http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
I am leaving blogger, not the blog idea. I have been toying with the idea of going over to tumblr for some time now, and have finally done so. My reasons:
1.)Although blogger is a professional blog site, it is incredibly clunky when compared to tumblr.
2.)Tumblr is more twitter-esque and anything that is similar to twitter is good because of twitter's fame. Thus, more people are willing to be signed up at tumblr than blogger and thus more inherit viewers to my blog. And you want views for your blogs, right?
3.)Already kind of said this, but the flow on tumblr's site is just so much easier and smoother. Plus, it is aesthetically pleasing.
I am still learning the ins-and-outs of tumblr, so everything might not be working as it should. Oh, and the URL:
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
http://christianfaithapologetics.tumblr.com/
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Vestigial Organs--Is there such a thing?
To start, the idea of a vestigial organ is an evolutionary term, or I should say, the result of evolutionary thinking. Basically a vestigial organ is any organ that does not seem to have apparent function, but still remains in the body. I should also mention that I am referring to humans specifically. Some examples of vestigial organs are the appendix, coccyx (tail-bone) and tonsils. Through time and progression of science, however, these organs were found to be useful, and not a vestigial organ. Through time, every organ that evolutionists consider "vestigial" will be found to have a function. Just like a cell was originally thought to just be a blob (more or less), we now know has absolutely incredible complexity.
So, what am I getting at? It is the year 2010, and people still think there are body parts in the human body that have no function, yet the people of about 100 A.D. knew that every body part had it's place.
In this passage, Paul is talking about the gifts the spirit bestows on each believer and how every believer is vital to the church no matter how small of a spiritual gift they have. The analogy works beautifully for vestigial organs. Some things may have very small roles to the overall functioning, but they are just as useful to the functioning of the body as any other part. The coccyx can be removed, but it makes sitting uncomfortable. The tonsils may be removed, but it increases chance of infection of the throat. Just like the church, as Paul is saying, you can remove people with certain gifts, but that makes it that much harder for the church to function comfortably and fully -- just like removing the coccyx or tonsils do to the body.
Paul even says:
Every part is only important because of the parts around it. What good would a heart be without arteries and veins? What good would a brain be without a heart? Or a heart without a brain? They can't just stand alone and be useful, they have to be in used in conjunction with each other in order to be fully expressed. Just like people with "lesser" gifts from God can't be very useful by themselves, tonsils can't be very useful without a throat.
It is funny how people from many years ago could tell us the answer to vestigial organs today: There is no such classification. These people would know this through the Bible, which is God-Breathed and absolute truth! Instead of evolutionists begrudging admit there is no vestigial organs in 200 years, why don't I just check the book that is unchanging absolute truth!
So, what am I getting at? It is the year 2010, and people still think there are body parts in the human body that have no function, yet the people of about 100 A.D. knew that every body part had it's place.
On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable - 1 Corinthians 12:22
In this passage, Paul is talking about the gifts the spirit bestows on each believer and how every believer is vital to the church no matter how small of a spiritual gift they have. The analogy works beautifully for vestigial organs. Some things may have very small roles to the overall functioning, but they are just as useful to the functioning of the body as any other part. The coccyx can be removed, but it makes sitting uncomfortable. The tonsils may be removed, but it increases chance of infection of the throat. Just like the church, as Paul is saying, you can remove people with certain gifts, but that makes it that much harder for the church to function comfortably and fully -- just like removing the coccyx or tonsils do to the body.
Paul even says:
If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, but one body. - 1 Corinthians 12:19-120
Every part is only important because of the parts around it. What good would a heart be without arteries and veins? What good would a brain be without a heart? Or a heart without a brain? They can't just stand alone and be useful, they have to be in used in conjunction with each other in order to be fully expressed. Just like people with "lesser" gifts from God can't be very useful by themselves, tonsils can't be very useful without a throat.
It is funny how people from many years ago could tell us the answer to vestigial organs today: There is no such classification. These people would know this through the Bible, which is God-Breathed and absolute truth! Instead of evolutionists begrudging admit there is no vestigial organs in 200 years, why don't I just check the book that is unchanging absolute truth!
Friday, November 5, 2010
Why Christian Metal Bands are so important
Like most people, I used to detest any screaming whatsoever in music. I thought it was unneeded and just weird and almost...demonic. However, my one of my good friends was into screamo music and would always play it and I would sit there and fake enjoyment. Occasionally there would be a song I really enjoyed, but for the most part I hated it. This all changed when I went on Warped Tour in 2009. I began to have a like for screamo/metal and began searching for bands that were like this. The point of this isn't to tell my story of getting into Metal music, but to show exactly why the Kingdom of God needs Christian Metal Band.
So often I see people, the older folk especially, knock on Christian Metal and even degrade it. Why? I am really not to sure, but I suspect it has something to do with a change from what they are use to. When I see Christian Metal, I see another area where God can speak to people. In a nutshell, metal started off as being a very, very dark genre of music, and which I believe became really popular in Sweden (but that isn't important). The important fact is that Metal used to be basically a devil-worshipping genre at one point, and, in my experience, a lot of the fans of Metal have roots in bands that are borderline satanic or straight up are satanic.
As a prime example, I was looking at some Impending Doom videos, when I came across this guys comment:
This guy is quite explicit in saying his views on Christians. How are we suppose to ever reach him through a conversation without monstrous opposition? It would be very difficult, and maybe even fruitless. However, this guy does go on to say that he loves the sound of Impending Doom--whose message in this song talks about our God and his role:
This guy that normally would most likely never even come close to a spiritual conversation is now willingly listening to a message of Christ! How amazing is that? God can work in all ways, and I truly believe Metal is one of the forerunners for letting Christ's name be known to all--even those who vehemently oppose him!
So often I see people, the older folk especially, knock on Christian Metal and even degrade it. Why? I am really not to sure, but I suspect it has something to do with a change from what they are use to. When I see Christian Metal, I see another area where God can speak to people. In a nutshell, metal started off as being a very, very dark genre of music, and which I believe became really popular in Sweden (but that isn't important). The important fact is that Metal used to be basically a devil-worshipping genre at one point, and, in my experience, a lot of the fans of Metal have roots in bands that are borderline satanic or straight up are satanic.
As a prime example, I was looking at some Impending Doom videos, when I came across this guys comment:
This guy is quite explicit in saying his views on Christians. How are we suppose to ever reach him through a conversation without monstrous opposition? It would be very difficult, and maybe even fruitless. However, this guy does go on to say that he loves the sound of Impending Doom--whose message in this song talks about our God and his role:
If you wanna find heaven with me, I will show you the way.
Eternal youth, forever young, immortalize your name.
My foolish heart, put nails through me.
On his day I will be ready.
We are the children of the age, out of control, out of place, we will demolish this religion that you have made.
Nails.
Through.
Me.
If you wanna find heaven with me, I will show you the way.
Uphold my name so I can proudly claim yours.
We call you God, but are you king.
Strip me of my status, my everything, immortalize my name.
We are the children of the age.
Out of control, out of place, we will demolish this religion that you have made.
We will battle for our kingdom, we are more than conquers.
This guy that normally would most likely never even come close to a spiritual conversation is now willingly listening to a message of Christ! How amazing is that? God can work in all ways, and I truly believe Metal is one of the forerunners for letting Christ's name be known to all--even those who vehemently oppose him!
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
The Power of 1 Corinthians (part 1)
This past week or two I have been reading through 1 Corinthians all the while reading through the New Testament and several passages throughout Corinthians really made it clear to me why there is such a debate about God and the reasons why God debates can get so fierce and drawn out.
Since all absolute truths are derived from God and thusly through the Bible (morality for example), we need the Spirit of God to rightly understand the truths. 1 Cor. 2 explains this idea in more detail. Specifically 1 Corinthians 2:14 tells us that people who do not have the spirit of God (Holy Spirit) will not understand what comes from God. This comes a long way explaining why great minds such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchins will vehemently attack Christianity and Creationism. These two men and many, many others will put full faith into ideas that are mere hopes of scientists who need a God they can control. It takes much faith to believe everything came from nothing opposed to everything came from something or two laws/theories that are in direct contradiction with each other (Law of Entropy and the the Theory of Evolution). Anything from God is plain foolishness to them! It then makes sense why 1 Corinthians 3:18-19 calls men of the world considered wise are actually fools. They can't understand and thus reject the absolute truth given to us from the creator of themselves and the entire universe.
