Archive for June, 2010

Jesus Christ: Freedom from Sin and Shame

June 26, 2010


I have read another story with sadness written by a well-intentioned author, who unfortunately shares a lot of the misunderstandings so common in today’s world about what Jesus is all about. As a matter of fact, part of the problem is that one of the greatest sins is the use of the Christian faith to keep people subjugated to arbitrary rules that in the words of Jesus, no man can bear, and laying grievous burdens on people that they themselves would not move with one little finger.

It is an interesting phenomenon that Christians in the United States are leaving their churches but not their faith, because the churches are not meeting their spiritual needs. I’m talking about the ones who continue dedicated, continue in fellowship with other believers, but joining missions that actually put the love of Christ in action for their fellow man, helping them with both their physical needs and sharing the answer to their spiritual yearnings as well.

Jesus said he came not to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved!

I’ll try to help disentangle.

It’s true that the Roman Church and a few protestant churches have used the story of Jesus Christ to “a lot of damage because it has been used throughout the centuries by the Church to make people feel unworthy, guilty, and inherently evil.”

In fact, though, Jesus Christ came to free us from guilt completely, totally, and once and for all. That’s the beauty of it.

And yet despite this fact, people often confuse Christ’s story with the atrocities committed supposedly in his name. Despite the fact that Jesus Christ drove the money-changers out of the temple in Jerusalem at the sharp end of a big bad bull whip, over the centuries the church was infiltrated by avaricious charlatans who whipped up penance by the truckloads for their great cathedrals and their luxurious digs, and now many people conflate the two.

I guess it’s not the only instance in history when people are trying to blame you for the charges racked up to your credit sheet by the imposter. During Martin Luther’s time, the priests around him did not even attempt to look like they paid any heed to their own scriptures, only presenting their false credentials to the poor gullible parishioners.

John Knox, as a Roman Catholic priest, never even knew there was such a thing as a “Bible” until he saw it on a list of banned books. But reading it stirred him up against the crimes committed by the hierarchies.

The idea of “original sin” as some kind of hidden gene that all humanity inherits, as is said was described by Augustine, is the result of theologians with too much time on their hands and too much influence from the ancient Greek navel contemplations. Augustine never let go of his admiration of the practice of following endless intellectual labyrinths, what we used to call discussing “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin”.

It is also a distraction from how it really works. In the real world of sin, shame, redemption and the power of the resurrection, children are born totally innocent. Augustine should have paid attention to the verses where Jesus took the tots to his lap, and said “Except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of Heaven.”

See, little children can do some mischievous things without thinking, but there comes a time during their growing years when they have to begin making choices. Think of it this way: a child is innocent until he is guilty, and then he is guilty. All babies go to heaven without exception. Adults who know better than to whisper that little bit of gossip are a different matter. Great fires are started by the tiniest flames.

In other words, in God’s balance sheet, you pay for your own sins, not someone else’s, not Adam’s.

Now consider this about the Adam story. God gave them a paradise on earth, an easy life, everything they could want or need, and there was only one little itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny tiny rule: Do not eat from that one tree. When they ate from it, they knew it was wrong, and that was the “first sin”. The result was they now knew what it was to do wrong, kind of like Pandora’s box.

From then on, all of us know that there is such a thing as “right and wrong”. The problem with many is they invent intellectual cover for pretending they should not be held accountable for their rights and wrongs, by invoking images of priests in the Middle Ages demanding great sums of money for penance. Sin is not about the burdens placed on gullible followers by big bad brutes and money-changers and Pharisees. It is about what you did yourself.

It’s like the words God spoke about taking care of the widows and orphans in your midst. It’s not about Caesar confiscating the wealth of the realm for the poor, with his own cut in the middle for the tax collectors, it’s about you yourself taking money out of your own pocket and helping the poor yourself. It’s about the Salvation Army giving, not the cover story from Karl Marx imitators.

You know what right and wrong is. You know you have done wrong in your life, no matter what it was. That’s right, “nobody’s perfect”. And inside is your own conviction telling you the universal truth that “whatsoever a man seweth that shall he also reap”. Dirty old clergy don’t matter. But now there is also the knowledge now that we can be free from the burden of that knowledge, completely free!

