Tuesday, November 17, 2009

ALLAHU AKBAR! or The Atheist Obfuscation

Are Atheists Trying To Trick You?

Obfuscation. Purposeful clouding. Fooling. Deceiving. A smoke screen.
Chances are good that you have heard about the Fort Hood Massacre. Where the killer, reportedly, shouted the phrase Allahu Akbar (usually translated as God Is Great link). However, I assume that the chances aren't good that you have heard about the book titled "god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" (yes it's written just like that).

Allahu Akbar does not mean god is great or God is great. It means Allah is great. (I'll note why that is important later.) Notice that the author bails on proper English grammar only to emphasize his dishonor of God. All words in a title should be capitalized. Of course, he could say that he did it to denote that he was not speaking of a specific god. Yet, he could just make that clear in his preface. This book was written by the Great christopher hitchens. See what I mean? Kinda sneaky? Kinda underhanded? (My computer is even demanding that I correct these errors. Smart computer. Good boy.) You would pick up on this right away if you were familiar with the spewing, venomous, sledgehammer rhetoric that Hitchens uses. (watch his rhetoric now or here)

Sneaky and underhanded. That brings me to my next point. Rhetoric. Rhetoric is best and most often used by lawyers. Clarence Darrow's defense of two boys that pleaded guilty to the wanton and guiltless murder of a young neighborhood boy, which they committed because they were bored, is a classic example. see here (The prosecutor labels the murder as cold-blooded. How else could you label it?) He says things like,

"Why need the state's attorney ask for something that never before has been demanded?"(How do you answer that?)
and
"I have never yet tried a case where the state's attorney did not say that it was the most cold-blooded, inexcusable, premeditated case that ever occurred. If this was murder, there never was such a murder...Lawyers are apt to say that." (Accusing opponent of using rhetoric.)
But this is what really good lawyers do. Clarence Darrow was a really good lawyer. But, of course, we know from common sense that when a defense attorney knows that their clients are guilty and advises them to plead innocent that their job is now to deceive twelve citizens and, if necessary, the judge. Using rhetoric is an excellent way to deceive people. It's more about the words you use and how they sound. It's more about how you say it and your body language. It's about making your opponents look stupid (straw man). It's more about the look, feel, and inherent power in your words than the raw unfettered logic in your argument. In Greece there was a famous orator (I can't recall his name) who would practice speaking, yes practice speaking, by putting pebbles or marbles in his mouth.
“The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments.” -Nietzsche, The Gay Science.

Now, besides using rhetoric, Hitchens attempts to deceive his readers just in his title alone. The title is god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, stealing the title from the Muslim phrase. Well, in doing so, he paints all gods with the same religious brush. As Ravi Zacharias once said,

"Anyone who claims that all religions are the same betrays not only an ignorance of all religions but also a caricatured view of even the best known ones. "1
Though Christians do not know the exact name of their God, they do know that he has a name. After being robbed of its vowels by the Hebrew priests what we have left of God's name is YHWH, transliterated into English as JHVH. Looking familiar? Yes, Jehovah is the word we use as God's name. Jehovah encapsulates Father, Son, and Spirit as one God. Now with Islam you could say that Allah is just god in Arabic but, the Quran says in Chapter 20,
"Allah! There is no God save Him. His are the most beautiful names. (8) Hath there come unto thee the story of Moses? (9) When he saw a fire and said unto his folk: Wait! Lo! I see a fire afar off. Peradventure I may bring you a brand therefrom or may find guidance at the fire. (10) And when he reached it, he was called by name: O Moses! (11) Lo! I, even I, am thy Lord, So take off thy shoes, for lo! thou art in the holy valley of Tuwa. (12) And I have chosen thee, so hearken unto that which is inspired. (13) Lo! I, even I, am Allah, There is no God save Me. So serve Me and establish worship for My remembrance."
You see they say Allah is God, not God is God or Allah is Allah, but what's important is that Jehovah is not Allah. So when Hitchens says we should free ourselves from religion and uses 9/11 as a case against religion he is trying to say that god is god and all religions have the same effect. That is, evil, as defined by his relative and subjective morality given by his conscience and delivered to his mind to be recreated by his hardend heart.

So much deceit found in just the title of a book.


1. Doug Powell,
Christian Apologetics (Nashville: Holman Reference) 114.




Tuesday, October 6, 2009

The SIMPLE Question of Evil

Temptation is a mandatory byproduct of ones free will.

Free will is necessary for the reality of love to exist.

If love is forced then love is false.