For this reason alone, the great debate will never end. When Dawkins passes away, there will be another great mind to take his place. The best Christians and apologist can do is to give the facts and pray that the Holy Spirit can touch the lives of the people we debate. They simply can't understand what we are saying because the Holy Spirit isn't there to help.
Since all absolute truths are derived from God and thusly through the Bible (morality for example), we need the Spirit of God to rightly understand the truths. 1 Cor. 2 explains this idea in more detail. Specifically 1 Corinthians 2:14 tells us that people who do not have the spirit of God (Holy Spirit) will not understand what comes from God. This comes a long way explaining why great minds such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchins will vehemently attack Christianity and Creationism. These two men and many, many others will put full faith into ideas that are mere hopes of scientists who need a God they can control. It takes much faith to believe everything came from nothing opposed to everything came from something or two laws/theories that are in direct contradiction with each other (Law of Entropy and the the Theory of Evolution). Anything from God is plain foolishness to them! It then makes sense why 1 Corinthians 3:18-19 calls men of the world considered wise are actually fools. They can't understand and thus reject the absolute truth given to us from the creator of themselves and the entire universe.
For this reason alone, the great debate will never end. When Dawkins passes away, there will be another great mind to take his place. The best Christians and apologist can do is to give the facts and pray that the Holy Spirit can touch the lives of the people we debate. They simply can't understand what we are saying because the Holy Spirit isn't there to help.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
An attempt to understand infinity from finite mind
Alright, don't let the title scare you. It was the most accurate title I could think of that still pertained to what I am going to write about. Or it could be the first title I came up with. Either way, keep reading:
I think one area that is never really explained is how God views our existence on Earth. Of course he values us and sees us as very important creations of his, but I mean quite literally, how he sees us. God is the creator of everything we live in. That means all our tools we use to discover God's nature is from a finite point of view. If you can recall, God is infinite and essentially indiscoverable through our finite methods. The only ground we gain in the discovery of God's nature is through starting with the one thing God gave us called Truth (better known as the Bible ;)). If we start with what we know as being absolutely true coming from the infinite God himself, we can build our knowledge from there. I am certain that if God did not directly tell us of his nature (e.g. if the universe was essentially Deist), we would never even come close to discovering his attributes.
Another interesting area that is important Christians understand is how God see's time. Being finite beings, we are locked into three forms of time: Past, Present and Future. And to be quite literal, we only ever experience the Present time. This is because we are bound by the finite laws of time. However, God is infinite and the creator of time and thus he is outside of time. Now I am going on speculation here, but I envision God seeing the Past, Present and Future happening at the same time. Sure that doesn't make sense, because we only understand time through a finite point of view. It is the only way a finite mind can explain and understand how an infinite mind might work. God sees all three forms of time happening all at once. This is just the nature of trying to understand infinite with finite means. However, I didn't think of this for no reason. I thought of this thought process to explain the mixing of Armenism and Calvinism--which is enough of a topic to cover on it's own another time.
Anyways, that was what was on my mind for a while now. I am glad I am able to get these thoughts out more often. Like I said, I have been slowly growing in interest of Apologetics and this only fuels me more. Another side note: I believe that Apologetics might actually be what God wants me to do with my life. In some way, some how, I believe I am going to be using Apologetics to glorify God in whatever profession I wind up being in.
I think one area that is never really explained is how God views our existence on Earth. Of course he values us and sees us as very important creations of his, but I mean quite literally, how he sees us. God is the creator of everything we live in. That means all our tools we use to discover God's nature is from a finite point of view. If you can recall, God is infinite and essentially indiscoverable through our finite methods. The only ground we gain in the discovery of God's nature is through starting with the one thing God gave us called Truth (better known as the Bible ;)). If we start with what we know as being absolutely true coming from the infinite God himself, we can build our knowledge from there. I am certain that if God did not directly tell us of his nature (e.g. if the universe was essentially Deist), we would never even come close to discovering his attributes.
Another interesting area that is important Christians understand is how God see's time. Being finite beings, we are locked into three forms of time: Past, Present and Future. And to be quite literal, we only ever experience the Present time. This is because we are bound by the finite laws of time. However, God is infinite and the creator of time and thus he is outside of time. Now I am going on speculation here, but I envision God seeing the Past, Present and Future happening at the same time. Sure that doesn't make sense, because we only understand time through a finite point of view. It is the only way a finite mind can explain and understand how an infinite mind might work. God sees all three forms of time happening all at once. This is just the nature of trying to understand infinite with finite means. However, I didn't think of this for no reason. I thought of this thought process to explain the mixing of Armenism and Calvinism--which is enough of a topic to cover on it's own another time.
Anyways, that was what was on my mind for a while now. I am glad I am able to get these thoughts out more often. Like I said, I have been slowly growing in interest of Apologetics and this only fuels me more. Another side note: I believe that Apologetics might actually be what God wants me to do with my life. In some way, some how, I believe I am going to be using Apologetics to glorify God in whatever profession I wind up being in.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
God's Attribute of Omnipresence
God has many attributes that are in the "omni-" category. In fact, every single attribute of his is in that category because it is the closest way finite beings can explain infinite qualities. One attribute of God in particular that got me thinking was God's omnipresence. I mean, God is everywhere at all times, but would they mean he is everything at once in order to be omnipresent? For example, God is everywhere at every-time, does that mean he is in the sap of the tree, or the thoughts of a rabbit? And if that is the case, then is it fair to knock on New Age and similar cults who believe God is everything?
Well, my answer is quite simple and not a very long explanation. God is omnipresent but he is not everything. God is not trees or rabbits or computers. God is God who was, is and to be (again, the closest way finite beings can describe infinite beings). The single verse to prove my point: Hebrews 1:3. Jesus sustains all things through him. What does that mean? Simply, it means if Jesus was to just disappear, so would the entire universe. The universe staying intact and functioning properly is only done because Jesus is present. He is was makes gravity -9.8m/s. He is what makes math, math.
So, as you follow my logic, you may see where I am going. In order for the tree to have the ability to make sap run up it's roots against gravity, it needs the help of capillary action. How does the capillary action function? Well, it behaves according to its charge. And what dictates the sap's charge so it can flow up the roots? A law in physics that is becoming much more complex than the purpose of this paragraph. What it boils down to is that eventually we will get to a point where we simply don't know why something acts a way it does. Maybe time will allow us to figure out the unknown dictating factor, but what dictates that dictating factor. Eventually the answer is it just is. I it is at this point that Jesus steps in. He is what dictates that last known dictating factor. He is the foundation for the entire building. Without Jesus, all will be void. Since, we are not in a void, Jesus must be present. This is only possible because Jesus is sustaining every law required for life found throughout the universe. So, we come back to the sap in the tree and Jesus is right there in the sap of the tree. Of course he is not the tree, but the tree is only there because Jesus was there first. Thus, Jesus can be everywhere at once while not being everything at once.
Phew, that was actually much longer than I predicted. But I think you will follow the argument much better this way. Anyways, this is my first blog post since I restarted that actually has some content. Like I said before, I really feel like God is calling me to do something with Apologetics. How? I'm not sure. But I know I have a passion for it, and I have faith in God, so I don't need to worry about the rest :D
Disclaimer: I know my science may not be exact in my example, but that is not important. The main idea is what I am conveying and the exact science is not. So, if anyone does reply, you can tell me how I messed up, but don't use it against me.
Thanks
Well, my answer is quite simple and not a very long explanation. God is omnipresent but he is not everything. God is not trees or rabbits or computers. God is God who was, is and to be (again, the closest way finite beings can describe infinite beings). The single verse to prove my point: Hebrews 1:3. Jesus sustains all things through him. What does that mean? Simply, it means if Jesus was to just disappear, so would the entire universe. The universe staying intact and functioning properly is only done because Jesus is present. He is was makes gravity -9.8m/s. He is what makes math, math.