One can yell all they want about Augustine or whatever else you want, but even those who never heard of Christianity know within themselves that they should not lie for advantage over someone or cheat their neighbor out of his due. How do they know, and how do we know?

But the fact of the matter is, Jesus Christ IS indeed freedom from those sins. The proof of his victory over both your sin, the victory over guilt, and the baggage that comes with it, is in the Resurrection, a fact that is corroborated historically by every objective measure of historical truth that historians themselves apply to other areas of study. Only in this area do they bring their own biases with which to judge it. And yet, history is also full of thousands of skeptics and scholars who set about to disprove it, and being honest researchers, received Christ at the end of their journey.

I am one, after all.

That beautiful hymn, Amazing Grace, is the best showcase example of the power of salvation in Jesus Christ. It is the confession of the worst of scum, a slave trader, who took unwilling Africans into slavery across the Atlantic, who came to Christ. When I found this out, it put an even greater electric charge into hearing that song. “Amazing Grace, How sweet the sound, That saved a wretch like me”.

It testifies to the power of the gospel of salvation to both save a soul, and make the person into a new creature. John Newton went on to mentor the man who gets the credit more than any other for pushing England into eliminating the abomination of slavery in the British Empire. WIlliam Wilberforce has his rewards in both the earth and heaven.

It is the testimony of the onerous sin of the taking of one’s fellow human being for slavery, something that was prohibited by even the laws of Moses.

And that is the power of Incarnation, and the death and resurrection.

If the explanation in this little note doesn’t clarify the matter for you, don’t worry, sometimes it takes time for the cobwebs of diversions of false doctrines, like Jesus said, “traditions of men”, that “make of none effect the commandments of God”.

So remember, the real story and the power it speaks about is what transformed the early Roman Empire, inspiring them to abandon slavery and infanticide, inspired the establishment of learning centers that became our universities, centers for care for the sick that became hospitals,

It is the life-giving manifestation of God’s love that inspired Saint Francis to fight tenaciously against the Crusades, a rare Christian hero to Muslims today. It inspired Santa Theresa to fill the need of the poorest of the poor, taking in the sick and infirm aged who lay dying in the streets of Mumbai, and inspired her to call to account the “leader of the free world” at the time for the treatment of the helpless babes in the womb.

It is not just a nice story but it is a story that turned the mutineers of the Bounty from murderous envious backstabbers into such a harmonious community on the isolated Pacific Island where they were found in later years.

Once accepted, it is the truth that sets you free, the love that brings harmony to mankind.


Science: Witness to Creation

June 26, 2010

“From Raging Evolutionist to Creationist”

That title describes one of the most important aspects of my life in a nutshell, as well as that of tens of thousands of scientists and millions of people across the globe today.

As I was once a raging Darwinist and atheist myself, as well as being a former socialist, the recent article at HondurasWeekly condemning Intelligent Design theories compels an answer.

We can use this article as an exercise to show why the more prominent Darwinians among scientists today absolutely refuse to participate in a fair debate with formal and balanced rules with creation scientists, or even with Intelligent Design advocates.

The editors picked out an especially juicy paragraph to highlight this piece. It shows a repetition of the atheist strategy, applied in varying degrees by agnostics and theistic evolutionists, of using the worst hypocrites and money-grubbing “Christians” they can find in history to use Pavlov-driven associations to help make a point that is little more than invective. Effective for the de-facto monopoly stranglehold they have had on education the past century.

The author started off with a self-assured roar, using the phrase “absurd claims” and “anti-Darwinists” and “inject creationism into society”. Then he jumps right into the same attempt at pretending not to know the difference between creation science and intelligent design.

This strategy is built on their confidence in the use of the hypocrisy of money-grubbing hypocrites to make their case, instead of facts refuting the science. (Apologies to the few atheist scientists who do actually engage in real debate)

Never mind Jesus Christ himself drove those money-grubbing money-changers out of the temple at the wrong end of a bull whip, and called the religious Pharisees of his day “of your father the devil, for he is a liar”.


It is appropriate to clarify the terms for new initiates to this fascinating discussion, or those who only know the confusion coming from deniers of Creation and of common sense.

In a general sense, Creation Science is science as practiced by scientists who believe that the world was created by God, more or less as described in the Bible. “More or less” because there are others like Yarun Hahya, a Turkish Muslim who has a web site where you can find some intriguing factoids about science, as Muslims hold a similar view about creation.

