Tag Archives: atheist

AN EFFECTIVE BELIEF

39

Watching RZIM’s The Apologist a few nights ago, where they had two Christians and two atheists debating on why they believed what they believed.

Both of the RZIM apologist where former nonbelievers meaning they did not grow up in a home that taught Christianity and it made me think that former atheist or none believers seem to make really good tactical apologist meaning they defend Christianity sometimes better than Christians that grow up in a Christian home.

I’m a part of this group that grew up Christian and I’ve had to check myself and my belief and understanding of God and the nature of God and I can say growing up I was a miserable failure in defending Christianity and the fact growing up in a small down in Northern California made it that much worse

As I got older I needed to ask myself the hard questions and show evidence of why I believed what I did and this is where people that believe in God but are not grounded or have a good foundation lose the conversation when asked to show the evidence or tell why they believe and then give a coherent answer that can be understood.

Going to the Scriptures we can get a small view of this when reading 1 Peter 3:15: but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect. This requires us to do more than just say I believe in God it ask us to have an answer and how we go about answering the question.

Parents that believe in God beyond just believing in a deity need to know the how and why of God because it becomes their responsibility to teach this to their Children.

If you cannot communicate or answer why you believe then how can you yourself understand what you hold to be truth?

If I ask you why are you a Christian can you give me a good answer, if I ask you do you think you are going to heaven can you give me a good answer, if I ask you if I don’t believe in what you believe why is that wrong and will I go to heaven; can you give me a good and true Biblical answer?

These are question that we should be asking ourselves and our children. Don’t think your six year old child cannot give you a good answer if you have taught them well.

To think I’ll just drop them off at Sunday school or youth group and hope for the best is like throwing them in water and hoping they learn to swim, some will some wont maybe if you give them lessons they will learn for sure.

I feel the reason why non believers tend to give better answers is because they are new to the game and if they are serious about their conversion they tend to dive into the word deeper than people that grow up in a Christian home.

I am for one guilty of growing up in a Christian home and taking for granted that God gave me grace, I had the faith but I lacked the understanding of his nature and my nature making me ineffective as a believer to a nonbeliever.

I only bring this up because I hate to see people struggle with understanding the scriptures and being so ineffective in their belief. The most concerning is that these same people now have Children and they too become ineffective witnesses of Jesus and some even get completely lost.

I urge you if you are a believer in God, if you are a believer that Jesus is the son of God that the scriptures are the breathed word of God to then build a knowledge of understanding God. Build a defense of your faith in Jesus for others to know. The cost is time, effort and sometimes friends but the payoff is knowing who God is and how much he really loves you that he would extend his grace to you no matter who you are.

Romans 12:2

MIXING TWO WORLD VIEWS

The reason why I write this blog is based on that I believe the idea of God creating the universe based in millions and billions of years only compromises with the secular world view and it has implications that are far more reaching than just difference of opinion.

If you have the time here is a nice little debate or conversation between the idea of young earth and old earth via Ken Ham and Hugh Ross. Ken Ham is young earth and backs his theology by scripture while Ross is old earth that is trying to interpret scripture and the Bible with the idea of fitting millions of years into the Biblical historical picture.

Most secularists will say both proponents Ham and Ross are wrong because the universe is billions of years old.

What I find as the problem with the old earth belief is there is not good evidence and you have to add to scripture to make the point while the young earth is better equipped to follow scripture.

Interesting out of a panel of six on this show, five of the guest believed in a young earth and one (Ross) believes in an old earth that included the big bang.

Out of that 5 only three so it was split evenly (with Ross being the 6th), but only three Ken Ham, Ray Comfort and Eric Hovid believed the scripture was more clear on the idea of each day as it was created by God (day being 24 hours) and that this statement of scripture was very important, not only understanding Biblical creation but it aided in the understanding of Biblical knowledge for everyone.

The interpretation of each creation day being one day (24 hour day) is important to teach people based on if we demand that people believe in the parting of the red seas, a virgin woman getting pregnant by the Holy Spirit and a man dying and coming back to life. How then can we tell people that in Genesis God was not talking about 24 hour day but he meant millions of years and that the passages of Genesis aids itself more to how modern science interprets the age of the earth via millions and billions of years.

