Thursday, November 18, 2010

Freedom Is Rebellion

     OK so, you're at work when someone says, "They're supposed to do that, but they didn't." Probably happened to you before, right? Now, think: would you be surprised that the person who is supposed to do something didn't? Probably not. In fact, if you had acted surprised they would be utterly confused. I mean, the fact that you don't have to do what you ought to do should be very surprising, considering. It doesn't naturally follow that if you are supposed to do something that you might not do it. This is unnatural, illogical, even. "Of course they didn't have to do it, I'm just saying they were supposed to." If something should happen, subsequently it ought to happen. If something is supposed to happen, and it didn't, then something has gone very wrong. 

     Even so, in the human mindset, to expect that someone necessarily do what they are supposed to do is next to insanity. Not that they would do what they're supposed to, that's not craziness, but that, logically, one must do exactly what they ought to—that's craziness. This is very revealing of the essential fact that humans are rebellious to the absolute core. That we think it crazy to believe that there is no other rational option but to do what is essentially our duty shows that rebellion is a simple fluid product of our very nature. It is so perfectly natural to us to choose to do or not do what we should that anything else is unthinkable. 

     Why should it be a surprise, then, that people are remarkably put off by the idea that man has no say in whether he is saved—no choice in his salvation? This also may suggest as to why the humble repentant Christian goes overboard when he learns of the sovereignty of God in salvation written in the scriptures. So, when he learns that he was chosen by God, and not vice-versa, he starts to see, in fact, the necessity of carrying out oughtness is righteousness and all else is rebellion.

Sunday, November 7, 2010

Why is God so Great?

Why is God so Great?
Grace: unmerited; unearned; undeserved.
By working for it, you reject it;
By earning, it's annulled;
If deserved, voided.
A GIFT of GREAT cost!

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

The Sting of The Truth

     Jesus of Nazareth is the only man, of all those who have claimed for themselves divinity, whom assessed the nature of mankind so spot on accurately, that he actually offended, alienated, and/or enraged the large majority of any of those whom were ever to hear or read the words that Jesus spoke.

Saturday, September 25, 2010

People will always use the things we trust and the things we hope for as power for their goals. Whether we trust in God or Science

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Saturday, May 8, 2010

Why are we looking for missing link fossils. If they were better adapted than other apes why did they die off? There should be a ton of them still around today.

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Christ Is Our Foundation

America. Doomed From its Inception?

Foundation, foundation, foundation. No, you’re right; those aren’t the three most important things about real estate. However, you can definitely say that the foundation is the most important criteria of any endeavor which you may start. That is, whether you are starting a relationship, raising children, building a house, starting a business, or a fantasy football team, how you start and what you use at the base of your endeavor will dictate how the project will be turning out along the way. It’s just, as anyone who has cut a very large piece of paper with scissors can tell you, when one starts out skewed just the tiniest bit on the trajectory, by the time the cut is at its end, you’re off by a mile.
       Now, as much as we would love to see this country of ours get back to its origin, I think what we really need to do is get back to the basics. We need to get back to what the basic foundation of America was; what made America great in the first place. Let’s take a look at Iraq for second. Some people say that Democracy in Iraq is unattainable because of the Islamic morality system there. I tend to agree. It’s not that the Iraqi people are immoral or amoral. It’s actually the source of their morality that is the problem. It’s the foundation of the country of Iraq that makes it impossible for them to attain a long, self-sustaining, free-market democracy. In the same way, we too have lost the foundation that made our small-government freedom-based country run as well as it did and for as long as it did. Dr. Vishal Mangalwadi, in his teaching lecture, “Must the Sun Set on the West?”, recounts a visit of his to a friend in a European country that was founded on Christian ethics. Coming from a country which he calls morally corrupt that is, India, he was dumbfounded when, during a countryside walk with his friend, the two wandered into a small unmanned dairy. He was quite taken aback when this friend of his offered him some milk and then simply opened up a spigot and filled a couple of containers, leaving a form of payment there, and walked out. You see, this sort of thing would never occur in Vishal’s India. Vishal goes on to explain that, in his society, what would happen if there ever was a dairy unattended like that was, quite simply, that the thieves would steal the milk, the owner would have to hire an attendant, he would then have to raise the milk price to pay the worker, he would also have to water down the milk to increase profit, then he would have to pay off the quality inspector because of the watered-down milk, and therefore, have to raise the price again, and so on and so on. You get the idea, but that is just a small example of what it means to have a solid foundation; or a lack thereof. Christian Apologist, Ravi Zacharias, during a lecture at Wheaton College, made the statement, “Worldviews are the grids; they are the lenses through which we frame all of reality; the paradigm from which everything actually emerges… I think the biggest danger America lives with is the failure to recognize that if the worldview that framed her is abandoned, the worldview that she thinks she is espousing will not be strong enough to withstand the assaults of counter perspectives.”

