality, and that those “evil Nazis” may have antigravity ships and bases on the moon’s far side, waiting to conquer Earth. This sounds ridiculous, but there is actually a lot of evidence that the Germans had made incredible technological advances in the closing years of WWII, possibly including antigravity “flying saucers” or UFOs, and that they managed to ship those secrets to Antarctica and/or South America, where they developed them further. I can easily see why the Jews who control the U.S. and Russia would want to hide German antigravity UFOs and German military bases on the moon, if that is the case. It could also explain why U.S. and Russian nuke sites have been repeatedly probed by UFOs from 1947 up until the present day. Why would aliens from another star system be so concerned about our nuclear missiles, which could never reach them anyway? This “German UFO/ moon base” scenario could explain the NASA Space Shuttle video in which it appears that a missile was fired at a UFO in Earth’s upper atmosphere, which then immediately darted off into space to evade the missile.

Or, it could be that both scenarios are true – the moon is an artificial alien satellite, and the Germans have used their antigravity UFO technology to establish military bases there. I can certainly see why the Jews would want to hide such a reality from the people. If such a scenario is true, I’m pulling for the Germans!

Andrew Snelling #fundie theatlantic.com

A Creationist Sues the Grand Canyon for Religious Discrimination
The national park wouldn’t let him collect rocks for research.

“How did the Grand Canyon form?” is a question so commonly pondered that YouTube is rife with explanations. Go down into the long tail of Grand Canyon videos, and you’ll eventually find a two-part, 35-minute lecture by Andrew Snelling. The first sign this isn’t a typical geology lecture comes about a minute in, when Snelling proclaims, “The Grand Canyon does provide a testament to the biblical account of Earth’s history.”

Snelling is a prominent young-Earth creationist. For years, he has given lectures, guided biblical-themed Grand Canyon rafting tours, and worked for the nonprofit Answers in Genesis. (The CEO of Answers in Genesis, Ken Ham, is also behind the Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter theme park.) Young-Earth creationism, in contrast to other forms of creationism, specifically holds that the Earth is only thousands of years old. Snelling believes that the Grand Canyon formed after Noah’s flood—and he now claims the U.S. government is blocking his research in the canyon because of his religious views.

Last week, Snelling sued park administrators and the Department of Interior, which administers the national parks program, because they would not grant him a permit to collect 50 to 60 fist-sized rocks. All research in the national park is restricted, especially if it requires removing material. But the Grand Canyon does host 80 research projects a year, ranging from archaeology digs to trout tracking.

Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group that filed the lawsuit on behalf of Snelling, alleged discrimination by the park. “National Park Service: Research in Grand Canyon okay for geologists … but not Christian ones,” read the headline on their press release. (Interior department and NPS spokespeople declined to comment because of the pending litigation.)

If the permit application hit a nerve, it’s because young-Earth creationists have a bit of an obsession with the Grand Canyon. Where geologists see billions of years of rock layers carved out by a persistent flow of water, young-Earth creationists see sediments laid down in Noah’s flood. As the flood receded, they believe, water became trapped behind natural dams, until it finally broke through in a “catastrophic erosion” that carved the Grand Canyon.

This is the story told on religious rafting trips organized by companies like Canyon Ministries, for which Snelling also works as a guide. In 2004, a book by the Canyon Ministry founder Tom Vail caused a stir when it was sold at the national park’s bookstores.

It’s all part of an uneasy relationship between the park and young-Earth creationists. The park does permit the rafting trips, and it has allowed creationists, including Snelling according to the lawsuit, to work in the park before. Another prominent young-Earth creationist, Steve Austin, took photos of nautiloid fossils in the park and used them to argue that the creatures died during the flood. “I think the NPS has felt a bit stung by past creationist research in the Grand Canyon,” says Steven Newton, who teaches geology at College of Marin and serves as the programs and policy director for the National Center for Science Education, a nonprofit that opposes teaching creationism in public schools.

Exactly why the park did not grant Snelling’s application is, of course, now the subject of a lawsuit. His project did involve collecting a sizable number of rocks, which can invite more scrutiny. In an email to Snelling filed as part of the lawsuit, a park officer said the project was not granted because the type of rock he wanted to study can also be found outside of the Grand Canyon. The park solicited peer reviews from three mainstream geologists. One mentioned the rocks could be found elsewhere; all three overwhelmingly denounced the work as not scientifically valid, a criterion the park also uses to evaluate proposals. Snelling, who holds a Ph.D. in geology, did not disclose his Answers in Genesis affiliation, nor did he explicitly say he wanted to prove the Grand Canyon is young in his initial permit application, but the reviewers became aware of his reputation.

Geology as a profession has struggled with what to do with young-Earth creationists, whose beliefs are contradicted by literal mountains of scientific evidence. Shut them down, and you get cries of censorship—like this lawsuit. “This just so plays into their hands,” Newton says about the national park’s treatment of Snelling’s application. Newton favors letting creationists do their research and then arguing on the merits of their science. But allowing them to present at scientific conferences, others say, is lending creationists legitimacy.

“That’s really a tough question because in science we want to be the type of community where people can bring about ideas that are controversial,” says Stephen Moshier, a geologist at Wheaton, a Christian liberal arts college in Illinois, and a former president of the Affiliation of Christian Geologists. The problem, according to Moshier, who is not a young-Earth creationist, is that they want mainstream geologists to be open to new ideas, but it’s the young-Earth creationists themselves who have proved inflexible in the face of new evidence contradicting their ideas. “Often I read things by young-Earth creationists where I think they really ought to know better. Many of them have excellent training in the geosciences,” he says. (Snelling declined to comment because of the lawsuit. Four other young-Earth creationists who study the Grand Canyon did not respond to requests for comment.)

That the Grand Canyon is the stage where this conflict now plays out is no coincidence. The canyon is such a potent example of the power of small changes over time—of what’s possible on geological time scales. “Look through any introductory geology textbook, any sedimentology textbook, and the Grand Canyon is going to be there in either full color or on the whole page,” says Moshier.

Last year, he and other Christian geologists published a book titled The Grand Canyon, Monument to an Ancient Earth, directly refuting young-Earth creationists who cite the canyon as evidence of Noah’s flood. “It wouldn’t be of any use writing about the Appalachian Mountains—even though I think we can make a stronger case for an ancient Earth there because the geology is so complex,” says Moshier. “Because they make a big deal out of the Grand Canyon and use it as a lab for young-Earth creationism and flood geology, that’s naturally where we had to focus the book.”

When young-Earth creationists invoke God, they are tapping into a real sense of wonder about the Grand Canyon. It’s easy—in fact all too human—to wonder how so small a river could have carved so vast a chasm. One partial answer is that the Glen Canyon dam has quelled the spring floods that originally bored through rock; the lazily winding Colorado River that you see today is not the river that formed the Grand Canyon. But also, humans are bad at intuiting the consequences of deep time. Once you add enough zeros to number of years they all start to sound the same.

It’s hard to imagine how much can happen in geological time. About 1.7 billion years ago, a series of volcanoes crashed into what would become the continent of North America and created mountains taller than the Himalayas today. Those mountains eroded back down to hills to form the rock that now rests at the base of the canyon. Over countless millions of years, a shallow sea expanded and contracted over the area, laying down the sediment that would become the sandstone, shale, and limestone layers. Plate tectonics then pushed those rock layers up and up to became the Colorado Plateau. And finally, flowing water carved its way down 1.7 billion years of rock.

It’s hard to imagine, but there is wonder and grandeur in this imagination, too.

Lewis Howell #fundie teens-4-christ.org

Now simply from a standpoint of logic, the wine ("oinos") Jesus created in John 2 had to be pure, rather than fermented, grape juice. Why? Because everything that comes from the Creator’s hand is absolutely pure, whereas anything alcoholic comes from a corrupt process called fermentation, and nothing good is ever related to alcoholic wine in the Bible, only corruption comes from drinking alcoholic anything. There was also no time for fermentation to take place after the miracle.

Chick Publications #fundie chick.com

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan have just pledged 3 billion dollars to “cure, prevent or manage all diseases” by the end of the century. Chan, a pediatrician, is hoping to spare the pain she sees when she delivers bad news to parents. Few people would argue with this noble goal.

But it is one example of an impossible dream held by so many of the leaders in the “world.” It is a place opposed to God’s plan of salvation, redemption and true abundant life.

The dream sits squarely on the lie of evolution. This generation, baptized in technology, believes that they can speed up evolution by altering DNA and create a super race, freed of disease, aging, poverty and hatred. Robots, bright with artificial intelligence, will be willing servants to bring a utopia of abundance and harmony.

This counterfeit heaven on earth will be funded by the mountainous fortunes amassed by such as Zuckerberg and his techno-cohorts. Sadly, many who claim to believe the Bible are buying into this fantasy instead of discerning the “signs of the [end] times” that describe the increasing chaos until Christ comes to rule in righteousness.

Daniel is told in chapter 12 that “…many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” This certainly describes our freeways and internet. But he was also told that: “Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.”

We still see multitudes around the world, coming into Christ’s Kingdom and being “purified, and made white.” But also many are “tried,” with persecution rising in much of the world. Instead of being on the threshold of a new, man-made era of harmony and abundance, those who “do wickedly” will torpedo the dreams of those who refuse to include God in their plans.