On one end we demand people believe in supernatural events but in Genesis we compromise and say there is nothing supernatural how God created the universe. That statement maybe a bit over the top due to that Christians believing in a creation of a million years still view it as supernatural but the idea of God creating the world in 6 days has to be agreed as a bit more of a supernatural event than using a naturalistic way to explain creation.

Sean McDowell and John Bloom from Biola University were more on the fence of Biblical interpretation, McDowell even so far as to going there and saying so much as can we really know the true interpretation from Greek, Hebrew to English. I chalk McDowell statement to his youth; this statement is what secularist use to kill the conversation on Christians that don’t know there Biblical history or believe in actual words of our Biblical authors and we cannot accept such a statement.

Bloom and McDowell were willing to question interpretation while Comfort, Ham and Hovid felt that the Bible was God’s breathed word that all can know, people could know then (thousands of years ago) we can know now. 1 Timothy 3:16 Ephesians 4:11-16 and Hebrews 11: 1-40

McDowell and Bloom walk a slippery slope that will have you back peddling trying to explain Biblical truth in a sea of secular lies and it does not have to be that way if we take scripture at its word.

I believe Ross is trading certainty for truth and McDowell and Bloom are entertaining that idea as well Bloom more so than McDowell.

The truth is we can know scripture and what it says, understanding that not everyone will completely get what is being stated in every book or letter but the main theme of the Bible is God and following God. His grace to us and for us and how and why he did what he did for his creation.

You will see at the end of the video Ross offers a truce and I have no doubt Ross was very sincere just as I have no doubt Ross is a Bible believing man of God. The problem I have with Ross’s truce is it is not as the same way we can view the main purpose of truth from such men as George Whitfield and John Wesley.

Whitfield was a strong preacher of election with his main theme on salvation, while Wesley was a strong preacher on the will to know God with the main theme on salvation so we see two men that preached different styles had the same theme and that was salvation. This is what made these men great in the eyes of Biblical history the final authority was God and his salvation for you.

Ross’s truce is genuine but misguided based on the issue we live in different times than Wesley and Whitfield did; the average person had a standard of who was God and the respect of who God was not to mention being a pastor or evangelist during the 1700’s was a very respectable position.

Today’s western world does not respect God as it once did nor has a standard of who God is. Today’s western world does not respect men like Ross or Ham they view them as the enemy. People like Bill Nye who puts out hate messages that parents that teach creation are abusing their children.

We can easily see why main stream media and science who is desperate to be the grand daddy of all authority of life will mock and tear down our children and young people in the public arena.

How can we as Christians tell our children God did all these great supernatural things but that stuff in Genesis may not be literal, can you see why liberal Churches are not teaching that Jesus died or was born of a virgin, compromise to secularism to be relevant in today’s world is the in thing for people and Churches that think this is the only way to get people to God.

The difference between Ross and Ham is that Ham uses the Bible to interpret scripture for both knowing God and understanding God in a Biblical context with the final goal preaching the word of God for the purpose of following Jesus to salvation. Ross uses the Bible to prove science is correct and prove there is a God while returning a standard of the belief in God to science and while this is important without the notion of one following Jesus and putting God first before all things there is no real hope for people to know God.

Final thoughts I know those six men, Ham, Comfort, Hovid, Ross, McDowell and Bloom  are good men of God and I know they want the best for bringing the Gospel to all people but the western world we live in is now requiring we either go with the world or against the world.

Trying to compromise or make a hybrid world view with a mix of some world and some Christianity will not work. It is not Biblical to mix Holiness with evil 1 Corinthians 15:33, like my old youth pastor use to say, two rivers running into each other, one is flowing clear blue water the other is dirty brown water and when the two come together and mix the clear blue water turns to dirty brown. The two cannot mix.

THE MEGAPIXEL GOD

34

I very much enjoy Dietrich Bonhoeffer and this quote is one reason why. It is overwhelming the truth in any society here there or in any century.

A few months ago I was trolled on social media into a conversation with a devout atheist/agnostic I only add the agnostic because he would kind of admit that he didn’t know for sure if there was or not intelligent design but he was bent on doing his best to rebel by denying there was no God.