Creation science in that general sense was the science practiced by the greats of science history like Isaac Newton, Roger Bacon, Michael Faraday, Lord Kelvin, Joseph Listerine, in fact the founders of every modern branch of science.

In a narrower way, Creation Science is science based on using the relevant declarations in the Bible as a guideline. This is mostly known for where it diverges from the Darwinian Creation Myth, of course, and research based on the six-day creation of Genesis One and Noah’s Flood. But there are other declarations in the Bible about the real world that sometimes provide for research, not always known as Creation Research.

Then there is Intelligent Design theory, which is a different approach to science. It is the study of those phenomena in nature that suggest the necessity of an outside intelligent agent for their explanation.

The SETI project is precisely the same kind of idea, being that we can use the tools of science to determine whether a given set of patterns in nature or behavior of naturally occurring entities suggests the existence of an intelligent agent. However, most SETI researchers restrict themselves to extraterrestrial intelligence that fit an anti-creationist model, arbitrary delimiter an unscientific though it is.

In fact, scientists and researchers involved with Intelligent Design propositions include agnostics and skeptics. Its proponents now include the late Andrew Flew, who was the most prominent and acclaimed promoter of atheism in intellectual circles until in his eighties the facts of DNA and how it works convinced him that there had to be some kind of intelligent designer. And no “Creationist” he, he at the same time continued to insist he did not believe in the Judeo-Christian God.

That’s the difference.


We see the repetition of the tired old accusation that Intelligent Design advocates are somehow trying to “cover up” their religious affiliations. This is trying to win an argument with an attack on the motivations of the opponent rather than the argument. Crying “absurd!” and “is not!” do not count for rational discussion.

They apparently have not learned that for atheists and Darwinism, this has very heavy backfire potential, because the most prominent Darwinians who got any government power in history were the most brutal beasts of history, committing mass genocide on massive scales, and were the biggest liars of history to boot, and (they think) with a “safe” fifty years after the demise of the eugenicist race-breeding of the poster boy for tyranny, Hitler, they now think they can talk about race breeding again. Only call it something else. (Are you listening, Planned Parenthood, nee Birth Control League? Malthusians anyone?)

And Darwinism has its own history of frauds, scandals, coverups, lies, “trade secrets”, revisionist history, and a habit of publishing biology textbooks that present frauds as if they were facts, like Haeckel’s drawings, proven to be frauds 150 years agone already.

The insinuation that intelligent design advocates hide their religion is so easily refuted it should be a gross insult to the reader, and is an embarrassment for anyone who continues to use it, and shows an aversion to using an actual “fact” that speaks to the actual debate. Maybe the problem is the lack of facts for refutation.

Isaac Newton, both a creation scientist and intelligent design advocate, made no secret of his beliefs when doing science, and he made no secret that his motivations were to encourage the faith in God of others. It is the Darwinian education establishment that has kept hidden from us the facts of Isaac Newton’s emphatic beliefs in Creation, and the fact that he wrote more voluminously about the Bible and about his Christianity than he did science and math!

So WHO is hiding the religious affiliations of scientists here?


The question is put when ID is called an “inquiry-stifling premise”.

Let us investigate the reality of WHO is actually stifling inquiry?

Vestigial organs: The stifling of life-saving research by Darwinian dogma:

There are two fronts here to point up. One is the actual

    historical results

of Darwinian and anti-creationist science, versus the actual results of ID advocates and creationists.

At one time, there were at least 32 human organs that Darwinians had declared “vestigial organs” that no purpose and were “leftovers” from “evolution”. Creationist scientists said do the research and find their purpose! And there are no more “vestigial organs”. You can live without tonsils, or an appendix, but you can live without both your legs too!

So medical research that could have saved lives, like finding the purpose for these human organs, was stifled and unfunded because of the ancient pagan myth of Darwinism.

Vestigial DNA: Stifling research:

Then in this 21st century, early came discussion about “vestigial DNA”, which comprises an actual majority part of the total DNA in your body. They called it this because they had only matched a tiny percentage to actual protein manufacture and other active functions.