Sin was inevitable. Adam and/or Eve would have eventually sinned at one point in their living upon the earth.

God knew this and created mankind anyway. Now, every time that you've sinned you had an out.

God did this in order that He may rescue the humble by opening their eyes to the Good News of His experiencing the requirement for sin (though He had none of His own) which is death and in the process making enough payment for the worlds sin.

Is God A Murderer?

God can't steal.

He owns everything.


God can't murder.

All life is from Him.


God simply takes

back what He gives.

#2

No man can stand;

Before the Glory and Righteousness

of our Omnipotent Creator.


Let alone utter one solitary syllable;

in any pathetic and vain

attempt at proclaiming their own innocence.

#1

One day the badges of honor

that some have made

for themselves

will be melted and all but disappear

under the intense flooding light

of the Moral Law of God.

Friday, October 2, 2009

My Obsession With Freedom

I am obsessed with freedom.

When I was a slave to sin I was free to do what i wanted. I loved sin. That's what I wanted to do. Now, I am a slave to Christ, which is fine but, do I still have the freedom to do what I want to do? I want to be free. I want freedom.

You're either a slave to sin or a slave to Christ. There are no other options. As Bob Dylan once sang, "You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody."
Rather, I'd say you either serve Him or serve yourself.

Yet, I AM free to do what I want. I, like Paul, want to do evil AND do good. Evil in my body; good in my mind. So, as one who was unconverted, I pursued unrighteousness but, now I actually pursue righteousness. Previously, I never looked to be righteous, however, now I do. But, it is hard to find, sometimes very hard. However, evil was, for me, easy to find. And it still is.

By the way, being a slave is only a bad thing if you're NOT doing what you want. To be a slave working in a field is only a bad thing to someone who hates to physically labor in fields. So, which is better, to be a slave to sin? or to be a slave to Christ? Which is it?

Superficially... to sin. Until the resurrection and the removal of this flesh.

Monday, August 24, 2009

The Shortest Bible Version Ever (SBVE)

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and everything on it including man. 2 God will one day RE-create the heavens and the earth. 3 Anybody who has received God's gift of eternal life will live on it with new incorruptible bodies. 4 Amen.

Ok that said; let me fill in some blanks.

Firstly, God has given everyone life and the right to choose Him. (Though He gives some the ability to choose Him)

If you don't want to be with Him, then you don't have to be.

You see, you've broken His moral laws and He certainly shouldn't reward you by creating a separate heaven apart from him and sustain it as a gift for rejecting Him and breaking His Commandments, should He?

But, He has said that He's made a place for those who reject His Son and therefore reject the Father. (Even those who "accept" the Son but refuse to repent and turn from their sin life do not have the Holy Spirit of God.) This place is called Hell.

Now, all good things come from God. So then, when God ratifies your choice of separation from Him, you are choosing separation from everything that is good. (i.e. light, warmth, coolness, comfort, peace of mind) The absence of good is evil. You are choosing an eternity with everything (and everyone) that is wicked and evil. You can call this what you want, but God calls it Hell.

I warn you, do not be a fool when considering these things. There obviously won't be a second chance after you're dead. Now, if you don't find God here on earth, how will you find Him when you're dead? If you're separated from God in life, you'll be separated from Him after life.

In contrast, if you're joined with God in this life by His Spirit, given through Jesus by repentance and faith, then you will be joined with Him after this life. You must turn from your sinful nature and self-righteousness and grasp onto God's righteous nature, which is in His Spirit, given through Jesus, from the Father. Cling to Him as if your life depended on it, because it does.

Now, heaven would not be heaven if it were full of unrepentant sinners. Heaven is only heaven when it is made up of people who have been made righteous, not by their good deeds, but their trust and utter reliance on the cleansing power and full payment from the shed blood of the Lamb of God who was the final sacrifice for both Jew and non-Jew. This is Jesus who is the Christ, the living Son of the living God.

So, I urge you, decide now, whether you truly believe that you're a sinner and a lawbreaker with no righteousness of your own, that God came down from His throne in heaven to earth, to live in our corrupted bodies just to be beaten, mocked, spat upon, and nailed to a cross by the very things that He created and gave life to, that He died and resurrected Himself three days later just because He loves us.

If you really do believe this and today you repent and ask God for forgiveness and decide today to live for God, you too will be resurrected and live with God in a newly created heaven, a new earth, with a newly created body. You will share in this with many others who have nailed their will to the cross of Christ and accept God's perfect will for their lives.

All you can do is ask God to substitute His righteousness for yours and to conform you into the perfect image of His Son Jesus Christ.