What sparked the conversation was a FB friend had posted a meme that featured a smashed watch that no longer worked that basically said let us see if is broken watch will evolve itself into a working watch. I added a reply and so did our atheist by saying let’s drop some sand on the floor and see if God will create a human, you know how God took Adam from the earth and breathed life into him.

My first thought was “well God has been there and done that, besides he used a bone from Adam to create the second human Eve so why use dirt again”.

The conversation went on and on but believe it or not I finally got our atheist to civilly admit unless he saw proof there was no way he could believe in a God, at least he was honest I can respect that much.

My next thought was even if you saw God, you would not believe. Jesus said in Luke 16:31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’” Those words still ring true today as God has written on our hearts yet some still rebel and deny. Romans 2:13-15

This takes me to when I was listening to Ravi Zacharias one day and he had made a statement that I believe is very true, Ravi was convinced that Jesus came during the time period he did for good reason.

If God had came in a more modern time where we humans could record Jesus by photograph we would turn that image into an idol, I would add to that if we had visual proof of God most would make that proof into an visual or physical idols and then worship those images instead of worshiping God himself “why” you ask, because that is the way we humans are.

If God came down and visited us nothing new now would happen as it did then when he sent his son Jesus two thousand years ago.

The proof of God would be there as a digital image but still groups would be formed called the atheist magicians and they would try and explain how Jesus fed thousands with a few pita breads and a can of sardines and turned water into White Zinfandel using smoke and mirrors or used the power of suggestion.

Medical experts would try and explain away the physical and mental healing’s and first hand site miracles like the calming of the sea and the mount of transfiguration would be chalked up to cult like followers that would say or do anything to make Jesus or God appear supernatural.

God’s image would be liked and shared otherwise you won’t receive a blessing, pin it on your board and look my image I tweeted is trending well.

People first would give God’s image way freely but eventually the paparazzi would sell behind the scenes images of God doing miracles and the next thing you know we would be worshiping those photos.

You no longer need to have faith that the actual God of the Bible existed just stare at your photo or have a digitally enhanced stone cutter carve out a life size likeness of God.

There would be no mystery in who God was for some because you have his photo on your phone. Just pray to your phone and believe.

New mega churches would pop up everywhere in all denominations with God’s image front in centered, mood lighting, little plastic necklaces to wear and rub in your hands when your not sure or scared.

Why God sent his son Jesus to die and returned to heaven would no longer have meaning because I have his actual photo on my electronic photo frame who needs to study the Bible, Jesus is not in heaven he’s on my tablet my sins are forgiven just looking at my image the resolution is remarkable

My atheist troll would still not believe even if he said he saw some proof because like all people of his mentality there is never enough proof.

On the same notion a new breed of non believers would pop up, oh sure they saw Jesus, they have his image but that is all they want or think they need. No need to follow Jesus I saw God he’s on my computer I’m good to go.

No reason to crack open my Bible and listen for the Holy Spirit to speak to me God is on your front porch or on the fireplace mantel and I say a prayer to that image every night before I go to bed so I now have faith.

Bonhoeffer was absolutely right a God that would let us see and examine every megapixels of his existence without first believing in him and acknowledging his existence would just become an idol.

Some people would eventually throw their image into the trash because its everywhere why hold on to it, some would hoard even more images obsessing over them without truly understanding why he made them and what their existence is for.

Finely others will call him great but deny he was God because look I can see him, a true God that can do all things is beyond any humans approach.

 

A COMMON SYMPTOM, STATEMENT 2

28

A COMMON SYMPTOM (10 statements  unbelievers don’t believe about the Bible)

This in respond to a blog that was posted some time ago on a Christian blog forum by a professing Christian that obviously does not really believe in true Christianity.  The blogger made 10 statements that they did not believe about the Bible and what I found is these are not just statements or beliefs from Christians on the theological fence but these are statements that unbelievers would make as well in fact these statements are nothing new.

Because these statements are common in today’s world view I will take each statement as its own otherwise this can become a long drawn out blog so in order to keep your attention we will focus one statement at a time and this is statement 2, you can check out my first blog on these statements at A COMMON SYMPTOM, STATEMENT 1

I don’t believe the Bible explains the time and manner of earth’s creation and population accurately. The Creation accounts in Genesis are not scientific writings designed to instruct, as much as they are poetry and song meant to inspire. They should not be read as a literal explanation of the fashion or timetable of what Science clearly tells us were the far older and more gradual evolution of life than a literal Biblical translation contends. Genesis 1 and 2 are a who story, not a how story.”:

Understandably one who lacks faith and trust in God will question God’s creation. If we cannot believe the Bible is the real inspired word of God then how can we believe God created all things much less in 6 days.