My first encounter with the term “vestigial DNA” caused a big fit of laughter, wondering how long it would take them to correct this, yet another major faux pas from Darwinian dogma.

This time a few enterprising geneticists broke through and found that not only did this DNA have a few functions they were just beginning to get a glimpse of, it also served as a shelf of mix-and-match parts with which to do automatic experimentation in genetic combinations during times of environmental stress. Among other things.



Just like other places, we see here questions that really come from blaming God for everything we see as bad in the world. This is totally irrelevant to ID, for it is not creationism. ID is merely the study of criteria that can be used to determine whether a pattern or phenomenon is the result of design rather than spontaneous natural activity, and where this might or might not apply in science.

Actually, it is the same principle upon which is based much or most of forensic science, archaeology, and other endeavours.

The questions of why there is evil in the world therefore has nothing at all to do with Intelligent Design propositions. They are even irrelevant to Creation science. They used to defend the evil impact of belief in evolution as being irrelevant to the argument, but that was then people actually were educated enough to laugh out loud when somebody suggested evolution was better morally than believing in Jesus Christ.

It reminds me of one of the founders of the American Atheists Association after he became a Christian. He said he had only become atheist because he hated God for the hurt he had suffered in his life.

There are also a number of false premises embedded in most hate-God harangues, many that require answers for another writing. One such error is the long-discredited Malthusian idea that humankind is “procreating itself to extinction”.

Hey! It’s –NOT!– procreation that leads to extinction. By definition. Okay? NOT procreating IS extinction. Procreating is the best way to battle extinction.

Oh, yeah, and defending yourself against socialist and fascist tyrants like Pol Pot who kill off half their own people, or Chinese tryants who don’t bat an eyelid at the slaughter of forty TIMES the entire population of Cambodia, or Stalin who starved millions of Ukrainians to punish them for thinking independently. And beware of those who say they “have always been a Maoist”, like Hugo Chavez did in Beijing.

Complaining and whining bitterly about our lot in life and on the earth collectively as human beings is no argument for anything. Blaming God with a wave of the hand and piling on bitter invective without a serious considering the idea like Andrew Flew did, and other formerly embittered God-haters like myself, proves nothing about anything except for what it says about the accuser. At least Flew defended his ideas with actual arguments.

Take Haiti and Chile, two recent examples of victims of natural disasters. The earthquakes suffered by each country different enormously in terms of the fatalities, injuries, and to the economy. Haiti was helpless and without any kind of governing authority in the days following, while Chile was almost officially insulted by offers of help. This shows not that Haitians are to blame (although Haitian friends of mine do blame the spiritual condition of Haiti for its condition), but that natural disasters differ in their effect depending on the physical, economic, moral, spiritual condition of the affected parties.

And love goes a long way to healing the wounds and lifting up the physically broken and the broken-hearted.

My question about mental acuteness is how anyone could consider the coordinated network of digital computer systems that each one of us has in every one of the trillions of cells in our bodies, and claim –without any reasonable explanation whatsoever– that it just spontaneously arose from some kind of primeval ooze! And that’s just the DNA!

There’s much more for a later. Stay tuned.

But since the moral argument has been engaged, it will be enthusiastically answered.

Despite the best efforts of imposters, charlatans, hypocrites and identity thieves throughout history, the effect of Jesus Christ on history, especially after the terrestrial arrival of the Lord Jesus Christ, has been overwhelmingly positive. The basics of decent culture that are still left in our modern society owe themselves to Christ and the ones who followed his teachings.

Some people –if they were genuinely sincere and not just venting– ask how to tell the difference. Just compare the practice to the preaching. If it doesn’t match, it’s an imposter. Just make sure you don’t learn what the teaching is from people who don’t know it.

LOVE YOUR ENEMIES, and The Golden Rule…

Here’s two rules of thumb. One is, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Simple. “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” Matthew 7:12 Another is: Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Matthew 7:20

If only the tyrants and dictators who yell and go into fits trying to get Zelaya back into Honduras would be well served with the Golden Rule. They do not want people lying to them. The “human rights” hypocrites who claim they seek “reconciliation” by bringing the cause of division back into the country know full well that it would cause great trouble for Honduras. They know full well that the “Resistencia” does NOT want anything other than their socialist dictatorship, unfettered by bothersome human rights issues, and that Hondurans do not want this.

