October 30, 2007

I write mostly about biblical subjects. I receive many comments from those who do not believe in the God of the Bible, or any God. I really like those comments, even when they say I have the brain of a grapefruit, because they make you think and rethink what you have said. Those who comment from that view will discard anything said that might be considered evidence that there is a God and point out anything that might be considered evidence to the contrary.

I noticed a comment on one of their blog sites that seemed to point out a condradiction on my part. I wrote a post titled “Hey Christian do you want a laugh?” where I said that the exestance of God can not be proved and shortly before that I had written a post titled “Science proves there is a God”.

As I said they make you think and I realized that I was not willing to change either statement. To me the universe does prove there has to be a God and yet I know one cannot prove the existence of God to someone else! After some thought I realized that what seems like a contradiction is only a case of applying a different definition to the same word.

The Concise Oxford English Dictionary defines the word “Prove” as 1. demonstrate by evidence or argument the truth or existence of. 2. show by evidence or argument to be.

In my post “Science proves there is a God” I applied the first definition to the word prove. The evidence was that all of the matter in the universe is decaying or changing into energy and there is no evidence of it changing back into matter: so there is an end to the universe and that it could not have began without something outside of the natural laws.

In “Hey Christian do you want a laugh?” I applied the second definition. It seems to be impossible to show an atheist by evidence or argument that there is a God. At least I have not been successful in doing so.

I see God in all things and of course I see God in this. God confused the language at the tower of Babel and that is all languages. Every language usually has more than one definition for every word. The one that speaks a word knows the definition that they mean to apply, but the one who hears the word may, or may not apply the same definition. String a few sentences together without complete understanding of the words and confusion results.

Even if you do not want to believe there is a God you have to admit there is usually more than one definition to every word in every language and therefore it is very difficult to communicate.

I thought it was funny when it was said that I have a grapefruit for a brain. Maybe I will use that, “Words of wisdom from a grapefruit” it has I nice ring to it, don’t you think? Well, on second thought maybe it is just a thud.


October 25, 2007

Go get a bullet to bite on because this is painful.

I am not a stock broker, politician, or anyone else that has a reason to pull the wool over your eyes. I am just a poor slob that can see what happened and I am disgusted enough to tell it.

Let’s say the problem started with NAFTA (North American Foolish Trade Agreement), after all we have to start somewhere and I don’t have enough time to go all the way back to the Revolutionary War.

When those in the government passed NAFTA they assured foreign workers an advantage over americans. They did this under the guise of free trade: that free trade was fair to all. However workers in South America do not have the same standard of living enjoyed in the US. So anything that is made in the US can be made cheaper in South America.

Just after NAFTA was passed our exports to Mexico and South America increased dramatically: they were buying machine tools and equipment in order to build manufacturing plants. These facilities, when complete would manufacture goods cheaper than plants in the US. In other words they were only buying from us what they needed to take our jobs.

You have to ask yourself why your own government would pass such a bill; at least I have to ask myself. Was it complete incompetence? Or was it because those who were suppose to protect Americans had investments in manufacturing business that could benefit from much lower labor costs. Whatever caused the government to pass the bill it is obvious that it was not in the interest of the people of the United States.

If that was not bad enough they gave China “Most favored Nation” status. China is a socialist government that is trying to become the largest super power in the world. China would like nothing more than to ruin our economy: and they have.

You see it is really very simple. There is nothing made that can not be made cheaper in China. So in passing just two bills our own government has totally destroyed the middle class of the US. If you work in any manufacturing job in the US and haven’t lost your job yet, you will; it is just a matter of time as anything made can be made cheaper in China. (I told you to bite a bullet, didn’t I?)

You want a laugh? We are supposed to compete with those who make a few dollars a day and yet manufactures in the US must pay minimum wages! The bottom line is, though we must compete, it is illegal!!! Well, it is a laugh, but a bitter one.

We are just beginning to see the result of what I would call a criminal act. The housing industry can not sell a house because no one can buy a house working at a fast food restaurant and those kinds of jobs are all that is left. Nor can the car manufactures sell cars, for the same reason. It should be apparent that interest rates mean nothing to someone who has no job. Who is going to loan money to someone with no job?

Is it any wonder the stock market is in turmoil? You don’t get something for nothing so the logical result of a stronger “world economy” is a weaker US economy.

My friends I don’t have a solution to the problem. Everyone keeps telling me that if I don’t like the government to vote, but we just get a new set of politicians and they do the same things the others did. This government is of the people, by the people, and for the people and those people would be the ones in charge, not poor slobs like me.