Pride & Humility

    God shows mercy to whom He shows mercy,

And compassion upon whom He has compassion.

    God resists the proud,

But gives grace to the humble.


 

The prideful man says, 'I am better than you think I am'.

Where the humble man says, 'I'm worse than you can imagine'.

    

The proud cannot understand Mercy,

Because they don't believe that their punishment is just.

    The humble don't understand Grace,

Because they don't believe that their punishment is enough.

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Where Is Your Faith?!

Science Blunders and Mistakes



They blame religion for the lack of science or stifling it.
They accuse Christians of reading the Bible as a science textbook.
They attempt to use archeology to disprove the Bible.
They used science to help build Nietzsche and Hitler's Supermen in WWII.


How long will you trust them;
How long?


They told us Pluto was a planet;
That the earth was flat;
That it was the center of the universe;
That we were all gonna die from AIDS;
From SARS;
From the Bird Flu;
From the Swine Flu;
From DDT;
From overpopulation.


How long will we have faith;
How long?


They even said Evolution was a fact.
Then they said humans were causing global warming.
They said that the matter in the universe came from nothing;
And exploded into everything.
They said, 'THERE IS NO GOD'.


How long? How long?


How many times do they have to be proven wrong?
How many times do they have to make mistakes?
How many times do they have to lie to us?
How many blunders do they have to make before you stop putting your faith in them and start putting it solely in God?

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Belief is a Choice; Faith is an Action


Yes, belief is a choice and faith, an action.

Let me explain.

For example, there was a man.
The man was standing on one side of a huge chasm with a massive burning forest at his back. On the other side, there was an open pasture flowing with living springs. He surely smelt the smoke and felt the immense heat behind him. However, on the other side at a distance he could hear the waters flowing and feel the cool breezes from across the chasm. Though he wasn't positive, he could sense it. Then, all of a sudden, he heard a man speaking just on his left side, asking if he noticed the fire, since he was just standing there, not going anywhere. Then, he asked him about the smoke and charcoal stains all over his face and clothes. Startled, the man asked, "Who are you, what are you doing here?" The stranger responded, "My name is Thomas. I saw you standing here and came to check on you." At that point Thomas noticed the contents the man had, a box of matches and, behind him, a small gas can. So, Thomas asked the man, "Did you have a hand in this?" The man responded quickly, "Of course not. I'm a good person." Then, he mentioned the man's matches, as well as his gas can. At first, the man decided to believe that, yes, he is a good person. But then, he remembered what he had done, and he softened his heart and admitted that it indeed was him.

Then, one of the man's friends spoke up from the edge of the forest and said, "Yes. Of course, we all had a hand in this. We started the fire because we love mischief. And we're all gonna be burned and die if we stay here." The man responded, "Well, where can we go?" Then the friend, confirming the man's senses, said, "Well, there's a beautiful pasture afar off. The Man that owns this entire forest owns that pasture." The man muttered to himself, "A field." "How do we get there?", he asked. The friend said, "Well, there is a great chasm between here and there." The man said, "I feared as much, for when I threw a stone in the direction of the cool breeze that I had felt, I did not here the stone hit, and I knew I could not reach its source if I tried." "That is true, but someone told me of a bridge that was built by hand. Built by the hand of the Son of the One who owns the field, actually," said the friend. He continued, "He built it by himself, without any help. He made it from wood and nails, that are now stained with the Son's blood and sweat. They showed me the bridge, and even though I too am blind, I believed them when they told me." He continued, "I felt the bridge myself. I knew it was there. However, I wasn't sure that it would hold the full weight of my body because it was built by hand by just one man, and it spans a great distance."

"What did you do?", the man asked. The friend responded to him, "Well, I told them that I could build my own way across. And they told me not to do that, because that would be a huge insult to the Father and the Son and sacrifice that He made. Then, they told me the Father would never allow me to enter His field on my own bridge, and that I could only enter by the bridge stained with the blood of the Son.' I said, ‘OK but, let me, at least, reinforce the bridge.’ Then, they said, ‘No, if the Father sees anyone adding onto the already complete work that His Son has finished, He will send them back across the bridge into the searing flames, that they had created, to burn in, because, He has seen the bridge that His Son built and He instructed Him in every step of its construction. Yes, He has seen it and, He says that it is perfect and beautiful.’ So, believing them, I grabbed a hold of the side ropes with both hands and believing this Man to be a good man, I lifted one leg to step out onto the bridge. Just then the person speaking with me yelled at me to stop. He said to me, ‘You can’t go to the Son’s feast dressed like that. The father will never let you in like that. This will be a fantastic, beautiful, and prestigious feast.' Of course, I responded, ‘Like what?’ ‘Well, you’re filthy. You’re covered in smoke and charcoal and you still have the evidence of the hand you had in the fire laying across your back.’