America’s prosperity is the direct result of including God and honoring His word. That abundance has financed the spread of the gospel to all nations, just as Christ promised in Matt. 24:14. After that, though, He said that the end would come, not some man-made utopia.

Only righteousness can exalt a nation (Prov. 14:34.) As long as the hearts of sinful men are unchanged, sin will bring reproach: poverty, war, hatred, by those who “do wickedly.” The enemy of men’s souls, the trinity of “world, flesh and the devil” will not permit man to get his dream, no matter how much money they spend.

Daniel was told that the wise will understand. And Solomon declared that “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and he that winneth souls is wise” (Prov. 11:30). Never before in history has temptation of the “world” been more subtle for the Bible believer.

Church leaders and future leaders are told that using tracts is old fashioned and doesn’t work. Evangelism must be done through the long process of building a relationship to get permission to share the gospel.

But random sowing of the gospel seed does work. Thousands have written or called Chick Publications, testifying of changed lives from the message in a single tract —or a series of tracts found at random times.

Pastor Scott #fundie sbcopenforum.com

Responding to the Chart “So You Still Think Homosexuality is Sinful?”

Here is a post I recently put up at my “pastor’s blog” for my church. I am starting a regular post entitled ‘Ask the Pastor’ to give me an opportunity to answer question our folks have about theological issues, and living-out a biblically faithful life in the presence of the challenges we face in our world today. Here is what I posted:

In this post, I am going to answer the challenges put before us by someone who advocates in favor of same-sex marriage and against a biblical world view. Below is a picture of a chart which is making the rounds on the Internet, especially Facebook. The title of the chart is “So You Still Think Homosexuality is Sinful?” with the tag line of “And Therefore Gays Shouldn’t Be Allowed to Marry?” Here is that chart:


The question brought to me regarding this chart is pretty straightforward, “How do we answer the objections raised here?” In other words, when someone makes what sounds like a legitimate argument regarding the issue of homosexuality and what the Bible has to say about it or a related topic, how are we to respond? This is a great question which gets to the heart of what I hope we are able to do with these Ask the Pastor posts: When faced with the issues in our world today how are we as biblically faithful followers of Jesus Christ to think about and respond to them?

The bottom-line answer is really quite simple, we think, trust, and live according to what God’s word says. This statement is absolutely true, yet is somewhat incomplete. We must ask ourselves if the Bible is reliable and how do we find the assurance that our understanding of the Bible is correct. I do not wish to get side-tracked into a discussion of the apologetic for the reliability and veracity of the Bible. Perhaps that could be another post at another time. Suffice it to say that as Christians we place all our trust in God’s complete revelation found in the sixty-six books of the Bible. Upon that trust, we then embark upon diligent study of Scripture and develop our theological convictions. The consistency of right understanding is borne out in a logical cohesion of all biblical texts, proper understanding of the original languages and translation, the history of the time, and the continued witness of Christians throughout history. For example, we can assert much about the orthodox fact that God is triune–the Trinity–because we see numerous passages referencing our One great God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We also benefit from biblical linguistic scholars who have diligently studied the Hebrew and Greek to assure us of right understanding of the words in the Bible. We know of the history in which God revealed Himself, and we see established the unique nature of God in contrast to pagan religion. Finally, throughout church history Christians have come together and labeled any other description of God as unorthodox heresy. These same factors figure in to our understanding of what God says in His word about homosexuality.

For my focus here, I’m going to respond to each one of the reasons listed in the chart in rejecting homosexuality as sin thus advocating for same-sex marriage. I take them from left to right across the presentation of the chart:

“Jesus Never Uttered A Word about Same-Sex Relationships”:

This is simply FALSE. Jesus has spoken at length regarding the immorality of homosexuality. He is part of the eternally triune God and as such is the author of ALL SCRIPTURE from Genesis to Revelation. Those passages in the Old and New Testaments outside the Gospels–in which are found specific prohibitions regarding homosexuality–are just as much the words of Jesus as are the ‘red letters’ found in many of our Bibles which are attributed to Him during His earthly ministry.

A similar ‘argument from silence,’ as the one attempted by the author of the chart, could be made that in those passages where Jesus spoke directly to the issue of marriage–such as Matthew 5:31-32; 19:1-12, etc.–He took no opportunity to affirm same-sex marriage as valid, which one would assume He would want to do, so as to not be misunderstood.

“The O.T. Also Says It’s Sinful to Eat Shelfish, to Wear Clothes Woven with Different Fabrics, and to Eat Pork. Should We Still Live by O.T. Laws?”:

The question embodied in the final box of this section–“Should we still live by O.T. laws?”–does not have a simple yes-or-no answer, thus the question is ill-conceived and short-sighted. The reason the answer is not-so-simple lies in the fact that OT laws fall into three categories–civil, ceremonial, and moral. Civil laws applied to how Israel, as the people of God were to live within society. Ceremonial laws applied to matters of worship and special identity for Israel. Moral laws applied to right and wrong–what God calls righteous or sin. In the NT we read Scriptures which tell us that the ceremonial and many civil laws were no longer to be applied to God’s people (Acts 10:9-29; 11:1-14). Nowhere in the NT do we find nullification of the moral laws; in fact, Jesus Himself even shows us all just how deeply those laws still apply (Matthew 5:17-48).

“The Original Language of the N.T. Actually Refers to Male Prostitution, Molestation, or Promiscuity, not Committed Same-Sex Relationships. Paul May Have Spoken Against Homosexuality, but He Also Said That Women Should Be Silent and Never Assume Authority Over A Man. Shall Modern-Day Churches Live by All of Paul’s Values?”

The answer to the question posed in the bottom box is ‘Yes.’ We’ll return to the reason for that answer in a moment.

First we must address the error of the lengthy attempted justification of homosexuality based on the Greek words and context of the NT discussion. The assertion made by the originator of this chart is simply not proved. It is what biblical scholars call eisegesis, or reading into a biblical passage something which is not already there. The words used to describe homosexuality deal with a general description of sexual relationships involving people of the same gender. The most notable of these passages is Romans 1:18-32. Also, nothing in the context of Romans 1 or the other NT or OT passages which reference homosexuality draw any distinction between consensual or non-consensual same-sex relationships.

Returning to the question: Yes, we should live by “all of Paul’s values.” In this case, the author of the chart highlights “women should be silent and never assume authority over a man,” so let’s deal with that specifically. This statement references 1 Timothy 2:8-15. The referenced statement is made within the context of Paul’s instruction to Timothy on the structure and leadership of the local church (1 Timothy 3:1-7, & all of 1 Timothy). Paul’s assertion pertains to his argument that women are not to be pastors or deacons within the local church. Nothing is being said about women in positions of secular authority.

“That Was When the Earth Wasn’t Populated. There Are Now 6.79 Billion People. Breeding Clearly Isn’t an Issue Any More!”

This, aside from the ‘argument’ addressed on the very right side of this chart (which is nothing more than a stereotyping, straw-man attack on personality rather than a matter of substantive consideration), is the weakest of the arguments on this chart. The author concedes the actual statement of biblical truth. The simple fact is that the Bible explicitly states the order of creation is man and woman, who are created for sexual intimacy with those of the opposite gender (Genesis 2; Matthew 19:5; Mark 10:7; 1 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 5:31). Also, the fact that no population parameters exist within the Bible emphatically indicates that the commands limiting marriage to men to women are still applicable today.

“Wrong. The Bible Also Defines Marriage as One-Man-Many-Women, One Man Many Wives and Concubines, A Rapist & His Victim, and Conquering Soldier & Female Prisoner of War.”

To use the chart’s author’s own words regarding this statement…Wrong. The author is guilty of a confusion of categories, or category error. He attempts to equate two different types of Scriptural writing–prescriptive and descriptive. A prescriptive passage asserts something to be followed–Do not murder; Do not forsake the assembling of yourselves together; Honor your father and mother–while a descriptive passage simply reports that which happened–In the beginning God created; Judas went out and hung himself; John the Baptist came eating locusts and honey. Prescriptive passages give us commands to follow, even if given by example. They are often restated and affirmed as such in other parts of the Bible, such as is the case with the passages sited in the previous problem with relation to the definition of gender and marriage (Genesis 2; et al.). Descriptive Bible passages, such as have been correctly referenced by the author of the chart, merely state the observable facts, the narrative of historic events. Often times these references come with neither condemnation nor affirmation of the choices of those involved in the story. Such is the case with the examples sited in the chart.

One other interesting observation. Those examples sighted in an attempt to claim that the Bible advocates multiple definitions of marriage have at their foundation the biblical truth of men created for intimate relationships with women. No same-sex example of marriage can be cited from the Bible. To be sure though, all of those examples the chart author cited are indeed corruptions of the biblical prescription of one man for one woman for life.

Well…what I have attempted here is a relatively brief response to the various issues presented by this chart. Much more could be said. If you would like to see further discussion on one of these matters, please send me your question via the Ask the Pastor form on the blog here. I am also not averse to discussing specific questions pertaining to this post in the comment thread. I will certainly moderate it to be certain that it remains on topic, but would welcome helpful interaction on this topic.