October 22, 2007

I and all Christians are often asked this question. Our first response is to try to convince the one who asks by quoting the Bible, but if you are not a Christian you can not understand the Bible. The question is usually asked in an attempt to trap the believer and if asked with that motive is not asked in truth. This leads to arguments as the unbeliever tries to convince the Christian that he, or she is wrong and the Christian becomes frustrated because the other person doesn’t understand what is so clear to them.

This post is about my experience, so please excuse the constant reference to me.

At some point in my studies I began to believe the God of the Bible was the true God. I believe it was when I admitted to myself that I was truly a sinner. I suppose that one can say that I began to know God when I began to know myself.

To search for God is to search for truth and if you are not willing to apply truth to yourself then why would God reveal Himself to you?

I didn’t understand this at that time. I thought that it was all me, that I was going to find God, but now I see that it was God that revealed Himself; not because I searched, but because I searched in truth.

OK, so it was partially me. I do not think God reveals Himself if you don’t search and ask Him to.

When I knew that I was a sinner I knew also that God didn’t like sinners. I did not yet understand sin, but I could understand that I was not going to Heaven the way I was. God then lead me to understand Jesus and the realization that I could be forgiven. Whereupon, I asked Jesus to come into my heart and save me. That is purely a selfish act, but one God wants. I was then baptized and received the Holy Spirit to teach me about God. It should be apparent that if you do not have the Holy Spirit to teach you then you can not learn. Most people think they can learn about God on their own, but that is not God’s way. If you are not willing to admit the truth and want to change, then God is not willing either.

I wanted and still want to know everything about God. The more I learn the stronger my faith becomes.

If one does not start their search for God in truth they will find and make up all kinds of gods. Some gods are mere idols and some though they come close to the real God are an image of a god that is not loving or merciful.

Well, I suppose you could say that I believe the God of the Bible is the true God because He taught me that He is. I told you that you couldn’t understand if you were not a Christian, didn’t I?


October 20, 2007

The definition of the words oath, swear, pledge, and vow are all the same. They all mean to make a solemn promise about something. The person making a pledge is promising to do something in the future. If you think about this you will see that it is not possible to truthfully promise anything. I am not speaking of what a person intends to do, but what someone promises to do.

A solemn promise is not within the power of any man. No man can control the future, so no man can make a solemn promise in truth. When someone asks us to promise, or make a pledge, we should examine all of the situations which we think might cause us to break our promise and answer accordingly. However we do not even know the future. How then can we make a solemn promise and what promise that a Christian would make is not a solemn promise.

Let me illustrate what I am trying to say. Suppose you are walking down the street and you happen to meet a friend. Your friend stops you and explains that he desperately needs a loan. He asks for one hundred dollars. It seems like a lot of money, but you have a thousand in your pocket. However you intend to make a purchase with it and you do not want to go back to the bank, where you have more than a hundred thousand, in order to withdraw more. You fear you will miss out on the deal you had planed for. Your friend does not need the money until tomorrow so you promise to loan it to him in the morning. You see no reason that you can not fulfill your promise and it does seem reasonable, but it would be better to listen and contemplate what God says about making promises.

The ability to see the future is not given to man. Suppose you die tonight. Your friend who desperately needs the loan, which you promised, stopped searching for it, because of your promise. That is just one possible ending to the story. There are any number of possible endings.

You could forget, after all, the loan is not as important to you as it is to your friend. There could be a tornado, hurricane, or flood. Your bank could fail, or you could learn that you are bankrupt and did not realize it.

You are probably saying to yourself that these are very unusual occurrences and of course that is correct. This may lead you to think, because you could not predict these unusual circumstances that you have done nothing wrong. But do not forget your friend who depended on you to fulfill your promise. Your conscience will remind you that you have indeed erred.

Consider Matthew 5:33-37 (NIV),  “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’  But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.” Also James 5:12 (NIV), “Above all, my brothers, do not swear‑‑not by heaven or by earth or by anything else. Let your “Yes” be yes, and your “No,” no, or you will be condemned.”

While you are contemplating solemn promises and you still think you are released from your promise if unusual circumstances cause you to fail to fulfill your obligations. Consider Leviticus 5:4 (NIV), “Or if a person thoughtlessly takes an oath to do anything, whether good or evil‑‑in any matter one might carelessly swear about‑‑even though he is unaware of it, in any case when he learns of it he will be guilty.” Did God give you an out? He said anything, good or evil, in any matter, even if you are unaware of it you will be guilty.