So, as you follow my logic, you may see where I am going. In order for the tree to have the ability to make sap run up it's roots against gravity, it needs the help of capillary action. How does the capillary action function? Well, it behaves according to its charge. And what dictates the sap's charge so it can flow up the roots? A law in physics that is becoming much more complex than the purpose of this paragraph. What it boils down to is that eventually we will get to a point where we simply don't know why something acts a way it does. Maybe time will allow us to figure out the unknown dictating factor, but what dictates that dictating factor. Eventually the answer is it just is. I it is at this point that Jesus steps in. He is what dictates that last known dictating factor. He is the foundation for the entire building. Without Jesus, all will be void. Since, we are not in a void, Jesus must be present. This is only possible because Jesus is sustaining every law required for life found throughout the universe. So, we come back to the sap in the tree and Jesus is right there in the sap of the tree. Of course he is not the tree, but the tree is only there because Jesus was there first. Thus, Jesus can be everywhere at once while not being everything at once.
Phew, that was actually much longer than I predicted. But I think you will follow the argument much better this way. Anyways, this is my first blog post since I restarted that actually has some content. Like I said before, I really feel like God is calling me to do something with Apologetics. How? I'm not sure. But I know I have a passion for it, and I have faith in God, so I don't need to worry about the rest :D
Disclaimer: I know my science may not be exact in my example, but that is not important. The main idea is what I am conveying and the exact science is not. So, if anyone does reply, you can tell me how I messed up, but don't use it against me.
Thanks
Sunday, February 21, 2010
My Hiatus :(
Hi everyone!
I know it has been a very long time (nearly 9 months) since I have last written a blog. I really do want to keep this going, but it is difficult to do with school. Of course I choose to go to a University that isn't as easy as high school (I joke). So basically, I am here to say that I probably won't roll out a blog post any time soon, however I really, really want to and it has been itching me for a while now.
I figure what could be a decent trade off is write about a couple good Apologists that came to UofM (one of the advantages of being in college ha) in this post and what I thought about them. I suppose I could also give a general life update too and my future plans for this blog.
So, a while back, sometime in October I think, Frank Turek came to speak at UofM. Essentially his argument was about the truth of the New Testament and thus the validity of Jesus as who he claimed to be. His talk was very engaging and informative, and had a real air of confidence. I was thoroughly impressed by his speaking abilities. Of course being the liberal school we are, a humanism club was fortunate enough to attend the meeting also. These guys really made the meeting a fantastic experience because they offered legitimate counters to what Mr. Turek was saying. At the end of the meeting, there was a Q&A session and there was a non-stop slew of questions from the humanist club who asked the question based on major (The bio major asked questions about evolution). I thought Frank Turek did an incredible job at answering every question and offering a more-that-satisfactory counter-argument. Overall, I thought the meeting was hugely successful and made me buy his book: I don't have enough Faith to Be an Atheist. I would highly recommend that book to absolutely anyone no matter where you are in the faith or where you aren't in the faith. The book brand new was only about 15$.
I figured I should talk about the experience that is really pushing me back into doing this blog. I went to Panama City Beach this past spring break not to party, but to evangelize. I must say I was very nervous at first, but got more used to it and had an awesome time in Florida. My faith really grew and that was when I felt that God really wants me to do apologetics. For large portions of both the ride down and back up, we discussed apologetics. It really opened my eyes to the passion I have for this stuff and truly made it clear to me that I should keep doing stuff related to it. And for that reason I am going to stop worrying about choosing a career that pays well and choose a career the Lord can really use me and something I have a passion about. This Friday I am going to meet with my Academic Advisor and tell her that I like doing Christian Apologetics and ask her what classes I should take.
So, finally, what the purpose of this blog is going to be: I am going to use it just like I have been doing before. I am going to post something about a particular idea that has been weighing on me and give it an apologetic spin. I don't know how regular it will be, but I really want to at least do one a month until the summer when I have a lot more time.
So that's the update. Like I said, I am really wanting to keep this up more so you can expect to see more posts. FYI, I have like 12 ideas saved as drafts, so there is always something I can post.
Thanks,
Eric
I know it has been a very long time (nearly 9 months) since I have last written a blog. I really do want to keep this going, but it is difficult to do with school. Of course I choose to go to a University that isn't as easy as high school (I joke). So basically, I am here to say that I probably won't roll out a blog post any time soon, however I really, really want to and it has been itching me for a while now.
I figure what could be a decent trade off is write about a couple good Apologists that came to UofM (one of the advantages of being in college ha) in this post and what I thought about them. I suppose I could also give a general life update too and my future plans for this blog.
So, a while back, sometime in October I think, Frank Turek came to speak at UofM. Essentially his argument was about the truth of the New Testament and thus the validity of Jesus as who he claimed to be. His talk was very engaging and informative, and had a real air of confidence. I was thoroughly impressed by his speaking abilities. Of course being the liberal school we are, a humanism club was fortunate enough to attend the meeting also. These guys really made the meeting a fantastic experience because they offered legitimate counters to what Mr. Turek was saying. At the end of the meeting, there was a Q&A session and there was a non-stop slew of questions from the humanist club who asked the question based on major (The bio major asked questions about evolution). I thought Frank Turek did an incredible job at answering every question and offering a more-that-satisfactory counter-argument. Overall, I thought the meeting was hugely successful and made me buy his book: I don't have enough Faith to Be an Atheist. I would highly recommend that book to absolutely anyone no matter where you are in the faith or where you aren't in the faith. The book brand new was only about 15$.
I figured I should talk about the experience that is really pushing me back into doing this blog. I went to Panama City Beach this past spring break not to party, but to evangelize. I must say I was very nervous at first, but got more used to it and had an awesome time in Florida. My faith really grew and that was when I felt that God really wants me to do apologetics. For large portions of both the ride down and back up, we discussed apologetics. It really opened my eyes to the passion I have for this stuff and truly made it clear to me that I should keep doing stuff related to it. And for that reason I am going to stop worrying about choosing a career that pays well and choose a career the Lord can really use me and something I have a passion about. This Friday I am going to meet with my Academic Advisor and tell her that I like doing Christian Apologetics and ask her what classes I should take.
So, finally, what the purpose of this blog is going to be: I am going to use it just like I have been doing before. I am going to post something about a particular idea that has been weighing on me and give it an apologetic spin. I don't know how regular it will be, but I really want to at least do one a month until the summer when I have a lot more time.
So that's the update. Like I said, I am really wanting to keep this up more so you can expect to see more posts. FYI, I have like 12 ideas saved as drafts, so there is always something I can post.
Thanks,
Eric
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Pascal's Wager vs. Atheistic Wager
There is a famous gamble made by a man named Blaise Pascal. Essentially, his wager is there is no harm in believing in God. If you are wrong and God is not real-oh well. You lived a righteous life. If you are right and He is real, you made a great choice. If you are right and God isn't real then you lived a life of no morals doing whatever you want. However if you are wrong and He is real, then you are spending an eternity in a torture, fiery place called Hell. By my calculations this bet is 100% fail-safe. Why aren't more people believing it? It could be a bunch of factors such as having to live a life with morals or it could be they are counting on their own wager: The Atheistic Wager.
The Atheistic Wager is a belief that there is no point in believing in God. Live however you want. If God is real, then he is also benevolent and accept everyone into heaven. This sounds real appetizing and an "answer" to atheistic prayer giving them a reason not to believe. However, this has one very serious flaw to it.
By using the Atheistic Wager, Atheists (and non-believers to I suppose) can ignore God till they die. Thats when they assume they will be sent to heaven. However, the entire time they were living, God has been true meaning the Bible and everything inside of it is true to. Ultimately, their wager is forced to accept God as a very real Creator in order to hold any water. If they must accept Christianity is true then must accept what is written about life after death. That quite frankly says that the road to heaven is very narrow and the ONLY way to Heaven is through Jesus Christ as your savior. The Atheists ignored this part largely due to their ignorance and will find themselves in hell as they are only willing to accept some of Christianity in their wager.