As always, when we engage people who might bring these accusations against us or the Bible, we must always answer in a cordial, redemptive, and convictional manner. Thank you for your time in reading this post. Be looking for the next installment of “Ask the Pastor” soon.

By Grace Alone,

Pastor Scott

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

There has been much talk in the news recently about a famous Penn State college football coach who has been accused of sexually abusing several young boys. The coach has maintained his innocence, but admits to foolishly showering NAKED with several young boys. This case alone shows what's wrong with public nakedness. One thing often leads to another and public nudity is asking for trouble. Americans are deceived to think that males and females can walk around immodestly dressed without consequences.

The Bible teaches that it's best to stay as far away from sin as possible, which is why Jesus equated lust with adultery (Matthew 5:28). James 1:14-16 plainly teach what is wrong with public nakedness, for it is the root cause of sexual immorality...

James 1:14-16, “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Do not err, my beloved brethren.”

It all begins with lust. If you aren't in the presence of other naked people, then you cannot be drawn away by lust. it's not rocket-science!

It is unscriptural for men to shower naked around other men, let alone in the presence of young boys. This Scripture passage makes this clear. It is not good for men to see each other naked, as evidenced by the pederast homosexual problem. The Romans were infamous for pederasts (men having sex with boys). Socrates, the famous Greek philosopher, was a pederast homosexual.

There is nothing manly about men disrespecting one another by walking around naked in the shower room. It is proper and right for men to show respect for the body, and toward their fellow mankind, by clothing the body. It is more than coincidence that initiates into Luciferian occult groups are required to perform acts of homosexuality as part of their initiation rights. The purpose for this is to debase each other, removing all bastions of decency and reservation between one another. In all sexual relations, even if with a prostitute for a few minutes, a soul-tie is formed between the two people (whether male or female) involved in the act. This is one of the spiritual dangers of sexual immorality, which undermines one's entire soul's health. Proverb 6:32, “But whoso committeth adultery with a woman lacketh understanding: he that doeth it destroyeth his own soul.”

I heard an internet radio commercial today advertising the product, “AGELESS MALE,” guaranteed to boost testosterone for men by 61%. Then the advertiser said, “Get back in the game!” That's not why I wrote this article, but the timing was perfect for this article, because it evidences the sinful and irresponsible attitude of society today toward sexual relations. Get back in the game??? Sadly, sex is a game to many people!!! This is the horrible consequence of America's sexually-indecent television programming, promiscuous sitcoms, perverted Late Night comedy shows and TV in general.

I don't watch TV because it is too evil. So when I do occasionally see a TV show on someone else's TV in a hotel or at a restaurant, I am absolutely shocked and angered by what I see and hear. If you watch TV all-the-time, you won't see just how evil it is, because you are sinking into the abyss of wickedness with the hellivision. I guarantee you that if you turn off your television for 6-months that you'll be absolutely shell-shocked when you turn it back on. I hate TV!

It is common practice in health clubs, YMCA's and locker-rooms across America for men to shower naked in the presence of other men, and to walk around naked and let it all hang out. It is uncouth, tasteless, lacking of respect for each other and unscriptural. The same is true of women's locker-rooms. Historically, sports and public nudity have always been synonymous. The Greeks were famous for sports and infamous for nudity.

Genesis 9:21-27 teach us several important life-changing and moral lessons. We see that alcoholic beverages are spiritually dangerous, linked to nakedness and sin. Noah sinned by getting drunk and led his son to sin by doing so. Don't think that Noah didn't think about that either. Noah had to live with the division created between him and his son because of booze. Alcohol brought shame upon Noah. Noah had to live from that day forward knowing that Ham saw him naked and drunk. Although Noah knew he was forgiven in Christ, he caused permanent division between he and his son, Ham.

We also see that Ham sinfully paraded his father's sins, instead of faithfully concealing the matter. America's history books, Wikipedia and newspapers are filled with what husbands and wives have hypocritically said about each other during and after a divorce. The next time you hear a woman talking about how evil her husband is ask her how she obtained perfection. The Bible warns against condemning anyone. James 4:12, “There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?”

By the way, I hate Wikipedia. I've noticed that celebrity profiles (like George Clooney) are locked, but gospel preacher's profiles are open for every snake, rat and God-hating trash to slander and serve roast preacher. Wikipedia is a sewer of American society and Jimmy Wales will give account to God for helping spread malicious gossip. Wikipedia is a weapon. It's easy for some worm who never built a hot-dog stand to throw rocks at a faithful preacher who gave his life to others in the Lord for 50-years, helping literally millions of people in so many ways and changing a nation for God.

[...]

The Demon-Possessed Maniac of Gadarenes

Luke 8:27 and 35, “And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode in any house, but in the tombs... Then they went out to see what was done; and came to Jesus, and found the man, out of whom the devils were departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.”

What a precious passage of Scripture! This afflicted man was possessed by devils, running around naked and living in the wild. The entire city knew he was insane. Yet the Bible says when he found Jesus, he came into his right mind and put his clothes back on. Amen! Jesus is the cure for insanity and nudity.

Millions of Americans go to psychologists, psychiatrists and religious leaders for help; but the Word of God says the afflicted man at Gadarenes came into his RIGHT MIND when he found Jesus. It is interesting that being in one's “right mind” is associated with being properly clothed. Americans have a problem keeping their clothes on because they AREN'T in their right minds, they are mentally-ill. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that nearly half of the women in America have murdered a child by abortion. Only a mentally-ill person would deliberately kill a precious child. So it doesn't surprise me in a rotten society that devours it's own children that they would also have a problem with nudity.

The Cure for Nudity is Jesus!

Women who love and respect the Lord won't wear bikinis at the beach, or wear miniskirts, or wear pants, or pose in Playboy. There's not an honest normal man alive who doesn't know what's wrong with women wearing pants—they are extremely revealing of a woman's flesh.

We are living in evil times, when unrepentant sinners are trying to justify every sin imaginable with the Bible. I heard a woman on the news, a professional pornographic model, claim that God approved of her vile career. She said that God created Adam and Eve naked, so nudity must be ok. Evidently she's never read Genesis 3:7 or 1st Timothy 2:9.

Here's a Scripture for all you women who keep trying to justify your nudity and immodest clothing ... “Ye have wearied the LORD with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment?” (Malachi 2:17). Beyonce Knowles claims to be a devout Christian; yet says she has permission from God to wear sexy clothes and strip on stage. She is woefully wrong! Beyonce needs to see Jesus.

God knows what we watch on TV. It's just as bad to watch adultery on TV as it would be for us to be in same room with them. The TV has a desensitizing effect on its viewers. Sin is not shocking anymore but rather becomes commonplace (no big deal). This is why many people have become lackadaisical and acceptant of the wicked sin of homosexuality. The following reads like a synopsis of hellivision and unholy-wood:

Romans 1:28-32 -"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; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"

kennethwilkinson #fundie youtube.com

its funny the way you put it! if you had realy read the story of sodom&gomorrah. two angles came to sodom and lot met them and invited them to his house to stay and eat, b4 they went to bed the dudes from the city came to lots house and told lot to bring them out so they can have sex with them so lot told the men that they can have his 2 virgin daughters so they would noy be gay and sin and back in that time it wasnt rape bcuz the father owned his daughter and they did as theyre told for god

Patrick Scrivener #fundie reformation.org

WELCOME TO THE REFORMATION ONLINE—THE MOST
TIMELY SITE ON THE INTERNET!
O JEHOVAH, our JEHOVAH, how majestic is your name in all the earth (Psalm 8:9).

"And he showed me JOSHUA the high priest standing before the angel of JEHOVAH, and SATAN standing
at his right hand to oppose him. And JEHOVAH said unto Satan, "JEHOVAH rebuke thee, O Satan;
even JEHOVAH that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee" (Zechariah 3:1-2).

Saint Paul said "we (Christians) have a great high priest, JOSHUA the Son of Elohim" (Hebrews 4:14).

THE NAME OF THE JEWISH MESSIAH IN HEBREW IS JOSHUA BEN DAVID,
AND IN ENGLISH JOSHUA THE SON OF DAVID (JOSHUA DAVID).

Joshua the Messiah said: "SEEK and ye shall find; KNOCK, and the DOOR will be opened unto you" (St. Matthew 7:7).

In Holy Scripture, the divine Holy Spirit is symbolized by 7 Eyes, 7 Lamps of Fire, and 7 Horns:

"For behold the STONE that I have laid before JOSHUA: upon the STONE are seven eyes.
Behold, I will engrave its inscription," says JEHOVAH of Hosts, "and I will remove the
iniquity of that land in one day" (Zechariah 3:9, Apocalypse 4:5, 5:6).

Pope Boniface VIII said "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely
necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

The Reformation began on October 31, 1517, when German monk Saint Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the Castle Church door in Wittenberg, Germany. That was one of the greatest events of the past 1000 years. Saint Martin made a translation of the Bible from Greek and Hebrew into German. Soon all the countries of Europe followed his example by translating the Scriptures into their languages. For the first time in history, the recently invented printing press made the Word of JEHOVAH available to all the people.