There is much debate in the creation theater; secular science today has muddied the waters that have divided Christians on how many days to how many billion years old the earth is. One thing is for sure Genesis is not a who story but a real account on God creating the universe, the earth and its inhabitants.  Nehemia 9:6 and Acts 14:15 

There is a debate on how many years the earth is and it falls under good credible conversation. Both Greg Koukle and Ken Ham have a radically different perspective on the earth age yet both will agree Genesis is a story on how and why God created the earth Christians can agree on this.

People that do not believe in the sufficiency of the word of God will of course be incline to believe the account of Genesis is poetry and song and a story of who. The problem with people that do not consider the Bible as the sole word of God is the who is only two people when in fact the who needs to be on more than a man and a woman, there is a creator involved and eventually a redeemer involved.  Isaiah 44:24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer,  who formed you from the womb: “I am the Lord, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself”

The complete understanding of God’s time table is not needed fully. Understand even today when secular science throws out time tables it is not concrete but a theory. Science uses dating that can be fallible; there is not exact perfect way to date God’s creation.

Some Christians use God’s word (Bible) along with archaeology, the flood and other scientific anomalies like volcano and earthquakes to help date while other Christians use stars and light years to help their definition of the date of the earth. Either way does not diminish what God has created and how he created and why he created.

To say the Genesis account of the earth population states that writer of Genesis is not in literal is to have no credibility.  When you make a statement like what is made in first statement “I don’t believe the Bible was dictated by God” then we can fully understand why a person cannot believe in the full account of Genesis 1-2 and how man and woman flourished.

If Genesis and the Bible is not a full account of how and why God made everything do we then fall back on the worlds view of evolution and big bang and if so then how did that start and as a Christian would then one begin to compromise the word of God. To not completely understand how society became many is to deny how God made his creation or a coward of the truth.

It was Martin Luther that said “ But, if you cannot understand how this could have been done in six day then grant the Holy Spirit the honor of being more learned than you are” Simply stated we know what we know because God lets us know.

A COMMON SYMPTOM, STATEMENT 1

27

A COMMON SYMPTOM ( 10 statements unbelievers don’t believe about the Bible)

The other day a blog popped up  focusing on 10 statements that this Christian (this being the writer of the blog) does not believe about the Bible on one of the Christian Blogger feeds, what sparked my attention was that the blogger known for his liberal stand in Christianity. Further reading one can come to the conclusion that if this person was a Bible believing Christian this blog would be considered heresy.

Why I’m writing this blog is not to tear down this blogger but to show the lack of understanding of Christianity and what it means to follow Jesus and to show these statements are nothing new but a common symptom of  people that truely do not either believe or understand The God of the Bible and and or what it means to be a Christian.

Whether you are a non believer or a believer that is on the theological fence of Christianity I would like to contrast what our blogger here has written and show what Christians know to be true. Feel free to read the article for yourself to decide where you stand on the faith and words of Jesus Christ, God, the Holy Spirit and the faith of Christianity.

Because these statements are common in today’s world view I will take each statement as its own otherwise this can become a long drawn out blog so in order to keep your attention we will focus one statement at a time and this is statement 1

I don’t believe the Bible was dictated by God. The sixty-six books comprising the Bible were composed by flawed, imperfect, emotional, very human beings who never claim to have been fully possessed by God or robbed of their faculties as they wrote. This means that however virtuous or well-meaning or inspired they might have been, they can’t help but have brought some of themselves into the writing.”

This is a common belief by non believers and a belief by what we call “so called Christians”, liberal Christians and Universalist. 2nd Timothy 3:16 squashes this idea “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness”

If a person argues the Bible is not true and that goes for historical and scientific evidence then the argument is over because that kind of logic then must be taken for all books written on history or science, philosophy then become the only thing we can trust. You will find it hard to have a conversation with someone that does not believe the Bible is based on real event no matter how historically accurate it is.