So, what is America’s origin? A better question perhaps, is, ‘How can we even know or get back to America’s origin?’ Considering, we are so incredibly confused about, specifically, man’s origin.
 Back to the Basics
Evolution. The British philosopher Malcolm Muggeridge once wrote of evolution, “I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books in the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.” – Deceit, p. 164, The End of Christendom (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980, sp. 43.)
You don’t have to be a scientist to believe in evolution. You just need to have faith in the popular scientific community. You don’t need to be a scientist to know that evolution is impossible. You just need common sense. When thinking honestly about evolution or more importantly, the beginnings of Man, you may want to ask four important questions. They are: Where did matter come from? Where did time come from? Where did the information contained in DNA come from? Where did light come from? Since we know that nothing physical can be truly infinite, and time, therefore, cannot be infinite, we know that the all of these things did not exist, but now do exist. Additionally, from this we know that these things must have come out of nothing (physical), that is ex nihilo. If not from the physical, then from what? From outside the physical, outside the natural, super-natural. The answers to these questions are quite simply (respectively): It came from A creator; an initiator; A light source; an informant; an uncaused first cause. Yes, the information in your DNA (more complex than any architects blueprint) must have come from an informant, an informer, a source of information. Similarly, light must have a light source, be it the sun or the creator of the sun. Interestingly, the Apostle John states in his Gospel (John 1:1-5), “1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. 4In him was life,a and the life was the light of men.5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.” And in Genesis 1:1-4, “1In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. 3And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.” Furthermore the Bible states, “10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.” (Jn 1:10) and “16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
The foundation of the world; the good foundation stands up through the test of time. We’ve got to get back to our roots. The founding fathers erred when they failed to thoroughly define Christ as our foundation. Throughout history, great nations and times of peace were conceived by Christian reformation. Dark ages were a result of the loss of God’s written word. Now, when it so plentiful, people have forgotten how to read it or even that it is there to read.
With Christ as our foundation we cannot fail. Would God let us fail when we are trying to beautifully reflect His image in our country? I truly believe that Atheists are currently acting out with such veracity because, they are being cornered. Just as an animal. Evolution is definitely on its way out the door so, pick up your brooms and help us sweep it out, so we can make room for Christ which was our intended foundation. That is, for all men personally, locally, and globally. 

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

An Atheist would burn his own eyes out if he thought that it would aide in blinding him to the truth of God

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Salt & Peppered Moths vs Blacks & White Men


I am soooo incredibly sick of evolutionists trotting out the Peppered Moths as proof of evolution. They say that there were 98% grey and 2% black. The tree bark turned black from soot and exaust from nearby factories(they always refer to this as pollution. i wonder why). Therefore, birds saw the grey moths and ate them. The black ones blended in with the trees and lived. 50 years later, there were 5% grey and 95% black. TADAH! THEY EVOLVED. What? The grey moths turned into black moths through mutations over a long period of time. NOPE. THIS IS TO SAY THAT DURING LEGAL AMERICAN SLAVERY, THERE WERE 98%WHITES AND 2% BLACKS. AND NOW 200 YEARS LATER THERE ARE 5% WHITE AND 95% BLACK. NOW YOU TELL ME,  DID THE WHITE MEN EVOLVE OVER TIME INTO BLACK MEN????
{(this is as close to a rhetorical question as you can get so try not to over think it)}