In 1520, Saint Martin Luther published a book entitled On The Babylonian Captivity of the Church. The end of the Babylonian Captivity of the Jews in 457 BC led to the rebirth of Israel, and started the 490-year countdown to the First Coming of the Messiah. That explosive book sent shockwaves through the underworld, and the fallout soon reached unholy Roman Emperor Charles V. For that reason, he summoned Luther to the Diet of Worms, to publicly disallow the book, and be reconciled to the Church of Roma.

In May 1521, at the Diet of Worms, Luther made his courageous defense of On The Babylonian Captivity of the Church. For that reason, Elector Frederick the Wise feared for the life of the Reformer, and his soldiers "kidnapped" the Saint and hid him away in the Wartburg Castle. While "imprisoned" there, Luther translated the Bible from Hebrew and Greek into German. That is the place where he also threw the inkwell at the Devil.

The Wartburg Castle, in Thuringia, is a sacred site and a place of pilgrimage for all true Christians.

The "big bang" Jesuits would have loved to do a Guy Fawkes on the Castle, but it was shielded by angels, and the surrounding hills.

On the left can be seen Luther's desk, and the spot where he threw the inkwell at the Devil. Over the centuries, souvenir hunters have removed chunks of the wall.

In 1525, Saint Martin took another step which caused consternation at the Vatican—he married his sweetheart—escaped nun Saint Katharine von Bora.

It is a good thing that there was no German Equal Wrongs Amendment in force at that time. Otherwise, the gender roles would have been completely reversed, and there would have been no perfect partnership between the 2 saints....Monks and nuns are the true transgenders because they are obsessed with SEX . . . and yet they are forbidden to marry and have children (I Timothy 4:3).

Marvin #fundie news.yahoo.com

Science claims to have mountains of evidence though it clearly does not. What it has is mountains of manipulated/skewed evidence that is nothing but PURE FRAUD . . .

People believe Science because Science claims to have the answers people want them to have and whenever they make new discoveries and discard their old out-dated claims (errors) as well as any abrasion to their math models that would render their manipulated/skewed evidence it is clearly FRAUD . . .

Every year millions of people in the United States use a TAX PROGRAM to prepare their taxes that are guaranteed to be mathmatically correct, but, are they logically correct?

I have been a "Tax Accountant" for 45 years and "Amend" these "mathmatically correct returns" on almost a daily basis . . . why?

Tax programs need input and they will process whatever is input and the result is a mathmatically perfect tax return . . . this is where the phrase "GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT" comes from . . . if the preparer is furnished with bad or incomplete information (sometimes intentional), and inputs this information then the output is predictable . . . it isn't right, but, it appears right as the math is right . . . EVOLUTION is exactly the same ""GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT" . . .

There is a big difference in the millions of years EVOLUTION REQUIRES and the 6,000 years CREATION tells us . . . EVOLUTION is mathmatically correct because the DATA is SKEWED . . . for every piece of data scientists claims to have there are billions they do not have . . . that is not true in Tax Accounting . . . I forecast the tax impact on an individuals portfolio all the time . . . at the very worse I normally have 50% or more of all the data . . .

. . . if you trust Science you are trusting in a lie, a lie that is intentional . . .

Jon Davis #fundie youtube.com

(=Progressive vs Homophobic Christian=)

Jon Davis: Still missed it!! Jesus addressed this DIRECTLY. Right here!
Matthew 19:4-5
4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’
One only need to reference THE DESIGN to understand THE PERVERSION.

blind poet38: Not necessarily true. Translated into English, the Bible condemns homosexuality. But looking at the original text, the Hebrew word that is used is very vague. And Jesus never said that gay people couldn't get married, but it was just God's design that they don't get married.

Jon Davis: "Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable" is not a word, it is a description to eliminate the confusion.
Jesus didn't need to say that "gay people can't get married", he referenced the design and that settled it. One only need to reference THE DESIGN to understand THE PERVERSION.
Penis is designed for vagina. *blush* Vagina is for penis. *blush* Anus is for pooping. *pffrrt*
It's not homophobia. It's basic biology.

blind poet38: If it is basic biology, how is it that scientists have found over 1500 animal species that practice homosexual acts. You are just assuming homosexuality is a sin. But the Bible really does not say that. And I am a Christian by the way.

Jon Davis: It is basic biology because that is how we procreate, and to do things differently promotes bad health (bleeding butts anyone?) and is not conducive to humankind's continuity.
Animals do all kinds of disgusting things. Dogs eat poop. Cats pee on clothes. Are you just an animal? No. Mankind was made in God's image.
As for everything else you just said ("You are just assuming homosexuality is a sin" etc) you're obviously trolling. I just quoted the text that called it "detestable". And while neither Old nor New Testaments use the term "homosexual" (a term that modern English coined) they both describe the sexual act and describe it with disgust and contempt.

blind poet38: You can think I am trolling if you want to, but you have to understand that the original Hebrew uses terminology that is not as clear-cut as people think it is when it deals with condemning homosexuality.

Jon Davis: Read the OP. Matthew 19:4-5 has no dependency upon Leviticus 18:22; indeed it goes the other way around. You're barking at the wrong argument. I myself was trolled by actually responding to it.

blind poet38: Sorry dude, I don't get your point. All I am saying is that in the original Hebrew, the word that is used is not as clear-cut as people think it is to condemn homosexuality.

Jon Davis: Now you're spamming. Stop repeating yourself. Even if it was true, it's irrelevant, and I already explained why. Now go read Romans 1:18-32 (originated as Greek, not Hebrew), study it with an exhaustive study Bible which provides insight on the original language, and come back when you've studied more than the ridiculous false "truths" and FUD you've found on the Internet.

blind poet38: You can be dismissive all you want, and that is fine. But why is it irrelevant? We are talking about homosexuality and the Bible aren't we?

blind poet38: It is obvious you have no answers to anything. I have already done the research.

AskariStudios: But God Said that all sex outside of Marriage is wrong. Since Marriage is in between only a man and a women. this makes homosexuality wrong. in no way shap or form has marriage ben said to take place between a man and a man or a woman and a woman. ONLY a MAN and a Woman.this has been stated numerous times in the bible. Not only this but in Levitcus, it is clear stated that homosexuality is an abomination. clear cut. in Jude, it its written that Sodom and Gomorrah gave themselves up to sexual perversion (homosexuality) and where thus made an example of. So with Just Common Logic, and the fact that through multiple translations, the same wording has shown up., its clear that the bible is against homosexuality.

blind poet38: The Bible never says that sex outside of marriage is a sin.

Jon Davis: "Fornication" is quite elaborately spoken against. That you would say such a thing speaks volumes about modern society being so casually hedonistic; sex outside of marriage was universally taboo and expected to be everyone's struggle, it didn't need to be spelled out in detail like it spelled out homosexuality, it was simply referred to as "fornication".
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Fornication/
http://www.openbible.info/topics/fornication
http://www.gotquestions.org/sex-before-arriage.html

AskariStudios: 1 Cor 7 states : "Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: t“It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband." Its clear that Paul(I do believe he wrote this) implies that Sex before marriage is sexual immorality and that do to this temptation, a man should marry.
want more proof? look up : (Acts 15:20; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:13, 18; 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 7) and Hebrews 13:4.

blind poet38: The only sexual sins that are mentioned in the Bible are adultery, incest and sex with animals. Fornication means "sexual sin." Which sins? Adultery, incest and sex with animals. Premarital sex is not mentioned as a sin.

Jon Davis: "Fornication" does not mean "sexual sins in general". It means "extramarital sex". If you want to discuss Greek or Hebrew, say so, but you didn't. Look up the word and stop speaking assertions about our English words when you don't even know your own English language.

blind poet38: Fornication does not mean "extramarital sex." That is what someone told you it means. Fornication means "sexual sin." Learn the facts.

Jon Davis: There's a fine line between idiocy and trolling. That line is knowledgable intent. I'm not sure what you're doing in your case. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fornication

blind poet38: OK Jon, you are right. Translated into English, premarital sex is a sin, despite the fact that Solomon and David and Samson, etc etc etc all did it and were never punished for it in the Bible. But the question is in the NT,, what does porneia mean? That is not the Greek word for adultery or any specific sexual sin. It generally means any kind of sexual immorality. And what is sexual immorality in the Bible? Adultery and incest and sex with animals.

Jon Davis: what do you mean "they weren't punished for it"? OT figures who engaged in fornication took a pounding for it. Most of their stories are used as case lessons for the hell people go through when they do it.
To answer your question: Fundamentally, in the Bible there are only two types of sex: sex within marriage (one man and one woman) and sexual immorality, porneia. Read the OP in this thread if you don't understand.

StAliaHarkonnen #sexist reddit.com

self-respecting women would never have sex

Of course women had to evolve to be able to have sex and to get pregnant, so self respect isn't really in their nature. In fact, just read any topic on sex, you'll find most women are masochists who just want to be dominated and treated like sluts. They try to distance themselves from that in real life by calling it kinks and then pretending kinks should never be judged, but kinks don't exist in vacuum. in fact they speak volumes about a person's character, and in this case, character of a whole gender.