Throwing the historical and scientific evidence aside we as Christians must believe beyond historical and scientific evidence. We must believe the Gospel is the inspired word of God, all 66 books are by God and point to Jesus and that is our faith that justifies us for his Grace.

If the Bible is true then it is all true otherwise it is all a lie. You cannot say “well some of it is true based on the historical documents” but the rest is hocus pocus. If you take that route you then have to define what is real and what is not, all historical and scientific references are real but the rest is well interpretation.

You now are going on a cherry picking search for evidence that only satisfies you and your own morality; the Bible then becomes useless and offers no real good substance for anyone but only what I need for my wants and needs and makes my arguments valid.

If we are going to take the Bible, the scriptures as the sole word of God as it is intended then we must answer this statement based on the sole authority of the scripture and not just ones opinion or good thoughts.

The statement above rejects the Bible as being the sole authority of the scriptures being the word of God and if you take that line of thinking then the rest of the statements that I will go over will easily make sense to anybody because the above statement is saying yes there might be a God but the Bible is not his only word so you cannot trust it alone.

Exodus 31:18 says God not only spoke with Moses but used his finger to write the 10 commandments. Are we to believe Moses just made up the commandments used his own thoughts of what they the 10 Commandment should be, can you see the absurdity to this.

With that logic anyone could rewrite or add to the basics of these commandments. When we stop and say “the Bible is not inspired” or “the Bible is not the word of God” then that person has to ask what is the Bible for? Good thoughts and inspiration?

Christians that believe this sort of theology normally enjoy the words of Jesus and few will attack his word but you cannot then say “the Bible is not the inspired word of God” without making the statement Jesus is not God. When you say or think the Bible is not the sole word of God you then attack the word of God. When you attack God you attack the Holy Spirit and when you attack the Holy Spirit you attack Jesus; if you attack one part of God you attack all three persons of God.

In John 14: 1-14 Jesus is saying if you see him you see the father (God). What was John adding to this verse. Was he repeating what Jesus actually said or was John trying to add or advance  his own wants and needs to this verse so it reads Jesus is God. If we are to believe John added his own thoughts and not the inspired words of the Holy Spirit then we have to question was Jesus God; something non believers want to be questioned.

2nd Peter 1:16 “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty”

For a person to think the Bible is not inspired by God is a person that does not believe in God nor do they believe in Jesus as the Son of God. Peter is saying we the disciples  witnessed everything, if we are to believe Peter is making some of this up or adding his own biases and is not inspired solely by God then 2nd Peter is a fraud, correct?

Romans 1: 1-4  Paul, a servant[a] of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David[b] according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord

Paul declares Jesus to be the messiah, Paul declares Jesus to be God, so if we are to believe this is not inspired but just Paul’s own thoughts and biases then Jesus cannot be God based on any of the New Testament writers.

The New Testament becomes a feel good book based on good philosophy and warm thoughts. Jesus death  was all symbolism and Steven died for nothing.

As we can see Paul validates Peter who validates John who validates Moses.

The statement above allows one to have his or hers own view on God, morality, right and wrong. The Bible is merely a yard stick to measure your own ideas. As long as they don’t hurt anyone we can use any good book that teaches right and wrong. Problem is where did those books get right from wrong and who said those right and wrongs are indeed right and wrong.

The above statement is a world view, not a Biblical or Godly world view. It allows you to turn away from God and view anything as good or bad. The above statement is saying the Bible is not “The Word of God”. This is a concept of a deity based belief that a God created the world in some way now it is up to us to figure it out. We can use Jesus, Buddah, or eastern religion to sort out things out.

CONSERVATIVE CONTRAST

24

There is a contrast that separates conservatives and conservative Christians in general and the news of this week shows this contrast well.

Make no mistake conservative and conservative Christians are not at odds with each other, most of the time they are very tightly joined but when theology is involved Christians will start to circle the wagons of their faith more so than the average conservative.

This week in the news shows us this contrast with the Christian faith in The God of the Bible and the defense of Donald Trump. Christians are dealing with so called liberal Christians that assert that the God of Islam is the same God of the Bible while conservatives are dealing with the defense of free speech of Donald Trump from calling Hilary a liar to speeches by Trump causing peaceful Muslims to become radicalized for saying maybe some Mosques need to be shut down.