I begged, ‘What should I do then?’ ‘The fact of the matter is, when you put your faith and trust fully in the work of the Son to get you over to the Father. Then, you will be given an official invitation to the party, signed with a certain name that only the Father and Son will recognize. And, if you are willing to admit to the Father your guilt in burning His perfect and wonderful forest and ask for His forgiveness, He will forgive you your trespasses and He will give you a new outfit, white and spotless. Then, you will no longer have to be ashamed.’ ‘But He’s the one…', I said, 'He’s the one that made me want to burn down His forest ‘cause He allowed some person to tempt me by leaving these matches and this gas can next to my path.’ Of course, dumbfounded, he said, ‘What?!’ And, I eked, ‘Nothing.’ Then, they continued, ‘So, when you walk across, hold onto the invitation from His Son like your life depends on it because, anyone who doesn’t have the Son’s official invitation on them will be sent back to live with the fire that they started. Then, put on the new spotless suit and be sure to keep It spotless because, if you go back to your filth, there won’t be another suit to wear and you will be rejected at the door."

"So, when I heard the good things that Man and His Son had done for me, I just let go of the ropes and leaped onto the bridge and immediately stopped and thanked the Father and the Son. And, they said to me, 'You can always be sure the bridge is there because you have been on it. You know it is trustworthy because you've been across. Now, on the day when the feast is here, when the flames are licking at your back, you can know for sure that you will be at the feast. You will know because, the Father and Son were so kind that, even though you burnt down His forest, even though you tried to build your own way to the feast and build onto the beautiful work He had already done, He forgave you and saved you.'"

"Then, they continued, 'You see, He told us to show you, the way to His field, where the feast will be held. The feast for His Son and all those that trust in our message and in the work of the Son. So, while you are here, share this good news because, you were forgiven and you should extend this gift to all.'"

Well, after hearing all of his friend's testimony, the man said, "Well, show me this bridge. This all sounds so fanciful to me." The friend replied, "But, you have sensed all of these evidences. Even so, I will show you the bridge." The friend showed the man. The man even touched it. Then, the friend said, "So, there it is, I know that it will hold you, just like it held me. Now, just jump." "No way!", the man retorted. "What, you want to stay and burn?" "Well, you may think that the bridge is all well and good but, you don't even know whats on the other side. You don't even know if the fire is still burning." "Man, I really care about you. You're my friend. Just jump on. I don't want you to stay here and die!" The friend continued, "I've touched the bridge. I know the Son built it. It's good!" The man returned, "Hey, I'll go my own way!" "You'll never make it, man!" "It's my CHOICE!", yelled the man. Then, the friend simply replied, " I know." He continued, "The Owner of the field will not force you to go and neither will I."



This is simply AN analogy of the Gospel. It is not full. It is not a comment on either Calvinism or Armenianism. Like the parables of Jesus it is meant to convey a certain point. That is whether God, in His infinite wisdom makes us believe or simply grants us the ability to believe, it is a choice all people make. That includes atheists, agnostics, post-moderns (yes they believe in stuff), Sheep, and Goats. As well as, the fact that faith is to be acted upon to be true faith.

plz comment on this to tell me if there are any major flaws or just to say if you like it or not. Thanks

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

empiricist or hypocrite

Are empirical Atheistic Evolutionists Really Being Empirical When It Comes To Evolution?

empiricism (plural empiricism s)

1. A pursuit of knowledge purely through experience, especially by means of observation and sometimes by experimentation.

hypocrisy (plural hypocrisies)

  1. The claim or pretense of holding beliefs, feelings, standards, qualities, opinions or virtues that one does not actually possess.
Recently, I was watching a nature show on the Science channel that had some beautiful video. There were two hosts. Both believed in evolution and an incredibly old earth. The two were doing field research on some islands, collecting samples. One sample that was taken from the rock was said to possibly contain the origins of life. At the end of the show one scientist , while still on the island, semi-smiling, said that they were going to take the samples back to the lab, where they 'would study them, look at the information and come up with a story... in the end, that's what we do, come up with stories'.