Just the nature of sex is such that female body gets penetrated and no matter how much women like to pretend that they need and love sex just as much as men do, it is blatantly obvious that this isn't the case.

There seem to be two types of women out there, women who really hate sex but will do it for a bit for their social status, try to get the best genetic material available to procreate, and then usually stop with sex unless they need a new provider. Many married men complain about this type it is practically a cliche. Instead of just refusing to have sex at all, these women fake it and degrade themselves only for practical reasons and then men wonder why they treat sex as currency. They do it because they know they are whoring themselves out when they do it, but they don't have enough self respect and independence to risk losing power it gives them over men. They are also often very stupid thinking they'll be very careful with whom they get fucked by and only have sex with Chad, and he will be eternally grateful for this precious and intimate "gift". Then after getting used over and over again they bitterly settle for a beta provider, reproduce, and stop. they often cheat to ensure the right genetic material and they can excuse it cause they hate their beta providers anyway for being the best they could get and still so shit, and for having that level male sexually degrade them (aka have sex with them). Betas are happy for a bit and then spend the rest of their lives between couple's therapy and porn at rare moments when they get some free time between providing and offspring. These women are spineless used goods who shouldn't get anything but ridicule.

The second group are women who genuinely love getting fucked, and to get there they fully embraced their masochism and decided to call it feminist and empowering, which is of course the complete opposite. Naturally, they need a Chad for it to really work because they need to feel completely dominated - whether it's by male body or his overall status, they always need to be the inferior ones - that way they are in touch with their true nature and they enjoy it. They let themselves have all kinds of shit done to their bodies and shoved in their holes,take videos and photos of it, allow other women to join in and get cucked, etc telling themselves they are being adventurous and progressive while men laugh and ask for more. They need a way to compensate for that or else they would suffer from some type of mental breakdown, so everyone who fucks them learned to act like they are the shit and keep their egos as high as possible when not fucking. This type be even more generous with their beta orbiters and normies will sometimes be fuck buddies between Chads, as it gives their egos more boost to additionally compensate the fact that they are everyone's cum box. They feel very superior to the first group of wannabe females cause they think they really are what men want, they aren't faking it. but then there is so many of them and after a polyamorous decade or so and getting the idea that they are actually just being used and ridiculed, the whole "I'm into it too" shit starts to slowly fade away. Then they wonder how they ended up in abusive relationships, or how they always get cheated on despite being so cool about it, once hotter younger models replace them for good. Now they are Chad's ex wife/gf, perhaps with kids and shittier body. Then it's the same beta provider route for them and "past is past". Those videos shouldn't make him insecure just because after 10 years she discovered she is no longer into anal and bisexuality.

Every woman who has sex knows she is degrading herself and allowing herself to be dominated. That is why the topic of sex and "objectification" is such a sensitive one. Look at a man sexually, it's a simple compliment, there's nothing to it let alone an ego offense. Women however always experience this mix of things ranging between ego trips to wondering if their whole essence is being mentally violated. Because they know that their role in the fantasy and actual act of sex is pretty embarrassing.

To be sexy, women act absolutely ridiculous. Wear shoes they can't walk in well, paint their whole faces, spend hours working on their hair, strike ridiculous unnatural poses for hot photos... a man who acts that way doesn't just look ridiculous because of social norms but because it is ridiculous and you see it in a context you didn't get fully immune to. From looking at women acting sexy to watching how women act while having sex, they just seem so affected and fake. Mo matter how much everyone tells them it really is so empowering, and no matter how many times they say to to themselves, on some level everyone knows this is the truth that can remain ignored as long as no one acknowledges it out loud.

That's why women put so much effort into attacking everyone and everything who doesn't sugarcoat their sexual reality, but don't have the spine to have personal dignity and not act like sluts since it could cost them some social attention. Rather than doing something different they focus on forcing people not to call it what it is.

Rad fems are right, they should never let anyone fuck them at all. I could even respect that. It's their only way out of being Chad's bitch, as that is the only thing sexually active women can strive for due to the nature of the act - it always makes them someone's bitch so everything below Chad just isn't going to feed their rationalizations long enough for them to keep on doing it before they start to get sick of it. For women, sex always has a price. Betas should know, most of their energy has to go into paying for it.

Only women who reject sex completely are truly dignified. Of course they get hated on as well, even here. But it's maybe the only chance they have in being people, one thing they always (rightfully) fear their sexuality is taking away from them. Except instead of addressing the cause they try to hide the effect.

A4C #fundie christianforums.com

you could climb up the mountain , look at the evidence of where the rock came from and therefore conclude that intelligence was involved in getting it from where it was to where it went. It would be foolish to assume that because the rock had been there for 4.5 billion years it had been evolving itself into a rolling version and had decided to make the journey on its own

Dust #fundie iidb.org

You atheist types are such hypocrites. Anytime a theists says something they believe, atheist say, 'but it doesn’t say that'. But when they pull some cockeyed crap out of their hat to ask a question as absurd as 'was Jesus gay?' they want to twist stuff every which way they can. And even still you have others thinking he was married. 'But…but…his mom told him they were out of wine at a wedding. It had to be his wedding.' 'Well…well…he was Jewish, and most Jewish are married.' 'But, Mary Magdelen hung around him a lot. She must have been his girl.' Puullleeeassee. I swear, you atheists will do anything to pervert the truth. And you wonder why you are despised by most of society.

Chris Aldridge #magick caldridge.net

In The Presence of the Gods: The Night That Changed Our Lives Forever

This is an experience I do not normally talk about, because I don't want to come off as a bragger. I always say that you can tell the difference between people who have had legitimate spiritual experience and those who haven't, because those who have will not brag, or try to use it to score religious, social or financial points. Those of us who have had real experiences in these realms, don't go around blowing our own trumpets. The only time I tell this story is when it is necessary to describe why my wife and I became worshipers of the Greek Gods. It's not something someone will usually find me discussing or trying to spread around on a consistent basis, because I don't feel the need to be personally validated or convinced of my experience, nor do I care if others believe me or not. In fact, the only reason I am telling it now on my blog and website here is because I feel I should make a reasonable post about it for my readers. They read my life story in my autobiography, but it doesn't describe this massive change, so I am going to tell one of the greatest stories of my personal life.

The Greek Gods are not merely myths as many consider them to be. They were real before and during ancient times, and they remain real in our own time, immortal and deathless, and the rulers of heaven, Earth, and the worlds and realms beyond those. Nothing escapes their authority or their blessings, for it is theirs, and always has been and will be.

The event took place shortly after my wife and I, my fiancee at the time, moved into our first apartment together in North Carolina in the summer of 2009. At that time, she was a Wiccan of ten years and leaned more toward a Norse Pagan persuasion, but she also knew of the Greek Gods and considered herself to have a relationship with Athene. I considered myself to be a "Christian Wiccan," or more accurately, a "Christian Witch." Even though I knew of the Greek Gods as the only alternative religion I had heard of through my years in school, I retained the Christian belief system I had been exposed to all my life and combined it with the emerging practices of magick and witchcraft that I so dearly loved.

Because we had just moved in together and completely left our old lives, we had little money. I was unemployed and my wife only had a part time retail job. So we had to go to thrift stores to get the things we needed for our apartment, which there's no shame in at all. Many times, thrift stores can have very nice things. Although this particular thrift, which shall remain nameless, was unlike any I had ever entered. When you walked in, you could sense that there was just something very, very negative, even perhaps evil, about the place. It just was not a pleasant feeling at all, but rather a feeling of extreme uneasiness. It's not unreasonable to think that such places could possess negative influences, energies or beings because you never know where the items therein originated. They could have been involved in violence and other bad things, or could be the property of a deceased who is very angry that their stuff is being sold. There are several problems that could come with random belongings of others that have been taken or discarded. Nevertheless, we really didn't give it much thought at the time. We just wanted to get a table and chairs for our kitchen, and after a short time, we found a set and went on our way back home.

On into that evening was when things turned weird and terrifying for us. A presence began to manifest in our home which can only be described as a serious and aggressive haunting. Some kind of spirit or negative influence had entered our home, probably having followed or latched onto us from the item we came into contact with and then attacked when we took it to our home. Whatever this thing really was, it made itself known by slamming doors and filling us with fear, saying that it was not going to leave until death was brought on us. Not only could we feel and hear its hostility, we could hear its voice and it talked to us as plain as any person would.

Me being highly Christian, I began an exorcism, calling on Jesus and also Saint Michael, the biggest enemy of Satan, to kick the spirit out. However, not a single prayer of mine worked. In fact, the situation became more and more desperate with each passing minute because the creature grew more and more powerful, or so it seemed. One thing is certain, it laughed at me in everything I did and every prayer I prayed.

My wife told me that she could tell that the spirit feared the old Gods, and how she knew that I did not know. Perhaps she was closer to the Greek Gods than I was at the time. But at this point, I was willing to try something different because nothing I was doing was working. So I decided to turn my prayers to the Greek Gods, particularly to Athene and Apollon. Athene is the great warrior Goddess and defender and Apollon is the God of Light who averts evil and purifies ill. So I prayed to them, my wife joining me, simply asking for them to please help us. After what seemed like a few seconds of praying to these Greek Gods, my wife described an image of a lady with a spear and a male of light appearing and confronting the spirit. To quote her exactly, "Athene grabbed him by his tail," and stabbed him, then Apollon's light filled the area and cleansed away all the impurities. Then, almost as fast as it had begun, the time of terror came to an end.