Both issues are slightly related to each other but still both issues have complete non related outcomes. For the conservative it’s like a fresh drink of water to have a candidate say what everyone is thinking. We know Hilary and the DNC is in a constant lie and most Americans are in fear of Muslims and what kind of violence can ensue.

For the Christian conservative that follows Jesus the idea that Allah and “Elohim or I Am” being the same god is heresy at best it is defiantly is not a heterodox in any stretch of the imagination no matter how much liberal Christians want this to be true. Yes while Christianity, Islam and Judaism fall under the idea of theism Christians are by no means worshiping the same god of Islam.

While conservatives deal with free speech and the undermining of the liberal agenda that marks the main stream media and the DNC the conservative Christians deal with both issues since truly a conservative Christian must make all issues be a part of the Christian view and that includes dealing with candidates that people inside the conservative cause don’t necessarily agree with or even have any reason to side with. The goal would be to work inside the Christian world view in the hopes it works with the moral law of God and the American view of freedom and the constitution that our founding fathers and framers developed for us.

For the most part Christians in general whether they are conservative or liberal battle the political and religious end of their ideology. Liberals will tend to leave the politics in favor of liberal theology while conservative Christians normally will not.

Conservative Christians understand the fabric of politics that is woven into religion. While conservative Christians normally will not allow politics to make or break their theology, politics does impact the society we live in and can effect how that theology is spoken, delivered and received making politics important in not only the Christian world view but the world view in general.

What conservative have to understand, whether they are non believers of God or bordering on atheism, whether they are Jewish or apart of polytheism is that Christianity is the cornerstone of the American foundation of this county. People like Dennis Prager know and understand this and they know and understand how much the belief in God and Christianity in general has shaped this country.

One of the main reason why liberals want to fundamentally change America is because people are not  bowing down to progressiveness that does not believe in secular relativism. Not only is America too white, too capitalist it is also too Christian and that cannot be a part of a liberal America.

Conservatives have known they all are an enemy of the liberal, harsh words enemy but sadly it’s true. Liberals have no need for conservative values, yes some may love God but for the most part they dislike the idea that requires repentance and a declaration to follow Jesus in the same breath. Liberal Christians want that red letter love and nothing to do with obedience to God because that takes away the idea of free will and autonomy.  Liberal Christians that believe in repentance, following Jesus and being obedient to God always throw in the love first for everyone that questions disobedience and demands repentance not fully understanding that with love comes obedience but before all that we need to truly repent.

While conservatives in general do not need to completely know and understand the theology of Christianity  or each individuals philosophy they do need to know and understand how Christianity and the belief in the God of the Bible have shaped this country. Knowing how gives understanding how conservatism works in a joint effort of multi beliefs.

Christian conservatives have to balance these multi beliefs and they have to learn it is not a deal breaker to work with beliefs that are not Christian beliefs but still function with in Gods moral law. Not everyone will follow the conservative Christian idea that is for sure but we can still live and work in the same world, we can still share in ideas that will grow this country for the better.

Taking the conservative ideas that are not Christian in general and transforming and changing these multi views into a Christian view might still could be done. We  just have to view core beliefs as important to all conservatives hard to do sometimes but important for stability. Building on a good conservative idea that is not Christian can be done and for the believer may even be an idea that can be transformed into the Christians world view.

As we go into an election year understand it will be a fight but I believe it is key for conservatives to stay strong, stay logical and stay united. Liberalism and moderates riding the fence lack logic and unity something the conservative idea should do its best to capitalize on. The goal is simple, bring back America before we loose it.

HOLLYWOOD’S PARADE OF NOTHING

17

Yes more Hollywood brilliance, of course I’m not saying Penn is a bad guy matter of knowledge he is slightly conservative in an anarchist kind of way (yes Jillette is an anarchist) Breitbart story

Why is this a big deal well, the idea of an atheist involved in a Christmas parade and mind you Christmas is short for Christ Mas just does not jive with me and anyone with a lick of sense of what both Christmas and atheism means shouldn’t either.

Has Hollywood finally reached the point it just doesn’t care about anything or anyone’s idea of sacred and meaningful much less insulting our intellect.

I guess looking at both Hollywood and Jillette, one would think someone with some sense and intelligence would question this decision.