The Atheistic Wager is a belief that there is no point in believing in God. Live however you want. If God is real, then he is also benevolent and accept everyone into heaven. This sounds real appetizing and an "answer" to atheistic prayer giving them a reason not to believe. However, this has one very serious flaw to it.
By using the Atheistic Wager, Atheists (and non-believers to I suppose) can ignore God till they die. Thats when they assume they will be sent to heaven. However, the entire time they were living, God has been true meaning the Bible and everything inside of it is true to. Ultimately, their wager is forced to accept God as a very real Creator in order to hold any water. If they must accept Christianity is true then must accept what is written about life after death. That quite frankly says that the road to heaven is very narrow and the ONLY way to Heaven is through Jesus Christ as your savior. The Atheists ignored this part largely due to their ignorance and will find themselves in hell as they are only willing to accept some of Christianity in their wager.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Impossibilty to Deny God
No matter which world view you subscribe to, denying God is impossible. How can that be even with evolution which SUPPOSEDLY gets rid of the need for a creator? Simple. Evolutionary Theory states that we evolved from a very simple single-cell organism to what we are now-a very complicated and diverse creature with many functions and most of all a conscious. If we were to keep in line with how evolution works (upward progression), we will keep getting smarter, more intelligent, higher conscious until we are Gods ourselves. With enough time our brains will become so strong that we will become very powerful-powerful enough to even create another universe to play with.
Think about it. Even if you are a die hard Evolutionists this scenario is very real. How can you prove that something of that sort didn't happen to us in this universe? Another species on another planet evolved to such a powerful level that it created this universe and then evolution starts over again. In fact this is right up Evolutionists alley, as this theory is impossible to prove except through time itself. And we all know those are the best kind of theories evolutionists like to propose.
Either way, you must bow your head to a creator. No matter which view you subscribe to, there is a Creator called God.
Think about it. Even if you are a die hard Evolutionists this scenario is very real. How can you prove that something of that sort didn't happen to us in this universe? Another species on another planet evolved to such a powerful level that it created this universe and then evolution starts over again. In fact this is right up Evolutionists alley, as this theory is impossible to prove except through time itself. And we all know those are the best kind of theories evolutionists like to propose.
Either way, you must bow your head to a creator. No matter which view you subscribe to, there is a Creator called God.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
No turning back
I have been thinking over the entire aspect of God from an Atheist view. How much they would just have to trust in the idea of God and what he did and I can totally see how hard it would be for them to officially recognize God and believe in him.
That's when I was thinking "What if I stopped believing in God?" What would I do. And it really hit me. I would be on an island by myself. In respect to origins of life and the universe, I could never possibly accept the naturalistic approach no matter how hard I try. I have seen an unskewed presentation of evidence for creationism and the points are to large and critical for me to ignore.
What I am saying is that even if I wanted to stop believing in God and never hear of him again, no matter how hard I would try, and could not ignore the facts staring me down in every facet of nature not only because I "use" to believe in creationism, but because I know the true facts of the Creationism argument and not some mere straw-men.
That's when I was thinking "What if I stopped believing in God?" What would I do. And it really hit me. I would be on an island by myself. In respect to origins of life and the universe, I could never possibly accept the naturalistic approach no matter how hard I try. I have seen an unskewed presentation of evidence for creationism and the points are to large and critical for me to ignore.
What I am saying is that even if I wanted to stop believing in God and never hear of him again, no matter how hard I would try, and could not ignore the facts staring me down in every facet of nature not only because I "use" to believe in creationism, but because I know the true facts of the Creationism argument and not some mere straw-men.
Saturday, May 9, 2009
The Tools Required
We know atoms exist. Can we see them? Of course not. But we KNOW they are there, creating the reactions we need to survive. Even back in 400 B.C. Democritus knew there had to be something smaller than the smallest thing he could see. How else could the piece of cheese stay together then?
This would seem like blind faith to many. Why on earth would you be so sure there are atoms present when you haven't even seen them yourself! I am sure many, many people in the world today have never seen actual atoms. But they don't believe simply because they just "know" there are atoms, they believe because they see the effects of them.
Not until the 1930's did humans ever see these atoms. They knew they were there simply by the effects atoms had. They understood the properties and reactive abilities of atoms, could give rough estimates of how one looked, but never saw one. Only though an electron microscope, a tool, could humans finally see the atom itself.
God is all around us. We have never seen God, yet we believe in him. Why? Because we can see the effects of God all around us. From the acute tuning of all life one Earth to interact so precisely with one another to the benevolent care he provides and the blessings he pours out. We know he is there. But in order to truly see God, you need to use a certain tool just like the electron microscope is needed to see atoms. The Bible is the most important tool to all of man. Without it we can't see God's nature at all. We can see his characteristics through general observation (such as he was a master engineer, physicist, mathematician etc.), but never get a real reading on how to come to know him and what he requires us to do until we look into our 'microscope' and actually study him.
This would seem like blind faith to many. Why on earth would you be so sure there are atoms present when you haven't even seen them yourself! I am sure many, many people in the world today have never seen actual atoms. But they don't believe simply because they just "know" there are atoms, they believe because they see the effects of them.
Not until the 1930's did humans ever see these atoms. They knew they were there simply by the effects atoms had. They understood the properties and reactive abilities of atoms, could give rough estimates of how one looked, but never saw one. Only though an electron microscope, a tool, could humans finally see the atom itself.
God is all around us. We have never seen God, yet we believe in him. Why? Because we can see the effects of God all around us. From the acute tuning of all life one Earth to interact so precisely with one another to the benevolent care he provides and the blessings he pours out. We know he is there. But in order to truly see God, you need to use a certain tool just like the electron microscope is needed to see atoms. The Bible is the most important tool to all of man. Without it we can't see God's nature at all. We can see his characteristics through general observation (such as he was a master engineer, physicist, mathematician etc.), but never get a real reading on how to come to know him and what he requires us to do until we look into our 'microscope' and actually study him.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
I concede my Young Earth Creationists views. Evolution is true and I have been given undeniable evidence!
Yea, it's true guys. I have been given irrefutable evidence against special creation and it in fact proves Evolution through mutations are quite true. I will show my enlightenment to you too.
The Evolution of Transportation
We start with simple wheels on our feet:
Over the eons of making those same rollerblades, and through chance mistakes in producing them, we somehow added enough material to create a extra large, but better supportive wheel:
Again, through millions of chance mistakes, we added another wheel.
Now extra strength to the frame, and a complex motorized engine has been added. Remember, this has been through random, non-intelligent mistakes we are causing to what we previously were building to add complexity to it.
Ahh! The pinnacle of the two wheels. This will be the last time we see this in our evoulutionary process of transportation
Now we enter the era of three-wheels. This is a short lived period but a shining example of chance.
We now have reached a four-wheel vehicle that has all-weather conditions. The processes are so complex that I would say a divine being created it, but of course that is against what I believe. In Evolution I believe!
And finally, through the billions years of producing parts and accidently putting them together thus creating newer, better inventions with increasing complexity and order, we get to Optimus Prime. The greatest example nature will ever have to show of the power of making mistakes:
Yes, through random, chancy mutations over the course of billions of years we evolved from simple roller skates to Optimus Prime. Where did all the resources come for this extra information? I don't know, but it just does. And that is what is taught as fact....lol.
Does that series of pictures look ridiculous? That is what our "educated" scientists say is how humans came to be. Interesting when in a different light, huh?
The Evolution of Transportation
We start with simple wheels on our feet:
Over the eons of making those same rollerblades, and through chance mistakes in producing them, we somehow added enough material to create a extra large, but better supportive wheel:
Again, through millions of chance mistakes, we added another wheel.
Now extra strength to the frame, and a complex motorized engine has been added. Remember, this has been through random, non-intelligent mistakes we are causing to what we previously were building to add complexity to it.