Needless to say, my wife and I cuddled closely in the bed for the rest of the night, sometimes fearing the spirit might return, but it never did. It was gone, and so was our former religions. The next day, without even verbally confirming it to ourselves, we became ancient Greek. It was a given after our experience, especially with me, because the god I had spent years serving and defending never showed up, while the Gods I had given nothing to, gladly extended their hands in help in our time of desperate need.

I knew that each time I would tell this story, there would be Christians who would not only tell me I wasn't a real Christian, but that what really happened was not that the Greek Gods came and rescued us, but that it was actually Satan tricking us, that he was the one who removed the demon of his to trick us. The theory of this ultimate conman is reverted to sometimes more than the name of his counterparts. But what I found to be interesting about this claim was the fact that Jesus said the exact opposite in the bible, because Jesus plainly stated that Satan cannot cast out Satan, because it would divide his kingdom (Mark 3:22-27). By the words of their very own religious and spiritual icon, no, it wasn't a trick by this alleged Satan, because Satan would not drive out his own presence. The simplest answer is probably the right one, that the Greek Gods are real, they are authorities of goodness, and they came to restore goodness and order once more as they have done for so many years in Greek religious belief.

In the Goodness of the Dodekatheon,
Chris.

Jesus is the Light #fundie jesusisthelight.net

WHY SATAN LOVES IT WHEN YOU DRINK AND GET HIGH

Maybe you never thought of this, but you should know that drug use opens you up to spiritual attack. Some Indians used to use peyote and other "natural" substances to get high so that they could speak to their spiritual guides. I can tell you right now that those "guides" weren't angels of God; they were Satan's devils. Satan will use drugs and alcohol to get a stronghold in your life. He loves it when you drink and get high. Satan wants you to be off guard and hallucinating. There are specific demonic spirits associated with liquor and marijuana and cocaine and heroin, and opium, etc., and every time you use these substances, you could unknowingly be opening the doorway for these demonic spirits to come into your life.

Ephesians 6:12 warns us of such things: "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." Satan loves it when you drink alcohol and use drugs because you are then in no shape to fight against his attacks. You are leaving yourself wide open to demonic possession.

And satan loves it when you drink alcohol and use drugs because he knows that with your inhibitions lowered and your judgment gone, you will sin and get into things that you would have avoided had you not been intoxicated. How many people have been killed because of drunk drivers? How many babies have been aborted because two drunken strangers had sex that they later regretted? How many men and women have committed crimes against their neighbors and friends because they had to get some money for a quick fix?

God's Word warns against these things. Romans 13:12-14, "The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light. Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying: but put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof."

Proverbs 23:31-32 "Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright. At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder."

Isaiah 28:7, "But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink. They are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment."

Does satan love the way you drink and get high? Are you living sober? Are you on guard? Remember Ephesians 6:11 instructs you to "Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil." So if you are struggling with sin in different areas of your life, ask yourself, "Am I leaving the door wide open for satan by the things I involve myself with?" And ask yourself, "Do I treat my body like the temple of the Holy Spirit or more like a temple of devils?"

Maybe you need to change your ways and follow the advice found here: 1 Peter 4:7, "But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer."

June Griffin #fundie patheos.com

Terror for Jesus: A gun-toting, evolution-denying, Bible-thumping, Christian extremist is threatening atheists in Tennessee.

Long time Christian activist Pastor June Griffin of the American Bible Protestant Church is making “subtle and not-so-subtle threats” against atheists and other freethinkers behind a new statue of legendary lawyer and rationalist Clarence Darrow.

The statue is set to be dedicated on Friday, July 14, in front of the site of the historic Scopes evolution trial: the Rhea County Courthouse in Dayton, Tennessee.

Declaring that “an atheist is not on an equal footing with the Christian,” Griffin told WRCB that she is not happy with new statue, and suggested that she and others would take the law into their own hands if the statue goes up as planned.

During the interview Griffin said:

"All history proves the existence of God and Evolution is a joke for any thinking person. This is a very serious matter, the courthouse is a sacred place, you don’t turn it into a theater.

Well I know God is real and he’s not pleased with this. You can come in here with all kinds of French opinions of this, that and the other but this is not France and we don’t run on opinions and an atheist is not on an equal footing with the Christian.

You (commissioners) have betrayed the people of this county, you have betrayed them. There are people that live on the outskirts and they don’t make appointments with Channel 3, they just do things and I’ve heard talk of ‘well there’s always spray paint.’"

Griffin is vehement in her opposition to the Darrow statue. In addition to her interview with WRCB, Griffin also made some outrageous and concerning social media posts. On her Facebook page Griffins uses Psalm 149 to threaten atheists and other freethinkers: writing:

"(The non-prophet American humanist association and the non-prophet freedom from religion outfits think they are going to waltz into Rhea County and have all the Christians smile and love them. Here’s news for you: Christians don’t cowtow to the enemies of God. The God of David, Oliver Cromwell, George Washington and Wm. Gannaway Brownlow lives. You will get a nice surprise when you dare to step on sacred grounds of OUR Courthouse. You might bully your way around with our County’s advisor (we have no County Attorney),the historical society, the DA, and the Commission who are afraid of you, but I am not afraid of you. You are worse than devils; the 'devils fear and tremble,' but you have no fear of God. You come with your high-minded corruption and your boasted freedom but you will be brought to nothing when we get through with you. You come to us in the name of theatrical equality lawyers, but we come to you in the Name of the LORD OF HOSTS. The County property owners control this House – not you.Our God will bring upon your worst fear. This is not a threat – it is a Promise. Psalm 149. from a Christian saint. June Griffin. For God and Country.)"

Note: Psalm 149 is in part a call for the faithful to destroy the enemies of the Lord –

"May the praise of God be in their mouths
and a double-edged sword in their hands,
to inflict vengeance on the nations
and punishment on the peoples,
to bind their kings with fetters,
their nobles with shackles of iron,
to carry out the sentence written against them—
this is the glory of all his faithful people.
Praise the Lord."

In addition to the above post, Griffin made other statements on her Facebook page suggesting violence was a legitimate option in her opposition to the statue that is being promoted by atheists and other freethinkers.

Also, Griffin told a local paper that she wanted to meet the sponsors of the statue without lawyers, suggesting a violent confrontation may be necessary if the atheists and freethinkers did not see the light. The following is an excerpt from the exchange:

"'No lawyers,' she said, 'only personal confrontation. Engage them in the debate right there.'

If not that, she said, the humanists should have to defend themselves in court, without lawyers, who she says feed on taxpayer money and have no concern for people’s rights.

And barring that, Griffin suggests the association form its own militia.

'If worst comes to worst, I will challenge them to meet us in their uniforms at King’s Mountain, just like John Sevier did, and we’ll settle it over there,' Griffin said.

During the American Revolutionary War, Sevier led patriots to battle against loyalist militias in South Carolina."

Writing for Friendly Atheist, Hemant Mehta spoke with Griffin about her subtle and not so subtle threats. However, despite being pressed, Griffin refused to say whether or not she would engage in violence to protest the Clarence Darrow statue.

Peter Vajda #fundie creation.com

Peter Vajda, Ph.D. is a research scientist with the Division of Geophysics at the Earth Science Institute, at the Slovak Academy of Sciences in Bratislava, Slovakia. He studied geophysics at the Comenius University, Bratislava, specializing in paleomagnetism, and obtained his doctorate at University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, Canada, researching the earth’s gravity.

These days, people think scientists do not believe in God or the Bible, but Peter is one of many researchers who shatter those ideas. He is a successful scientist who believes the Bible completely.

Dr Vajda (a Hungarian name pronounced VIE-da) is the internationally acclaimed head of the Department of Gravimetry and Geodynamics at the Earth Science Institute. With more than 60 papers to his name, he has presented at conferences all over the world including in South Africa, Canada, Fiji, USA (including Hawaii), and in several European countries.

His research interest is primarily geophysics, with a focus on the earth’s gravitational field, its observation and interpretation. One important application of his research is studying magma deep inside volcanoes by carefully measuring the strength of the gravity in the surrounding area. It helps scientists understand how dormant volcanoes re-awaken, and the threat of impending eruptions. This helps keep people safe from volcanic explosions.

Peter grew up in Slovakia (formerly part of Czechoslovakia) in an orderly, happy home. His father lectured in physics at the university, and his mother taught at college. Peter recalls that his parents loved him, and the family enjoyed outdoor activities together, including hiking, swimming, skiing, snowboarding, and mountain climbing.

It was his passion for the outdoor life and the beauty of nature that prompted Peter to study mathematics and physics. “My idea was that I would do lots of field work and expeditions.” Peter recalls, “I was a satisfied atheist. I firmly believed that the world and life came into existence through evolution, although I knew nothing about it. And I thought of myself as a good person who never hurt anyone.”