Gillette feels it’s just a holiday but I guess he fails to see holiday is just the modernized word for the Holy Day.

I’m pretty sure few people will actually watch the Hollywood Christmas parade since its normally on some oddball TV network filling in times slot that nobody watches, but I have asked, should we just change the name to say the “December parade” so that way everyone knows the parade stands and means nothing just like Hollywood’s and  Jillettes beliefs?

Who loses here? Well, I see it as mainstream America loses because media feels there is no meaning in Christmas, much less the holiness of Christmas.

It is a big deal that a belief in no God grand marshals a parade that is in honor of.

It says a lot when a corner of the country that had little regard to the essence of what a country regards as good and right, and it says a lot about a society that won’t even know what is happening or even cares it has happened.

CLIMATE CHANGE HAS LITTLE ROOM FOR ATHEIST

16

We might think atheism and secularism as a minor force with strong arms today trying to end Christianity as we know it.

Atheist claim they don’t believe in any religion but for reasons that can be debated they seem to pay particular attention to Christianity trying to discredit it, they’re more anti theist than just people that claim not to believe in a God or the supernatural and leave it at that.

It is my thoughts that liberalism cannot at this point in time allow atheism to totally destroy the idea of God from our heart, our minds yes but the idea of a God must be allowed to live in the heart of man. Romans 12:2

The reason being is atheism for the most part is a leftist point of view. Yes there maybe some conservative atheist out there but they would be more economically conservative rather than socially conservative and those people that identify themselves as atheist rarely identify with the same moral ideology as people that do believe in God or Christianity. Note both can but most of the time there is normally a difference of opinion on a moral law code.

Conservatives and Christian conservatives in general think similar and believe similar. They tend to share values much the same and the embrace moral and ethical values much the same.

The leftist agenda is contrary to the conservative agenda particularly in climate change and global warming. This idea is not universally anti Christian as we see a few Christians take up the leftist cause of radical environmentalism.

Most Christians that subscribe to radical environmentalism can be defined as liberal leaning and therefore are sometimes dismissed as legitimate  believers in true Christianity but make no mistake those Christians that do endorse radical environmentalism such as Pope Francis have a wide following in the leftist community.

This is where I have wrote before it’s a fine line for leaders like Sir Francis to court radical environmentalism but being that said it is also a fine line for leftist to court Christians that embrace this idea as well. 1 John 2:15

By no means is Pope Francis an advocate of abortion something leftist embrace with open arms as a rite of passage. For leftist  hope to convince as many people as possible to believe in radical man made climate change they need all the help they can. If they cannot legislate it down our throats then having the aid of top Christians leaders to preach radical climate change in the pulpit is a plus which is why they cannot fully condone the actions of radical atheism that is anti theist.

To the atheist that believe in no God, believes in random chance, believes in subjective morality they in principle should not care one way or another if man made climate change is real or just junk science..

In the words of Jeff Durbin pastor of Apologia church in Tempe Arizona “So what”, so what if it’s man made or not it does not stop the random chance of happening.

So what if the polar bears run out of ice, survival of the fittest regardless if man made carbon from cars that melt ice or if three super volcanos erupt and ash covers the earth and kills one quarter of the earth species, it happens. In reality what happens is so what; if naturalism is real then life will go on, government regulations won’t change that.

Leftist who rely on radical environmentalism for power cannot have this, they need people to be behind them and to believe in the cause and while many atheist won’t buy this idea of a “so what” reality they should in order to be true to their beliefs.

Liberal leftist may just need the belief in God to continue and having the aid of Christians that believe God puts man in total control of his creation is a win. They need leaders like Rev Mitchell C Hescox that have doubt in what God can do to infiltrate the minds and emotions of their followers and a total disbelief in God cannot be on the agenda at this time.

While both atheist and like minded liberals would love to see the end of a Biblical moral law the goal might be to rid God from people’s minds but keep the notion of a God that is good, environmentally gentle and emotionally illogical in our hearts.

COEXIST CAN ONLY CONTRADICT

15

You run across one of these stickers probably once a week on somebody’s Prius, most likely it’s a hippie or a sharp leftist but do you wonder is it possible to truly coexist with everyone and do these people really know what they are demanding.

Next to every “coexist” sticker should be a sticker that says “contradict”. Each belief contradicts the others belief making coexistence impossible.