Ahh! The pinnacle of the two wheels. This will be the last time we see this in our evoulutionary process of transportation
Now we enter the era of three-wheels. This is a short lived period but a shining example of chance.
We now have reached a four-wheel vehicle that has all-weather conditions. The processes are so complex that I would say a divine being created it, but of course that is against what I believe. In Evolution I believe!
And finally, through the billions years of producing parts and accidently putting them together thus creating newer, better inventions with increasing complexity and order, we get to Optimus Prime. The greatest example nature will ever have to show of the power of making mistakes:
Yes, through random, chancy mutations over the course of billions of years we evolved from simple roller skates to Optimus Prime. Where did all the resources come for this extra information? I don't know, but it just does. And that is what is taught as fact....lol.
Does that series of pictures look ridiculous? That is what our "educated" scientists say is how humans came to be. Interesting when in a different light, huh?
Why God is not intolerant
So often I hear the remark, "If God is so benelovent then why does he send people to hell?" or "If God is so benelovent, why does he have such intolerance in my (non)christian beliefs and send me to hell for that?"
A very simple answer to this that is quite logical and fits well within God's benelovence:
Why would God force you to spend an eternity with him when you have been denying him your whole life?
If anything you should be thanking him for his benelovence pouring out. He is doing you a service-finally granting your eternal seperation from your Creator to spend an eternity in hell.
Think about it.
A very simple answer to this that is quite logical and fits well within God's benelovence:
Why would God force you to spend an eternity with him when you have been denying him your whole life?
If anything you should be thanking him for his benelovence pouring out. He is doing you a service-finally granting your eternal seperation from your Creator to spend an eternity in hell.
Think about it.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Refute of Penn and Teller video
To be very general right now, the people in the video have an evolutionary worldview and come into the video with a bias. This bias will force themselves to come to a result they want to see. What this means is at best this video is Evolutionary evangelism. How can this video honestly give a fair view on the bible? If you don't clearly see the bias, look 1:03, Penn uses his own bias to give the bible a "fairy tale" twist (Once upon a time..)
:42-The scientist (aka Terry) makes a pretty bold and general claim that archaeologists have not found anything evidence to support places or events in the bible. This is not true on two accounts: One, we have not dug up every piece of dirt on this earth. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Two, archaeologists have found evidence listed in the bible. An example I can think of off the top of my head are Bricks with hay found in them-which is precisely what Moses said in Exodus.
1:20-The age old "Two Creation Accounts". The more I deal with people who believe such a view, I realize it is out of pure ignorance. In fact such a belief would be a definite contradiction, and God does not lie Titus 1:2.
Let me give you an example to try and understand how Genesis chapter 2 complements Genesis chapter 1. I am writing the history of the Detroit Lions for a sports editorial for the local paper. I might start off with important dates and then give a short description. So something like this might appear:
- In 1934 the Detroit Lions were conceived.
- In 1935 Detroit won their first World Championship (Super Bowl)
- In 1952 Detroit won their second World Championship
- In 1953 Detroit won their third World Championship
- In 1957 Detroit won their fourth World Championship
This is enough to get my point across. If a reader is wanting a quick and general history, this is exactly what you would want. However, how clunky would it be if the author of this decided to explain every year with detail? It would look something like this:
- Dick Richards leads a group that purchases the Portsmouth Spartans for the staggering price of $7,952.08, and moves them to Detroit, where in keeping with the jungle tradition with other Detroit nicknames the team utilizes the name Lions. The Lions play their first game ever on September 23rd at the old University of Detroit Stadium, and beat the New York Giants by a score of 9-0 in front of 12,000 fans. The Lions would go on to win their first 10 games that included 7 straight shutouts. Four days after their first loss the Lions host the Chicago Bears on Thanksgiving establishing a new tradition. The Lions would lose the key game 16-13, and would go on to finish their inaugural campaign with a 10-3 record.
- The Lions are among 4 teams in the NFL's competitive Western Division that finishes with a winning record. The Lions would finish the season with a 7-3-2 record, finishing percentage points ahead of the Green Bay Packers for the Division Championship earning them a birth in their first ever Championship Game. On December 9th in front of a rockus home crowd the Lions host the New York Giants for the NFL Championship. Led by QB Earl Clark the Lions would roar their way to a deceive 26-7 victory earning their first NFL Championship.
- The Lions continue to improve finishing 9-3 and in a flat-footed tie with Los Angeles Rams for the National Conference Title. The tie set up a tiebreaker for a trip to the NFL Championship game. On December 21st in front of a loud home crowd the Lions beat the over matched Rams by a score of 31-21 to earn a trip to the following week's NFL Championship game in Cleveland against the Browns. The Lions would on to stun the Browns in front of their home fans 17-7 to claim their 2nd NFL Championship.
- The Lions finish 10-2 to earn a return trip to the NFL Championship game where they a matched up in a rematch with the Cleveland Browns. On December 27th in front of a load crowd of 54,577 the Lions win a 17-16 nail bitter to claim their second consecutive NFL Championship.
- Prior to the start of the season Head Coach Raymond Parker who guided the Lions through their best era of success abruptly resigns. Assistant George Wilson would replace him the following day. Rogers helps lead the Lions to an 8-4 season which is good enough to earn a tie for the Western Conference title with San Francisco 49ers. The Lions would fall behind early in the Western Conference Championship at San Francisco's Cesar Stadium. However, the Lions would roar to life in the second half and would claim a 31-27 victory to earn a trip to the NFL Championship game. In the NFL Championship played in front of a 55,263 fans at Briggs Stadium the Lions take apart the Browns 59-14 to claim their 4th NFL Championship, and 3rd of the decade. However, the Lions would not win another Championship in the 20th Century.
Now this becomes a very cluttered mess and to get any exact information you want, you would almost have to sit down and piece through every year. Since our God is an intelligent creator understands this. How awkward would it be if he gives a chronological record of creation of this world, but on Day 6 puts literally everything from Genesis chapter 2 into the verses pertaining to Day 6. Again, this would be a very awkward placement. It is only fitting that immediately after the creation account is laid down does God go into much further detail on exactly what happened on Day 6. Humans are only Gods most precious creation, and a detailed account of how we came about would be very welcomed. When people try and tell me Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis are clearly contradicting passages, I slap my hand to my forehead and shake my head. If one really looked into how the two chapters are laid out it becomes clear what Chapter 2's intention was-which is quite evident by the way we work today when we organize timelines. I did not know all those facts about the Lions (Go Lions!). I merely pulled them off another website to give an example.
1:43-Terry believes he is in the authority to sanction what part of the bible Christians are allowed to say is literal. His reasoning is that because there are two creation accounts, that are complementary to each other, in Genesis, Christians can not say the account of Genesis is literal. This is an illogical conclusion regardless if the two creation accounts were complementary or not.
1:58-Terry goes on to find it impossible for Noah to maintain the more than 10 billion species living on a single Ark. Well so do I. Luckily the bible did not tell Noah to take every specie, but every kind. Granted, the exact definition of kind is not very stable, but what is known is a "kind" is on a much larger scope such as genus or even family. Species wasn't even a term fully developed yet until recent times and in Noah's time genetic variation between animals was very minimal as mutations and in-breeding had not fully been incorporated into life.
The following animals could have survived outside the ark (Whitcomb 1998, p.68):
25,000 species of fish
1,700 tunicates (mane chordates like sea squirts) found throughout the seas
600 echinoderms including star fish and sea urchins
107,000 mollusks such as mussels, clams and oysters
10,000 coelenterates like corals and sea anemones, jelly fish and hydroids
4,000 species of sponges
31,000 protozoan, the microscopic single-celled creatures.
Noah would not have to be concerned with the aquatic mammals such as the dolphins, whales, porpoises, sea lions, and walrus. There are also many aquatic reptiles that could survive outside of the ark. These would include many types of snakes, alligators, crocodiles, and sea turtles. There are almost a million species of arthropods that would survive the flood. Animals such as the following: shrimps, crabs, lobsters, and many other crustaceans. All of the insects could survive outside the ark. Mote than 35,000 species of worms and nematodes would also survive the flood.