Things started changing during his time in Canada. A friend introduced him to the Bible, which he began reading in the evenings. Within a few days he was ‘hooked’. As he read, he realized he was selfish, used people, and hurt them. That made him think there was something wrong with his heart, which started him reflecting on life.

“I began reading the Bible in Genesis,” Peter explained, “and the amazing thing is that, although I was an atheist and evolutionist, I did not dismiss it. As I read, the truth came through that the heart of man is corrupted. This matched my own experience. It left me wondering, ‘Why didn’t my parents tell me this? Why didn’t they teach me this at school’?”

When he read about animal sacrifices in the Old Testament, he felt he needed to get a flawless lamb to sacrifice somewhere to make him clean. “Eventually I reached the New Testament and discovered the solution—Jesus Christ died on the Cross 2,000 years ago as my sacrifice.”

Peter explained, “I knew the Bible was right about the corruption of man’s heart so I concluded it would be right about the cure.” Eventually, he got on his knees and asked God to save him. Peter recalls, “And God did. With time, I realized there were new things at work in me. I had new values in life. I had new desires. I discovered that God is alive and personal.”

Surprisingly, Peter’s evolutionary beliefs were no obstacle to him reading the Bible. At that time, the origin and history of universe were not at the forefront of his thinking. Rather, he was consumed by the issue of righteousness and justification. Evolution did pop up about two years afterwards. The context concerned the origin of death. According to evolution, death is a natural part of life on Earth, and has been around for hundreds of millions of years. But, according to the Bible, there was no death originally. It came into the world through the disobedience of the first two people, Adam and Eve.

Peter explains, “Then and there it hit me. I realized it was either/or. I immediately accepted the biblical account for the origin of death, based purely on the authority of the Word of God. For me the Bible stands infinitely higher than human speculation. My attitude was that the ultimate truth is the Word of God. He has all wisdom; He was the only ‘eye witness’ of the history; He reveals the truth to us.”

That decision began a quest to understand where and how the evolutionary explanation was wrong. “I was especially motivated because I work professionally in research in academia, and the majority of the people I knew considered it fact. I wanted to know every possible detail about the errors with evolutionary thinking.”

He was uneasy about the way researchers said so many things with such certainty about what the earth was like ‘millions of years ago’. In this regard, Peter remembered his research work for his Master’s degree1 in Bratislava. He was studying paleomagnetism, the past magnetism of the earth, allegedly reaching back over millions of years. He recalls how, even as an atheist, he was deeply concerned about all the unknowns in trying to recover information about the deep past. He was uneasy about the way researchers said so many things with such certainty about what the earth was like ‘millions of years ago’. He recalls thinking, “How can we know? How can we be certain?”

Peter quipped, “I eventually escaped from paleomagnetism to work in physical geodesy and geophysics, specifically gravimetry. I was very happy. Now I could research things that were verifiable by empirical science based on facts—on actual observations.”

The past is in accessible to empirical science. Observations can only be made in the present. The rest is reconstruction, in which beliefs play a pivotal role. Recalling this confirmed for Peter that we cannot discover the origin and history of the earth using ‘science’. “The past is inaccessible to empirical science. Observations can only be made in the present. The rest is reconstruction, in which beliefs play a pivotal role.”

He said, “God had already explained this in Job 38:4, that the only genuine knowledge about origins is His Word. He was there, and He has revealed this knowledge to us. Not only does He know the history of the earth because He witnessed it; He actually did it—Himself.”

One topic Peter initially found tricky to resolve was radioactive dating and the age of the earth. This, too, became clear when he recognized the difference between empirical knowledge and speculation. “The empirical knowledge, what is actually measured, is the ratio of isotopes. The age is a questionable interpretation based on untestable assumptions. Further, the value actually selected is chosen to match their naturalistic philosophy. Although they don’t want to say it, the ages they quote are taken on faith.”

In his quest on evolution he was greatly helped by the abundant creationist literature that addresses these ‘scientific’ issues. “I was thrilled as I discovered that when we begin with biblical assumptions the outcomes beautifully harmonize with the true history of the world.”

Peter thinks that laypeople would benefit from understanding “the spatial (3D) inverse problem in earth sciences”. This refers to the problem of reconstructing the three dimensional (3D) structure and properties of the interior of the earth using just two dimensional (2D) observations from the earth’s surface.

Peter explained that it is not possible to reach a unique solution because many different 3D models can equally well fit the 2D surface data. “Consider how much more uncertainty we face when we add the time dimension and try to reconstruct the deep past of Earth’s history—essentially a 4D problem. The uncertainty and ambiguity is greater by more than one order of magnitude,” Peter said. “This intrinsic uncertainty means that the materialistic, atheistic evolutionary claims on origins and history are ultimately religion, and their acceptance a matter of belief.”

On the positive side, Peter refers to many scientific evidences that give insights into and confidence in the Bible. In geology these include the abundance and preservation of fossils, the horizontal and vertical extent of sedimentary layers, their deformation, and the interfaces between them. Even more compelling are the evidences from biology: the impossibility of chemical evolution, the insurmountable problems with biological evolution, and the overwhelming evidence of design.

Peter said, “I find the origin and history of the cosmos and life to be the most interesting and ultimate of questions in the human quest for knowledge. And I am convinced that the Bible reveals the true history of the universe, and can be depended upon absolutely.”

Stephen Green #fundie christianvoice.org.uk

So these are the only two examples you can find of Christian ‘extremism’. But the Westboro Baptist People are not bombing public transport or murdering infidels. Witchcraft is a big problem in Africa. And so is the corruption of young people by western sex tourists.

It is pandering to the evil of sodomy which results and will result in misery. Opposing it and delivering people from same-sex attraction is a good thing.

The only ‘hilarious’ thing about our post on Michael Gove forbidding teaching of Creation or Intelligent Design was how all the evolutionists promised ‘mountains of evidence’ for evolution and when pressed, didn’t have any at all.

Atheism is even more superstitious than the worst non-Christian religious belief. Despite the evidence, atheists retain a blind faith in the goodness of man. Atheists also put themselves above other human beings as a supposedly more ‘highly-evolved’ or more intelligent class of people, who alone have the right to boss the rest of us around.

As for you, yes, you are a sinner in need of repentance and a new life in Jesus Christ. But you clearly believe in the power of prayer. That’s a start.

Will Hoyt #fundie learnthebible.org

Nature NEVER forms spiritous liquors. The fruit (grape) may rot and turn sour but it takes ART to convert juice to alcohol. The indispensable conditions for vinous fermentation are exact proportions of sugar, yeast or gluten and water with air temperature between 50 and 75 degrees. Chemical science forbids vinous fermentation when heat exceeds 75 degrees and assures the acetous (vinegar). Since the Middle East is well above that even at night most of the year, something had to be done to preserve the juice (wine) for the year, or else it would all turn to vinegar! To assume it was all turned to alcoholic wine is a ridiculous assertion and flies in the face of historical fact. Josephus, famous Jewish historian declares that he has seen provisions at the Jewish fortress Massada including grapes and fruits, kept fresh to last for 100 years!!!! Pliny the Roman historian confirms this. Don't let anyone tell you that grapes have to be kept by making alcoholic wine so they can last the year!!

So we see that the portrayal that grape juice was only preserved by fermentation is utterly false. Unfermented wine was the most common wine in biblical times. It was not what we know as wine today which is always alcoholic. You cannot defend wine drinking today on the basis of biblical times because the two are totally different.
Argument from the Passover

Some will still say that Jesus Christ indeed drank alcoholic wine and we know this by the passover (which was the last supper - Mark 14:14-17
). There is a difference of seven months grapes between the harvest and passover. They will say “they didn't have refrigerators, so to keep the grapes from souring, they were fermented”. As we have shown above, the seven month time span would not have been a problem due to the multitude of frequently used preservation methods, all of which easier than fermentation, available to the people at that time.

Jephunneh #fundie christianforums.com

Here is one reason why the Authorized Version of the Holy Bible is superior to any Greek text, or any Greek manuscripts: And that is because it is in the universal language of the end time.Greek, as a language, is deader than last year's bird nest. It constitutes less than one percent of the world's spoken languages, and there is no demand for it anywhere on earth, except in Greece, and in the back rooms of dead, orthodox, conservative, Bible critics.

brianb. #fundie blogger.com

I handed one of Living Waters (Million Dollar) gospel tracts to a drive threw worker the other day while picking up some food for my family. When I pulled up to the window I decided to give her the gospel tract first before giving her my real money. Well she took the tract and before I could get a word out shut the window. She just looked with amazement at the tract for about 10 seconds then she called one of her friends over to check it out. Now I know I should have knocked on the window to let her know it’s not real, but I just had to see how far this would go. The drive threw girl and her friend looked very carefully at the tract and then took out one of those money markers, you know which kind I’m talking about the kind to tell if it’s counterfeit or not. She then walked off which was an attempt to find the manager. I thought to myself, oh no they are going to call the law on me – well if they do I guess I will just have to witness to the authorities.

A minute later the manager came back and opened the window in which she began to tell me, “Uhmm sir, this is not real money and we cannot accept this” which I responded, “Yes I know it’s not real, they do not even make a million dollar bill.”