Each belief demands exclusivity to that belief and that belief alone. Islam demands Allah is the only God, Jews their God is the only God, Hindi has many Gods but their belief of reincarnation is a must. Atheist demand naturalism and science is the only truth.

There is contradiction with all these beliefs so who do you follow, who will you give your life to?

Atheists believe there has to be proof to be something, seeing is believing. Yet no one has seen large scale evolution, no one has seen a big bang creating life out of nothing. Gravity just exists, no why or how it just exists. DNA is magic per Richard Dawkins but wait is not magic something that cannot be seen or understood?

Buddha was a Hindu that believed there was more; he abandoned the core beliefs of Hinduism and ended up mixing atheism with reincarnation. One has to die and die again to obtain nirvana a complete blowout of the mind where one ceases to exist there is no God.

Christians and Jews believe in a one true God but unlike Jews Christians believe the one true God sent his son Jesus to die for us so that we would be worthy. That through his death God now gives us salvation by his grace alone. John 14:6  and Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved”.

COEXIST is either a complete insult or complete ignorance by one that is reaching for an end to free thought. COEXIST is not new it is the same exclusivity in the idea that no one is correct that there is no truth.

Without truth your ideas are invalid to my ideas, making the ability to truly coexist is impossible.

CHRISTIANITY AND AMERICA

12

If we accept the notion that America should not be or is not a Christian national we fail to see the consequences that could have been and will be.
The founding framers attempted to design the constitution with the adaptation of natural law. They were of course a few ticks off but still maintained the importance of the need of The God of the Bible essence to be an integral part of the framework.

A strong percentage of our framers belonged to one church denomination or another, whether they were truly saved is not ours to judge but we have to know this affiliation to a Judeo-Christian church had to influence their judgment when creating a country such as America.
If we take Christianity away then we need only to take away some of our founding fathers like George Washington wondering would we have won the revolution without him and his Christian influence. Would a country full of atheist, Islamism, Buddhist and Hindus could have challenged the crown.

Would we still have a two party political system with the democrats and the Wigs parties? One could argue there would be no need for a man like Abraham Lincoln and how long would America continue slavery without the objection of the Christians.

In 1821 Benjamin Lunday, a Quaker from Ohio, started an anti-slavery newspaper “The Genius of Universal Emancipation.” 1830: The Plantation Mission Movement began. Methodist chapels were constructed on many plantations. 1959 John Brown raid on Haper’s ferry are just a few of the many Christian movements that combated slavery in America.

Christian missionaries moved in to helping the Native Americans, Christianizing many tribes over the years one notable being the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

As America became more prosperous missionary work flourished, one can easily criticize America’s greed but one cannot take away from prosperous people that gave and continue to give for and to missionaries to help the poor and disadvantaged in this country and abroad with privet contributions.

Much of our colleges we have today started out as Christian based education, Harvard, Yale, Princeton to name a few.

Civil rights movement of the 1960’s was heavily Christian with Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and seminary students like John Lewis

We can argue and debate on this issue but it’s fairly easy to see the Christian influences in this country are huge. Can we say we are not a Christian nation well I guess one can make the case but we have to say we are a nation of Christian’s and a nation that has been impacted by Christianity. Can you make a case that our government should be secular, yes you can but we must then demand or statesmen and women to be Godly?

Our government functionality should be unbiased to everyone but the people that fill those positions in government should be Godly good statesmen.

If we have bad statesmen then we have bad government, ungodly statesmen ungodly government. In past it was important that anyone serving the public have some ties to a Judeo-Christian believing church of some kind. You can argue this is not fair for a county that embraces all religions all faiths but I’m not sure your argument would be valid.

Go back to the founding framers and their original intentions of natural law, this requires a statesman to know and understand moral law to govern. Can men and women of other faith know and understand good and bad and how morality plays out in a society; to an extent they can but they will fail to grasp why and who set these laws in motion thus the slow migration from a good and moral set of rules to a mixture of moral relativism.

I suspect the last few sentences will enrage some people, we can say America was not intended to be a Christian only nation but we have to admit it is a nation of Christians that have impacted society and helped design country based on a rule and law held on a notion of a creator and one God. A country based on a God with a moral law to protect and govern all that live in this great nation.