Most animals are not very large. The average size of all animals, is the size of a sheep, some say a small rodent. One railroad stock car can carry about 240 sheep. This would mean that all 40,000 animals could fit in 167 railroad cars. The arks total capacity was 569 stock cars. The 40,000 animals would require less than 30% of the ark's space. In other words all the animals could fit on one of the ark's three decks. This would leave the other 70% of the ark's space for Noah's family, food, supplies, and baggage.
Many biologists state that the average size of most vertebrates is the size of a sheep. Other sources state that the average size is about the size of a small rabbit. Since there is some doubt as to what is the average size of the animals that were brought into the ark, and this paper is a conservative analysis of the carrying capacity of the ark, we will use the larger sheep average.We will also base our calculation on four different occupancy estimates. The first is my own conservative estimate of 40,000. The second is the estimate of Whitcomb at 35,000. The final two figures of 16,000 and 2,000 are based on the work of Woodmorappe. The 16,000 figure is based on the biblical kind being equivalent to the taxonomic rank of genus. The second figure of 2,000 is based on the biblical kind being equivalent to the taxonomic rank of family.
Based on railroad industry figures a railroad stockcar can hold 240 sheep and each stock car has a capacity of 2670 ft3. Therefore each sheep requires 11.125 ft3. Most authorities on rabbit husbandry give the dimensions for a rabbit hutch as 3.0 ft3per animal. If the average animal size is indeed the size of a small rabbit the calculations shown below could be reduced by a factor of three.
The following calculations show the amount of the ark space that would be required to carry the stated number of animals, based on the average size of a sheep.
40,000 animals x 11.125 ft3 = 445,000 ft3 OR 445,000 ft 3
1,518,750 ft3 × 100 = 29% of the Ark's capacity
http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/sizeark.html
Given that Terry had the wrong idea of what God required Noah to take (species instead of kinds) and that the Ark is more than large enough to hold two of every animal on the Earth, this argument becomes moot.
2:25-Penn proceeds to tell viewers the traditional "stolen myth" story that the flood was account was taken from a real event that happened in the region. To my surprise he didn't use the ever popular "Gilgamesh" flood account. Instead he used the story that Euphrates floods every year. One year it flooded exceptionally bad the Sumerian King took a barge to float down the river until it landed on dry ground. He then proceeds to tell viewers their is plenty of archaeological and geological evidence for such a view.
This could of been an event that really happened, I don't know. But it doesn't matter. The biblical account is so much more different from this account that to say it was an over exaggeration of it is ridiculous. The Bible says the flood was global, killed all living creatures, lasted a little over a year, took two of every animal, the ark landed on a mountain and it needed a massive boat (ark) to carry all the animals. The account Penn speaks of merely says there was exceptional flooding that over ran all the levees and killed a lot of people. The king took a barge and floated down river until he landed on dry land. Do you see any connection? Neither did I.
3:06-Ironically enough, Penn then mentions that 6 other cultures in the area have similar flood stories like Noah's. In fact, I will go a step farther and mention that nearly every culture around the world has a flood story like Noah's. If every culture, and many are independent of each other, has some story of a world wide flood near the dawn of time occurring, then maybe, just maybe it actually did happen. The details are not very similar as each is written to appease their polytheistic pagan beliefs, but one fact that stays quite consistent between each story is the fact the flood was global and killed everything except that in the ark.
Why Global flood stories from every culture is proof
Summary of every flood myth from around the world
3:45-Penn tells viewers absolutely no evidence even exists that Jews even existed in Egypt. I guess he hasn't hear of the internet ;) What Penn said is a grand case of a secular bias. A simple search, and I came up with this site(very long read, but LOTS of evidence of Exodus):
http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm
4:13-Terry makes a logical fallacy in claiming "Since there is no evidence of the exodus, there must of been no exodus". I can then turn around and say "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". You have to remember that the Exodus was in fact, an exodus. The people were nomadic who traveled the desert, never setting up permanent cities. If there was any archaeological evidence, it would be hard press to find-that's if archaeologists dismiss just because it is in support of biblical history.
4:33-A new scientists comes into the picture that we will call Richard. He says it is so hard for people to accept biblical miracles because they can't be explained. Now let's hold on for a second. Hypothetically assume God is real. Hypothetically also assume he is the God of Judeo-Christianity who created all we see. Why must he do anything in this world in accordance to the natural laws he created? He is God, and he can do as he wants. It also begs the question, if we can explain the miracles through finite human mind, then they aren't so much miracles, but more or less an act of nature.
4:52-Richard cannot wrap his mind around the fact that God can do whatever he wants in this world. That means perform miracles unexplainably. So he does what any human being does and rationalizes it. He uses the age old theory that Moses and the Israelites crossed the "sea of reeds" or essentially a marsh. This of course is completely wrong. The Bible makes it quite clear through it's context that the Red Sea was the deep body of water east of Egypt and adjacent to the Sinai Peninsula. The bible says the sea was very deep (Isaiah 63:11-13, Psalms 78:11-13). The Bible also makes it clear the water covered the Egyptians. No mere marsh could possibly do this. (Exodus 15:1, Deuteronomy 11:4, Joshua 24:7, Nehemiah 9:11, Psalms 78:52-54). The bible also makes it clear that all the Egyptians died from the water falling on them (Exodus 14:27-28,Exodus 14:30, Psalms 106:11). Now we need to ask the question, what is the miracle of Richard that a marsh could do all this? Cover all the Egyptians completely to the point of drowning? If we look at the hebrew word for Red Sea, yam suph, it can be translated to "sea of reeds" or a marsh. But throughout the entire old and new testament it is translated as Red Sea (1 Kings 9:26-28, Acts 7:36, Hebrews 11:29). The bible makes it quite clear the Red Sea is in fact the Red Sea. The illogical presentation of the Red Sea as a mere marsh is quite evident by all the Bible claimed the Red Sea did. I wish I could explain exactly how the Red Sea parted, but then it would take away from the whole "show the Israelites the power of God through miracles aspect" ;)
6:08-Penn complains that a historical account was written after the event in question happened....Do I really need to explain what's wrong with this statement?
6:48-The video goes on and tells about another guy, Appollonius of Tyana. They go on to say he called himself a Messiah. Apparently the man could do the same stuff as Jesus. This brings up a good point though. What would be better at swaying people from God than another guy just like Jesus? The antichrist is going to claim to have powers of divine origin-does that mean he is considered a Jesus too? If you say yes then the devil has achieved his goal-to sway you from the truth. There have always been imitators of Jesus throughout history. Why? Maybe because he is the Son of God, and no one has ever lived a life like his. I'm not sure if they are using this Appollonius of Tyana fellow to prove that Jesus was not a true Messiah, but remember just because someone copies you does not discredit what you have done. One other note is Penn seems appalled that Jesus only helped those who he came in contact with. Well, duh. He is physically healing them for all to see his miracles as Son of God. He can only heal those who he sees in that case. He also implies that Jesus didn't go out of his way to heal people-which I doubt very much. The Bible is a very accurate book, but it cannot possibly hold all the information of Jesus's life in it. I am sure he healed many, many people, but not all the cases could possibly be listed.
7:28-Penn proceeds to call religious people uneducated. This is one of the most ignorant stereotypes one can possibly say. Most Christians go to school and get a good education. Many of our revolutionary scientific breakthroughs were discovered by bible-believing Christians. Of course Penn ignores all this and speaks out of ignorance.
7:48-"Popular sure doesn't mean right." Ha! I guess that we can throw the evolutionary theory out of the window as "Popular sure doesn't mean right."