The manager tried to hand it back, but I told her it was for the girl that was waiting on me. I gave her my real money and we both had a good chuckle. When the drive threw girl handed me my food she was obviously embarrassed. I told her no worries and that she did a wonderful job and gave her a four million dollar tip.

metro #fundie abovetopsecret.com

which was when I was a child and was told by my mother that everyone must face satan/demons by themselves to overcome it.
Well it had happened to me at a very young age. I started noticing peculiar things happen to me that started out small and ended rather big. The first of such was the missing lego piece. I was playing with my lego and misplaced a rather large pre-assembled piece to go with a spaceship. Looked everywhere. Could not find it. I had my own room dedicated to lego and I flipped it upside down looking for it. Must have been for a week I lost it. Then a friend came over to see my lego set and I told him I was missing a piece to complete my ship, and he randomly picks up a piece and asks if this was the one - which it was. I was shocked that it was there in plain view. It was then I started suspecting something.

Few months later I would hear fast footsteps outside my door. I would run to my parents room and would be tripped by a soft invisible object.
Things would escalate when a ouija board mysteriously appeared in my room. I threw it away but it would always come back. Had to burn the thing. Boy did it make some weird noises.
Then the big finale came when I woke up in the middle of the night and the whole room was red, with bodies hanging upside down from the room. And cloaked figures chanting strange things. I gathered my courage, sat up and yelled "SHUT UP!" and laid back down. Immediately they disappeared. I knew it wasn't sleep paralysis because duh I could move and talk. Everything went smooth for a few years after that, but then I found the internet in '97 and loved chatrooms. Being bored in a chatroom one day, I decided to join channel satan. This is pretty scary for me to write, but I'll go on.
No one was in it was a user channel. Was about to leave when, all in about half a second maybe less this happened.

[satan has joined channel satan]
satan rolls on the floor laughing
satan rolls on the floor laughing
satan rolls on the floor laughing
[satan has left channel satan]

ever since then I have had no doubt in my mind that there is evil everywhere and that demons now roam the earth.

David J. Stewart #fundie soulwinning.info

One of the greatest forms of injustice is to outcast someone from a church and then abandon that person, which was done to me. I know exactly how Rudolph The Red-nosed Reindeer felt, being outcast and banned by the Bob Jones University crowd on Guam for my King James Bible only position. Instead of having a bright red nose like Rudolph, I simply told the truth and was outcast as a rodent. God will plead my cause and judge between me and them! I told the truth. I am right about the modern Bible versions being of the Devil. Sadly, most Baptist pastors are so wicked today that they couldn't care less about the purity of God's Word, they merely want their next paycheck; and if they do take any type of cowardly stand, it is so vague and frail that they dare not speak a negative word against Bob Jones University, because they fear persecution from peers. I'd fire them all if I had my way! I pray to God that the only reward they ever receive is their earthly salary, which is what they live for (mammon).

Jeremiah 23:1-2, “Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD. Therefore thus saith the LORD God of Israel against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the LORD.”

Jeremiah 3:15, “And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding.” ... Jeremiah 10:21, “For the pastors are become brutish, and have not sought the LORD: therefore they shall not prosper, and all their flocks shall be scattered.”

No church pastor has truly sought the Lord, who promotes corrupt Bible versions based upon the 1881 Greek work of apostates' Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort; the SAME Greek that the satanic Jehovah's Witnesses' New World Translation (NWT) is based upon!!! Doesn't anyone think it more than a coincidence that the Jehovah's Witness' religious cult, that denies Jesus' deity, would adopt the Alexandrian manuscripts, which are also notorious for attacking Christ's deity? If I have one big fault, it is that I CARE TOO MUCH!!! If that is a fault, I am glad to have it!!! I know God is proud of me for caring about little things, the details. The God of the inspired King James Bible knows how many hairs are on our head (Matthew 10:30). That same wonderful God never forgets one bird that perishes (Luke 12:6). That same wonderful God knows when I lay down and when I get up (Psalms 139:1-6). The animals of the earth seek their food from their Creator (Psalms 104:21). Do you honestly think that same omnipotent God doesn't notice or care that EVERY modern Bible has removed His solemn promise in Psalms 12:6-7 to preserve His PURE WORDS unto every generation? Why do the Alexandrian manuscripts remove God's promise? The answer is obvious, so that Satan can cause men to doubt God's Word.

Higgscel & Various TERFs #sexist #transphobia incels.co

[LifeFuel] You made your bed, now sleep in it bitch.

Over.

I feel like the fight is over. Women have lost.

This morning I learned USA Swimming decided to follow IOC transgender policies for their junior divisions, Scottish government declaring men with penises in women's private areas are no different than women with different bodies like those who had mastectomy, and saw multiple threads of universities low-key changing all single-sex bathrooms into gender neutral bathrooms.

When Trump won the White House, the TV adaptation of The Handmaid's Tale was at its height of popularity. A girl friend of mine in Scotland was telling me that our western democratic societies can turn like this overnight. I didn't really agree with her at the time. Trump in the White House was alarming, but I also thought it was liberal fearmongering to think our entire social structure can be torn away and all of women's rights being taken away just like that. Surely this couldn't happen, right? Our systems are well-entrenched and women would rise up and raise hell if something like this ever happen.

3 years later and here we are. The only crazy thing is that it's not the radical conservative right that is bringing forth this dystopian world for women. It's the Woke Left--the very people who fearmongered women about how bad Trump and the Republicans would be for women. What a fking bait and switch! Here we are, I'm watching, flabbergasted, how women's rights are being taken away overnight just like that. Yes indeed, they can just do it. (For the record, this is not a pro-Trump post. But I can't hold it back anymore how utterly beyond shock I am that this vengeance against women is coming from the left. I'm at the point where I feel like the conservative right is actually benign, that's how shell-shocked I am.)

And not only are women not rising up and raising hell. Tons of them--all of them on Wokes--are now fking Serena Joy and Aunt Lydia, crucifying other women for mortal offenses like "misgendering" and gaslighting other women to strip them of their basic instinct to believe their guts when they're feeling vulnerable.

I feel so oppressed and helpless right now. It doesn't matter how loud we all scream to be heard. The powers that be really can just overnight take it all away. This is not a drill.

And they'll continue to oppress us, while scaring us with the same old rhetorics about how our right to choice will be taken away to threaten us to fold to their side. As long as we are blinded to keep our eyes only on the fight against the conservative right to think that's the only threat to us, women won't see what they're doing. Women won't see what's coming. And the younger generations of women will simply be groomed and conditioned to the New World Order.

I literally feel sick. I want off this train.

ETA: changed "single bathroom" to "single-sex bathrooms." And thanks for the silver.

And over.

Men wanting to be seen as cute young girls is infuriating

Signed, a 4"11 woman, hovering around 90lbs, who will never walk into a room and be respected. I'm in my mid-twenties, multiple times a day I get told I look like a child. I'm fetishized constantly, get dirty looks and disgusting comments whenever I'm out with my child, can't go to work without being asked if I'm old enough to serve alcohol. When I ask not to be called cute, or picked up and prodded, I'm told it's a fucking compliment. It's very depressing feeling like I won't be seen as a woman until I'm middle-aged.

At first, I really tried to understand the trans community. I don't feel comfortable in my body either, and in my head I'm 6 feet tall and built like a tank, but seeing grown ass men "child play" is the most disgusting and offensive thing I've ever had the displeasure of discovering.

And over again.

Painting your face and/or nails doesn't change your gender! Makeup is not a gender!

This won't be my most eloquent post here but I'm at my wits' end.

Sorry, I just feel like screaming right now. I work in a job where I could be fired for expressing even the slightest hint that I might be gender critical and it's non-binary day or some other nonsense. I keep seeing all these posters with bearded dudes in neon eyeshadow or young women with short hair and glitter and I just want to scream! Makeup! Isn't! A! Gender!

Where will this regressive nonsense end? I already had to back away from a friendship with a dude who came out as a they/them and immediately started spouting off on how cis women are oppressing him because he sometimes gets questioned by his parents about wearing eyeliner and someone hesitated before holding the door to the women's toilet open for him. A grown man!

I honestly think the nonbinary bullshit is more harmful and regressive than the trans stuff. I could sympathise with trans medicalists to a degree. This just reeks of "not like the other girls" and "I need some oppression points."

I work with people in poverty. I work with people with learning disorders and disabilities who've had their utilities cut off. I help recovering addicts go about getting enough food to live. I see young mums who were forced away from abortions by restrictive communities now struggling with actual starvation and violence at home. I help abused women find a shelter for their pets so their partners can't murder the animal when she tries to escape.

I see actual oppression every damn day. I've been on the breadline. I'm disabled. I know oppression.

You painting your nails and getting "Sir"-ed at the local grocery store isn't oppression. Grow up!

These women will complain about trannies. And no, not cherry picking, these posts are all "top" in their subreddit, in the last week.
Despite probably the same women who pushed for these tranny degeneracy and sexual openness, thanks to their PC nature.
Women invading male spaces? Empowering. Men in skirts invading your bathroom? In my opinion, "Deserving". Get ready for the 2020 Olympics ladies, men in skirts are after your world records.

Anywhoo, doesn't it feel good that both enemies are starting to have a go at one another? Get fucked both of you.