Monday, January 4, 2010

The intro to my first book

Reason and Reasonability

The Search for Reasonable Doubt


"If I put this knit cap on, who am I?" he asked. "I'm still Johnnie Cochran with a knit cap ... and O.J. Simpson in a knit cap from two blocks away is still O.J. Simpson. It's no disguise. It's no disguise. It makes no sense. It doesn't fit. If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." —

This is the famous rhyming rhetoric of one Johnnie Cochran, defense attorney.

The Scopes trial, Nuremberg, Oscar Wilde, George Reeves, Timothy McVeigh, the trial of Leopold & Loeb, the Black Dahlia, O.J. Simpson, Harold Shipman, Dr. Ossian Sweet, Bob Crane, the Hurricane, and JonBenét. Arguably the most famous, and infamous, cases of the 20th century. The murders, of Elizabeth Short (Black Dahlia) and Bob Crane (Hogan's Heroes), still unsolved today. The staged trial of John T. Scopes by the ACLU. The highly disputed acquittal of Orenthal James Simpson (SF 49ers RB). As well as, the highly disputed conviction of Rubin "Hurricane" Carter (American middleweight boxer). Consider these cases for a moment. If you would have asked anybody on the streets, at the times of these trials, for their opinions, you would have gotten an earful for sure. Sometimes unanimous opinions and other times contrasting and far spanning.

    No doubt, you can easily remember some of these trials yourself. In fact, you may have had very strong opinions on what the verdicts should have been. I can remember people being thoroughly convinced of the guilt of some of these infamous defendants before the cases had even come to an end or without even having had the same facts as the actual participants of the trials. Naturally though, regardless of actually being part of the courtroom proceedings, we sometimes genuinely make conclusions based on the evidence that we are privy to, in order to make our own convictions or acquittals. Yes, we are sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, that is, that the defendant is guilty, or innocent, or whatever.

    'Beyond a reasonable doubt', that's what is used in court right? That's how someone is found guilty or innocent, 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Actually, when you think about it, we really do make a large majority of our decisions, throughout the day, based on this idea. We usually don't think about it but, we often do it, nonetheless. For example, every day that you leave your house for work, you leave home with enough time to get to work on time, so you aren't late. My guess is that, you don't leave home two hours earlier than yesterday, just in case there are several huge traffic jams. No, even though that may be a possibility, you still don't consider it as a possible option. You know, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it will not take an additional two hours to get to work today, and you're right. In fact, I'd suggest that you use this philosophy just about every day.

    Now, if we, as people, do indeed let this idea dictate our day-to-day, menial, and mundane life decisions (If in fact unknowingly.) as well as, our criminal justice cases then, the question should be posed, "What about the truly HUGE life decisions?" Like, for example, "Will my fiancée be a good partner for me?" Or, "Is our President going to utterly destroy our country?" Or, "Does God exist?" Or, even more important, "Can I trust God with my life?" Is it still applicable? Does it still function? Well, I think we all rest a little easier at night when, after asking big questions like these, we have thought through them and have accumulated a sufficient amount of evidence to make a good decision. In fact, you probably do this often by recruiting a friend to help you think through tough issues like these. I would like to suggest that you can know whether you've made a good choice in a future spouse, you can know whether the Commander in Chief is heading us on an irreparable trajectory, and you can even know certainties about God. That is, unless you have already predetermined the outcome of the case, in advance.

    That brings us to the probing question of, "Is the amount or size of evidence that you are asking for to make your decision, reasonable?"
Are you being reasonable? If you are looking for a spouse, are you being reasonable? or are you looking for someone who is perfect? If you doubt God's existence, are you being reasonable in how much evidence you require?