When I heard this I, uncontrollably, laughed aloud. I think I laughed mainly because this is one of my main arguments against evolution. To hear an evolutionist-scientist come right-out, unabashedly, and say it like it was a job description... This is also an argument used by other well known creationists. This quote is right up there with some other quasi-infamous quotes from evolutionists, such as: Evolution is neither proven nor provable, but its alternative, special creation, is unthinkable. and [The Big Bang] represents the instantaneous suspension of physical laws, the sudden abrupt flash of lawlessness that allowed something to come from nothing. It represents a true miracle... You can see a truly massive list of such quotes at http://www.evolutionisdead.com/marc4eid/Quotes.csv.
Now, when I look for evidence for evolution, I look for empirical evidence as well. Good, solid, unquestionable, unintercontradictory, court room kinda evidence. I would think atheists would also like this kind of evidence, because it is a basis for their entire worldview. Unless of course, you choose your worldview because you like its particular benefits. In that case you would probably, like St. Paul said, ...by unrighteousness suppress the truth. Romans 1:18

No doubt you've heard someone somewhere say that unless they can see it or touch it they won't believe it exists. Well, since evolution is an idea and not a thing or person I would like to redefine this qualification. For evolution, the evidence that I think we should require is something that we don't have to propose a story on, something that exists in the present, and is sufficient in number. The evidence I've found for evolution has been less than thrilling. All I see is supposed links like some mollusks and bacteria. At its base evolution is about accidentally mutating beneficial attributes so as to better survive your surroundings. My sisters French Bulldog is evidence in the present of an accidentally and beneficially mutated animal. There are thousands of French Bulldogs and at one time in man's time they didn't exist. Their beneficial attribute? They are very small and hideously cute. On the contrary, they cannot survive more than a day or two without human help. I've heard some scientists say that this is evidence for evolution. I'd say at the best, this is grasping at straws. Their mutations are defects that were spotted by breeders who forced them to breed with other defective dogs.

So where, in nature, are the animals that are evolving? I've seen animals that have amazing natural defenses. Where are the animals with mutations? I've seen the cows with an extra leg. Where are the humans with beneficial mutations? I've seen X-Men and the NBA playoffs.

Probability suggests that in order for an animal with a mutation to pass on its mutation, it must have either a mutation that keeps it from dieing too soon to procreate or be incredibly lucky. The other option for a particular animal to pass down a mutation is for the same mutation to exist in many animals, either recurring through history or by being obtained by many offspring. For example, a rabbit giving birth to bunnies all having 1-inch longer ears or all similar rabbits having a relative that gives birth to a bunny with a 1-inch longer ear. Even though this is probable, I have not seen evidence for this in the wild. I've never seen even one same mutation passed down to all siblings. If this has happened, it is rare. And, the rarity, is a dead giveaway. Animals die from many natural occurrences, not to mention their predators. If you are the next step in the evolution of a species, when you are born, you need to make it all the way from infancy through adolescence all the way to maturity, without dieing in order to pass on that defective gene. But surviving to sexual maturity is not all. You still need to find a mate. Hopefully you can find a mate that has a thing for mutations and your mutation is hidden or attractive. If you actually do find a mate, the next step is impregnation... hopefully it takes. Now for the last piece. Did the faulty DNA transfer to an embryo? Other questions: Does that one embryo make it to birth? Does that one embryo survive the birth or is it still born? Does the father eat it? After all that amazing process, it has to happen a couple million more times and also has to be a beneficial attribute. This seems absurd to me, but that's not my point. My point is that we should see hundreds of mutants running around, mutants with beneficial mutations. I WANT EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE! and you should to.

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

Pro-choice; Pro-slavery





The Pro-choice and abolitionist's differences helped spur a civil war. Although the Civil War was not fought because of slavery, the war was spawned because of the dissension of the south that was caused by their supposed lack of freedom. A taking of a man's liberty. The freedom, the choice, the right to choose to own or not own a slave. We can catch a glimpse of what the confederates may have felt today, in the mass of emotions drummed up in the pro-choice activists of abortion and man to man marriage. I wonder, if women should have the right to choose the time and location of the death of their yet-to-premiere children, why shouldn't men be allowed to choose the color and age of their new farm implement?



If pro choice-ism spawned an INTRAnational war already, how long 'till it comes to blows again? Who's gonna throw the first punch? Sunday, we had a high-profile victim. A man who was killed for having his hand in the deaths of over 10,000 premature children, according to USA Today. Hopefully one side will concede rather than secede, and we can avoid a literal 'culture war'. But hopefully it will be the pro-choice side again, that surrenders. Surrenders to reason, logic, the conscience and TRUTH.


May God guide your mind and heart.

Ps- Sorry for the rethoric. I hope I used it rightly.