8:09-Now they go on to a pretty lengthy rant on the morality of the bible. The complaint is that how can the Bible say no to homosexuality and then, for example, say to stone whoever practices it. What you need to realize is the OT had laws like that for a reason. The Israelite nation was a very...stressful nation for God I think. They always swayed from him, was influenced by everything and couldn't keep their hearts straight. This was the nation that was going to birth Jesus! They need to be a good christian nation. They also need to realize many of these rules are not the same as we would think of them today. In order to stone someone to death, you needed two-three witnesses and a refusal to repent on the violators part. This was very hard to do and rarely happened. But it kept the nation Godly and that was important. Finally, you must realize that if the Bible says it, it does not necessarily mean it is ok to do. Polygyny is mentioned several times in the bible from many of the characters. But the Bible explicitly says "One man and one women". So which is it? Well, what the Bible says. In every case of polygyny, the violator was never praised for it and often had some misfortune occur to him.
9:23-Penn complains you can't throw out some of the rules just because you don't like them-which is true. However, he fails to notice that Jesus was the new covenant and that many of the OT laws are negated. You can throw out rules if the Bible states later that you are "no longer under the old covenant"
9:46-Penn says the bible advocates horrible crimes. Where did he read this, I don't know? Apparently the whole point of this video was to evangelize for Atheism-which is very ironic in my opinion.
Remember, Penn and Teller are magicians. There job is to deceive people-and make money from it! Please don't buy into their 'greatest trick yet'. I have hopefully sufficiently given good rebuttals to every point of their video. However if you have questions or I missed something, let me know! Thanks.
Monday, December 22, 2008
A creator not so impossible?
I was recently listening to the John Lennox and Richard Dawkins debate over Richard Dawkins new book "The God Delusion"
A single comment that really got me was when Richard Dawkins said "everything we see around us is a manufactured item and very tempting to believe the cosmos is too. (paraphrased)"
I don't mean to be rude but, duh. Why is it impossible that the universe, which is so carefully and beautifully made, not have a creator? Just as the most beautiful and majestic buildings have intelligent designers, why can't our universe have them too?
A single comment that really got me was when Richard Dawkins said "everything we see around us is a manufactured item and very tempting to believe the cosmos is too. (paraphrased)"
I don't mean to be rude but, duh. Why is it impossible that the universe, which is so carefully and beautifully made, not have a creator? Just as the most beautiful and majestic buildings have intelligent designers, why can't our universe have them too?
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Evolutionists complain of a God with no love
One of the most classic cases one will hear from an Evolutionists is our God is not such a loving God as we would like to think. Of course, being the Creationists Christians we are, and them being the God-Hating (or denying) Atheists, they would know more about the Bible than we would. Regardless of how absurd that is, I will still address it.
The claim is, if God is such a benevolent being, then why does he send people to hell? Why does he let people die? Why is there death/pain/destruction at all? This is all easily explained in two points.
One, as humans we have complete free will. God will not force you to go to heaven if you don't want to. He won't force you to do anything you don't want to do (Atheists can easily attest to this). If you refuse to believe in God, no problem. Just don't expect a ticket into Heaven.
Two, the world was originally created without sin. It was perfection. However, the master deceiver was running around (Satan) and tricked Eve, who then tricked Adam in turn. This is when sin entered the world, and all this death, disease, genetic mutations came into play. But before you go blaming Eve for her stupidity remember the Devil is the master deceiver. Look at the worlds top scientists now. There surprising faith towards a "theory" that "eliminates" God from the picture. Nice one Lucipher!
The most ironic part of this all is how little Evolutionists seem to even understand there own ideology! Evolution thrives on millions of years of death, weakness, murder, and disease. How then can Evolutionists complain about a God who doesn't love! Their world view is exactly everything they claim the Christian God of being! And for these exact reasons is why they a lot of Atheists can't stand the thought of a creator of man.
Again, the double-mindness of Atheism and refusal to admit there is a creator nabs them in the butt. From their claims as to why there can't be a benevolent creator they create their own God own all the supposed fallacies of our God.
The claim is, if God is such a benevolent being, then why does he send people to hell? Why does he let people die? Why is there death/pain/destruction at all? This is all easily explained in two points.
One, as humans we have complete free will. God will not force you to go to heaven if you don't want to. He won't force you to do anything you don't want to do (Atheists can easily attest to this). If you refuse to believe in God, no problem. Just don't expect a ticket into Heaven.
Two, the world was originally created without sin. It was perfection. However, the master deceiver was running around (Satan) and tricked Eve, who then tricked Adam in turn. This is when sin entered the world, and all this death, disease, genetic mutations came into play. But before you go blaming Eve for her stupidity remember the Devil is the master deceiver. Look at the worlds top scientists now. There surprising faith towards a "theory" that "eliminates" God from the picture. Nice one Lucipher!
The most ironic part of this all is how little Evolutionists seem to even understand there own ideology! Evolution thrives on millions of years of death, weakness, murder, and disease. How then can Evolutionists complain about a God who doesn't love! Their world view is exactly everything they claim the Christian God of being! And for these exact reasons is why they a lot of Atheists can't stand the thought of a creator of man.
Again, the double-mindness of Atheism and refusal to admit there is a creator nabs them in the butt. From their claims as to why there can't be a benevolent creator they create their own God own all the supposed fallacies of our God.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Biblical Accuracy? Absolutely!
One of the more well known stories of the bible is found in Sodom and Gomorrah. It speaks of the evil the people were living in and their eventual punishment for not repenting. God destroyed both cities with burning sulfur. The video goes to the site where Sodom and Gomorrah are located and what do they find? Lots of sulfur. I wonder why?
The bible is 100% true or 100% false. There is no in-between. The video shows very, very good evidence of what was recorded in the Bible to actually have happened. If this and countless other stories are credible, real events that happened, then why is it that there cannot be a God? It is simply wishful thinking of Atheists.
The bible is 100% true or 100% false. There is no in-between. The video shows very, very good evidence of what was recorded in the Bible to actually have happened. If this and countless other stories are credible, real events that happened, then why is it that there cannot be a God? It is simply wishful thinking of Atheists.
The Creation Museum
The Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky launched a special promotional deal with local Cincinnati Zoo which included an one day pass to both attractions for the combined price of $25.95 adult price thus saving a total of nine dollars. The promotion was meant to run from December 2nd to the 11th The zoo previously had a similar deal with the Cincinnati Reds, so the Creation Museum was not the first.
However, the deal did not go smoothly. After a mere 60 hours into the deal the zoo called it off. The reasoning? The massive amount of phone calls, e-mails, and in person complaints the zoo was receiving from Atheists/Freethinkers/Agnostics/Brights etc. The most traffic was received from a specific blog ran by the evolutionary biologist PZ Meyers. In this aggressive blog, Meyers goes as far as telling people to ruin this promotional deal. I just sit and wonder how anyone could do something like this. I understand completely that Creationism and Evolution don't get along to well, but to act so irrational and immature about it does not show any thought before action. I am certain that the only reason this had any objections at all by the evolutionary community (or more specifically Mr. Meyers and regardless that there are many other private organizations ran without state help in Cincinnati) is because is directly challenges the beliefs of so called "Evolution".
This brings me to my next point. So what? So what if there is a deal. Only the quote on quote "intelligent" humans are capable of believing Evolution, then why are they worried about the museum being open and having a deal with the zoo? I believe Evolutionists are scared of the open minded people out there. If they can eliminate the opposition, they will have no problems. Don't believe what you read out there. Evolution is not fact. It is a mere propaganda ploy. The evidence is not "solid" (as many like to claim, mainly out of their indoctrination through public schools) and what evidence they claim they have, upon closer examination, works just as well, if not better in Creationism model. The Creation Museum in Kentucky is a great way to expose people to a fair presentation of all the facts out there, not just the evolutionary biased ones.
Through all the absurd hatred for people who don't believe in Evolution, is the amount of attention Mr. Meyers himself dedicates his blog to attacking Christian beliefs. Instead of giving articles and discussion on mainly, atheistic items, he often discusses, links and gives decent publicity to Creationism articles/links/discussions. Regardless if he is attacking/mocking the articles, he is giving them much attention that could easily persuade the weak minded evolutionists just through exposure to outside facts! The most amazing thing I have witnessed on the site, however, is these secular groups across the nation wanting to make a trip to the Creation Museum. Of course they have reasons as they want to criticize, mock the museum and to "know their enemy", but they must first pay the museum for a ticket to do so. According to their logic, they are paying their "enemy" to learn about stuff that can easily be done through the internet, or better yet, go to a museum that explicitly teaches about evolution, make a video of it, and still support the museum through purchasing the ticket. Hey, go right ahead. Make all the "field trips" you want. It is not helping the "evolutionistic movement." Here is the video that the SAIU (Secular Alliance of Indiana University) made on their trip to the Creationism Museum.