I do not see any possible way to justify a broken promise. If you are one of those who would say Leviticus is the Old Testament and it no longer applies to the events of today you are wrong. It is true that the penalty for sin has been paid for all those who will admit guilt, and plead for mercy, but it is still wrong to sin.

Only God knows the future, so only God can make a promise. If we promise to do anything without the ability to fulfill it we are lying, and we do not have the ability to control or predict the future, so any promise is basically only a lie.

If you are inclined to think your motives make a vow, or pledge right then consider Jephthah the Gileadite who made a vow to the Lord. His motives were right. However he did not know the future and he had to sacrifice his only daughter, because of his vow.

Satan can not change the Word of God, so he changes the meaning of the words in which the Word of God is written. This is how Satan has confused this issue. Satan has managed to shade the meaning of swear into meaning using God’s name in vane. It does not mean that when it is used in the Bible. It means to make a promise. When we make a promise we are setting ourselves up as a God. We, though we do not mean to, are indicating that we can do what only God can do. Do as the Bible says (Mat. 5:34-37 NIV), “But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.”

That is how promises, oaths, swearing, pledges, and vows look to me.


October 19, 2007

It is customary for those who believe in science to ridicule Christians for believing in God. They cite one of the definitions of “faith” as their reason for not believing there is a God and that is “Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.”

I know that the existence of God can not be proven and I also know that He can not be disproved. It is part of His plan. If He can not be disproved then it is reasonable to assume that no other discipline can be proved. Well, let me say this, the core beliefs of those who do not believe in God do not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

That is right! They are guilty of the very thing they accuse us of!

The very core question of both sides of the issue is “Where did everything come from?” Our answer is “God made everything” and their answer is “The Big Bang Theory”.

Now I don’t know if you have thought about the Big Bang or not, but with only a little thought you will find that it is the “Big Dud” theory. If all the matter in the universe were compacted into a little ball there could be no explosion possible. Nothing can escape the gravity of a Black Hole and if all of the matter in the universe were in one place it would be the Black Hole of Black Holes. Scientist first said there was an explosion and some still do. Then it was an expansion and I believe I read that some now even say space began inside the matter.

It really doesn’t matter. (Yes, that is a play on words) There is no way to light the fuse and even if there was an explosion, because of the massive gravity it would not be possible for any expansion. Are you beginning to see that the beliefs of scientist do not rest on logical proof or material evidence? Well, actually there is evidence that there was no big bang. If there had been there would be massive amounts of gamma rays produced and there are no traces of them.

Steven Hawking has said that you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory. I would agree with that, but in practice the theory is changed to fit the observations. Even when the change is blatantly in error the theory is not abandoned. (Too many preachers of science would have to recant and admit they were wrong)

We finally reached the laugh. When observations of the universe didn’t fit sciences predictions that the expansion of the universe would slow and it would fall back into itself, they invented “Black Magic”. “O” please forgive me, I should have said “Dark Energy”, however black magic is more accurate. Instead of rethinking their math they invented something to make their math seem correct.

And they say we are ignorant!

Actually the expansion of the universe is logical and if accepted would be an observation that would suggest there was a beginning and end to the universe. Science is not going to accept this, because it would be evidence of God.

All of the stars are radiating massive amounts of energy in all directions and that radiation is striking all of the other stars. This is resulting in all of the stars being pushed apart and because the pressure is constant, though decreasing with distance, the rate of acceleration is increasing. In other words all of the bodies in the universe are solar sails, so of course the universe is expanding and will until the end of time.

This may also explain why the orbit of the earth is elliptical, but I really don’t care. I have determined for myself that there is a God and to me the universe is only a curiosity and of no real importance.

So brothers, when you are attacked and called ignorant for your belief in God, just consider “Black Magic” and have a good laugh.


October 14, 2007

I’ve got a couple of things to say before I show you that science proves the existence of God, so be patient and I will get around to it. First, I am rather small, so I have had to deal with bullies when I was younger. A bully is someone who always treats the weaker person in an overbearing or intimidating manner. The word is traditionally used to describe a person that is physically larger than the person he picks on. I don’t know if you realize it, but there are also intellectual bullies.

They are blessed with greater intellectual power and they use it to intimidate those who are intellectually weaker.

I class myself as weaker. Have you ever heard that “Your strength is your weakness and your weakness is your strength”? Well, because I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I have to break everything down to its simplest terms and then reassemble it to see if it really is as I was told.