The worst part of this all is how the scientific community just can't understand the massive numbers the museum is bringing in. "What is wrong with these people? Don't they understand the light? They must understand how wrong they are!" The problem is, these people are making the decision even though they are (for the most part) raised in public schools that bombard students with evolutionary propaganda and the intense push for a god-less society. Maybe evolution isn't teaching this "rock hard solid facts" well enough. Maybe they need to bombard people 24/7 with more propaganda? Or maybe they need to realize that people are intelligent, and they do make reasons based upon reason. All this hate for museum is stemmed from anger that "Us Creationists just don't see it their way". It sounds more like religion than science to me.
Oh well. In an attempt to ridicule and hurt the Creation Museum, PZ Meyers has elevated the museum to a publicity level it would never have achieved without his help. A plan that backfired and a perfect example of God in work. Evolutionists can keep on trying to drive the point "there is no God, blah, blah, blah" but they must realize they are in a very difficult battle. People have been trying to do the same thing for 6000 years now, but guess what? The Bible is still around. Christianity is still around. People are believing what the Bible teaches. Psalms 119:160. Atheists in general are a very small group with a loud voice. In due time they will be quelled. Hopefully before they have judgment before our Creator. It is our mission as Christians to keep them in prayer and hopefully we can facilitate the change.
God Bless,
Eric
However, the deal did not go smoothly. After a mere 60 hours into the deal the zoo called it off. The reasoning? The massive amount of phone calls, e-mails, and in person complaints the zoo was receiving from Atheists/Freethinkers/Agnostics/Brights etc. The most traffic was received from a specific blog ran by the evolutionary biologist PZ Meyers. In this aggressive blog, Meyers goes as far as telling people to ruin this promotional deal. I just sit and wonder how anyone could do something like this. I understand completely that Creationism and Evolution don't get along to well, but to act so irrational and immature about it does not show any thought before action. I am certain that the only reason this had any objections at all by the evolutionary community (or more specifically Mr. Meyers and regardless that there are many other private organizations ran without state help in Cincinnati) is because is directly challenges the beliefs of so called "Evolution".
This brings me to my next point. So what? So what if there is a deal. Only the quote on quote "intelligent" humans are capable of believing Evolution, then why are they worried about the museum being open and having a deal with the zoo? I believe Evolutionists are scared of the open minded people out there. If they can eliminate the opposition, they will have no problems. Don't believe what you read out there. Evolution is not fact. It is a mere propaganda ploy. The evidence is not "solid" (as many like to claim, mainly out of their indoctrination through public schools) and what evidence they claim they have, upon closer examination, works just as well, if not better in Creationism model. The Creation Museum in Kentucky is a great way to expose people to a fair presentation of all the facts out there, not just the evolutionary biased ones.
Through all the absurd hatred for people who don't believe in Evolution, is the amount of attention Mr. Meyers himself dedicates his blog to attacking Christian beliefs. Instead of giving articles and discussion on mainly, atheistic items, he often discusses, links and gives decent publicity to Creationism articles/links/discussions. Regardless if he is attacking/mocking the articles, he is giving them much attention that could easily persuade the weak minded evolutionists just through exposure to outside facts! The most amazing thing I have witnessed on the site, however, is these secular groups across the nation wanting to make a trip to the Creation Museum. Of course they have reasons as they want to criticize, mock the museum and to "know their enemy", but they must first pay the museum for a ticket to do so. According to their logic, they are paying their "enemy" to learn about stuff that can easily be done through the internet, or better yet, go to a museum that explicitly teaches about evolution, make a video of it, and still support the museum through purchasing the ticket. Hey, go right ahead. Make all the "field trips" you want. It is not helping the "evolutionistic movement." Here is the video that the SAIU (Secular Alliance of Indiana University) made on their trip to the Creationism Museum.
The worst part of this all is how the scientific community just can't understand the massive numbers the museum is bringing in. "What is wrong with these people? Don't they understand the light? They must understand how wrong they are!" The problem is, these people are making the decision even though they are (for the most part) raised in public schools that bombard students with evolutionary propaganda and the intense push for a god-less society. Maybe evolution isn't teaching this "rock hard solid facts" well enough. Maybe they need to bombard people 24/7 with more propaganda? Or maybe they need to realize that people are intelligent, and they do make reasons based upon reason. All this hate for museum is stemmed from anger that "Us Creationists just don't see it their way". It sounds more like religion than science to me.
Oh well. In an attempt to ridicule and hurt the Creation Museum, PZ Meyers has elevated the museum to a publicity level it would never have achieved without his help. A plan that backfired and a perfect example of God in work. Evolutionists can keep on trying to drive the point "there is no God, blah, blah, blah" but they must realize they are in a very difficult battle. People have been trying to do the same thing for 6000 years now, but guess what? The Bible is still around. Christianity is still around. People are believing what the Bible teaches. Psalms 119:160. Atheists in general are a very small group with a loud voice. In due time they will be quelled. Hopefully before they have judgment before our Creator. It is our mission as Christians to keep them in prayer and hopefully we can facilitate the change.
God Bless,
Eric
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Hello
I am writing , or I should say 'creating', this blog from a sort of a "spur of the moment" experience. As I was laying in bed last night, I began to think and question myself "How can I get my ideas out there? How can I really let everyone know the truth that they are not getting?" And then it came to me: I make a blog and discuss it there! This silly blogger account would be perfect to use, as I have had it for years without really using it. So last night I made the decision that I would set it up ASAP and get working on decent posts in due time.
Thus, it brings me to my Cisco class. Right now, I am writing this as the teacher is talking about subnetting and the works. I should be listening, but hey, I said I had to do it ASAP, and I definitely can't wait till tonight as I am going to be busy (in fact I don't think I will step back into my house until tomorrow early morning) . This post is more a less a bit more structured introduction to what and why I am doing this, and for you, the reader, to get to know me.
I have been doing a lot of research into Creationism/Evolution debate, and through it all I have realized how passionate I am about learning and teaching the science of Creation. I simply can't contain myself just reading articles on it. I want to contribute! To help the cause of Creation! And this is the only logical way I can do it (remember I am just a student who isn't even allowed to get a job during school year!). Just to make it clear I am a very firm believer of Creationism through history, science and scripture. I also understand this blog will not achieve billions of views, or even thousands for that matter, but that is not the whole point of this. It is here simply for me to contribute no matter how little or how much it does.
I would also like to note I get a great deal of my information and blog ideas from the following sites:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/- A very good resource site for all Creationism needs. Highly recommend as it very laymen orientated
http://www.icr.org/- Not as good as AiG, but it still has some valuable information
http://www.trueorigin.org/- A very technical site. Good for people who understand all the terms used in Creationism and science
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/aroundtheworld/- Ken Ham's blog (creator of AiG) Some very interesting ideas and stories in here.
Aside from the main focus of this blog, it will also help my english riting (I'm just playing; writing) abilities, which truly do need help. I also am going to actually research, study, write out, proofread, and overall make a quality blog. As of right now, I have no idea how many blogs I am going to put out, but I am planning of about a blog a week as that seems like the magical number for most bloggers.
Final note, I provided a little description about myself in the about me. However, I didn't provide a very in depth detail about me. What I can say at this very moment is I will update my profile as much as I can, as soon as I can. I kinda suck at writing about mes just because I feel so cheesy doing it. But I guess it is kind of important, so I will hop onto it asap.
I am very glad I was able to get this post out before my day was over, and hopefully I will have my first blog out sometime this week, or possibly (and hopefully) this weekend sometime.
Thanks,
Eric
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