Quite often I see someone brighter than I am, when told something, never questions the truth of what they have been told and they go on to build their understanding on a false base. It’s a case of their strength becoming their weakness. Well that is the start of weakness; it becomes much worse when after they have told everyone their theories and their pride will not let them recant. Then they become intellectual bullies and when anyone tries to point out an error they are attacked as complete idiots. So I know I will be attacked, but the truth is the truth and the truth is science has proved there has to be a God; they just are trying to hide the fact.

Have you ever heard the phrase “Turtles all the way down”? Let me tell you the story as I heard it. (There seems to be some other ways)

There was a young boy that had just reached the age where he began to be curios. One day while looking through a book he spied a picture of an elephant holding up the world. It brought a question to his mind and he went to his father, who knew everything, and asked him, “Father what is the elephant standing on?” His father having asked the same question as a lad answered, “Why, he is standing on a turtle”. That satisfied the boy for a few minutes, but then the obvious question occurred to him and he went back to his Dad and asked, “Father what is the turtle standing on?” Well, the boy was a bit brighter than his father at the same age, because the second question had never occurred to his father. Not wanting to seem as if he didn’t know he tried to wing it. “He is standing on another turtle” The boy didn’t even hesitate and blurted out, “What is that turtle standing on?” Now the boy had challenged his father’s knowledge too far, as he didn’t have an answer, and being a typical proud man was becoming quite angry. He snapped back at the boy, “Why there are turtles all the way down.”

Well, the boy knew when to shut up, but I am not a boy and I’m hearing the same kind of response when I ask science what the last turtle is standing on. The truth is science knows where the final turtle stands, but their pride will not let them admit it.

Let us examine some of the things science says about the beginning of the universe and some of its laws. The law of conservation of mass/matter, also known as law of mass/matter conservation (or the LomonosovLavoisier law), states that the mass of a closed system of substances will remain constant, regardless of the processes acting inside the system. An equivalent statement is that matter cannot be created nor destroyed, although it may change form.

That equivalent statement is not true. It is apparent that matter, or atoms can be destroyed, but they can not be created.

Einstein’s formula E=MC² was proved when the Atom Bomb detonated, and again when the Hydrogen Bomb worked. Basically Einstein said matter is nothing more than energy bound together by more energy and one can mathematically compute the amount of energy in a given amount of mass.

Heb 11:3 NIV says, “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” (Energy bound together by energy)

Both the Atom Bomb and the Hydrogen Bomb work by destroying matter, which releases the energy that holds the matter (Energy) together.

Go outside on a clear, dry, moonless night and look up. Everything that you see is matter being destroyed, or converted to energy. It can be properly said “destroyed” if it can not be returned to matter. Every star is a giant mass destroying machine. Actually you can only see one side of the visible stars and you can only see a small part of the universe.

Energy is only created by destroying matter. Even the power from a hydroelectric plant is produced by the destruction of matter, as is the very act of looking up.

Now, as you see the massive destruction of matter that is happening every second in the universe, doesn’t it stand to reason that if there is a method that turns energy back into matter that it would be readily visible?

Well there is no visible reversal of destruction. If you ask a scientist if it is possible to turn energy into matter he will say, yes we do it everyday in our particle accelerators.

There is a slight problem with that answer. Basically they take an electron and smash it into another electron and sometimes another electron and an anti-electron are produced. They are always produced in pairs: it’s not possible to produce just one. Because energy and matter are basically the same scientist claim they have turned energy into matter. 

These two electrons are supposed to be equal with opposite charges, but when they collide there are gamma rays produced.

Now grade school math will tell you that the sum of one positive added to one negative of equal value is zero, or nothing. Considering that electrons are particles of energy it should be clear that if they annihilate each other there could be no energy released as there is no excess energy left in either to be released: one would only cancel the others energy. Because there is energy released they can not be equal in value. It’s not as if we have two trains with the equal amount of the same kind of energy crashing together, but one train and one ghost train. If I were theorizing I would say that this is just a step in this particular method of converting matter into energy. (Electrons into gamma rays)

I might add that it takes a great amount of energy in order to accelerate an electron to speed required too produce this pair and we already know that matter must be destroyed to generate this energy. Ask yourself if one can claim that matter has been created if massive amounts of matter have to be destroyed in order to produce one particle. Also if you must have electrons to make electrons then have you really made matter?

To summarize this post: yes, we are both getting tired of this.

Matter does exist and therefore had to be created. Because it is not created in this universe it had to be created outside of it. This proves (To me) there has to be a God. Now I know science is not going to admit it, but that is not unusual for mankind.