They know full well there was a constitutional succession. The idea is simply to force a small country to subjugate itself to the new world empire.

The “dangerous” Christians died by the tens of thousands under the had of Roman Emperors, in following these dictates.

Matthew 5:44  But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;


LET ME COUNT THE WAYS: How the world is better off after Christ came in the flesh:

It is when they became comfortable and prosperous under less brutal regimes that the doctrines began deteriorating under such intellectuals as St. Augustin, who had too much fondness for Greek intellectual hubris, and in the embrace of political power under the cultivation of emperors like Constantine.

Too bad many of today's Christians have rushed to receive the embrace of government money, as in the States where they have to promise, cross their heart and hope to get arrested if they ever talk about Jesus while using that "faith-based" money.

If Christ had never been born, or if nobody had ever followed him, we would have missed a lot of what we were never taught in government schools in the States.

Gladiator bouts begone:

The intervention of one Christian bishop in a gladiator bout that cost him his life, brought to dead silence the cheers of that crowd that had yelled for his blood, and brought embarrassment to the emperor that had thumbed him down, and provided the ending bell for this "sport" of devils.

Infanticide, begone!

The Greeks and Romans routinely killed any babies they did not want or deem fit. Spartans left them on the rocks on the hillside, Athenians wrapped them up against the cold and left them in holes. Roman law said fathers could kill their sons for any reason or no reason whatsoever at any time. But infants were saved from infanticide when mothers learned they could leave an infant on the doorstep of a Christian couple, who were glad to rescue a child and raise him to maturity.
A Christian missionary came back from China and spoke at a forum in an ecumenical council in Chicago around 1900. He begged them not to pass a resolution giving moral equivalency to all religions, pointing to the "baby pond" in the Chinese village where he resided, where some villagers went to throw "unwanted' infants. The mass genocides by atheist regimes were still yet future.

Cannibalism, begone:

Even the father of Darwinism himself, Charles Darwin, defended Christian missionaries in a letter to the editor, in answer to a tirade against them. He said if you were a world traveller like me, and had to make port in a faraway unknown island, you would behold the steeple with a cross atop with the greatest relief that you were not going to end up in a pot of stew.


The practice of receiving "unwanted" babies that would have been sacrificed evolved later into orphanages.


Orders of Christians who took in the sick and infirm became known for being such centers and evolved into today's hospitals.


The former slave to an Irish noble, St.Patrick, brought his message of love to the Irish. That message ended the brutal practices of Druid priests in Ireland, ended the human sacrifice, ended slavery in Ireland.

Patrick also taught the Irish to read and write. They took to the practice feverishly. The monasteries of his followers, which were families living together in harmony and in which sometimes women were the leaders, took such a delight in books that they rescued the great bulk of Greek and Roman classics that survive to us today, copying with copious dedication everything possible, while the Huns and Visigoths and assorted barbarians burned every library they could find.

Charlemagne learned of the fame of the learned monks from Ireland and Britain and brought them to his palaces to establish centers at which they could teach the priesthood throughout his reach.


With the Reformation, and the liberation it brought to thinkers and tinkerers everywhere, science flourished. Christianity cultivated modern science as we know it today, and so say as a historical fact historians who are much less than enamored with Christianity.

Just for example, it took the Internet free of the constraints of top-down controlled education to make it general knowledge that Isaac Newton, acclaimed to this day as the greatest scientist, wrote more about the Bible and his Christian beliefs than he did about science and math.

The Bible itself actually invites the reader to challenge the science. Paul did not say "Can you feel it", "If it feels right do it", he said we do not follow fables but we follow facts, and he points to more than five hundred people who were eyewitnesses to the resurrected Jesus Christ.

The "heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handiwork". (Psalm 19:1) David also spoke of the way God "wrote" our members into our body in the womb, a verse that one atheist said I twisted to make it sound like DNA!

See for yourself: Psalms 139:16  Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.


About “Babies and the Origin of Good and Evil”

June 13, 2010

> June 3, 2010
> ToTheSource: Babies and the Origin of Good and Evil
> Dr. Paul Bloom, a psychology professor at Yale University, has made an amazing discovery­ Рat least to psychologists. Babies as young as five months old know the difference between good and evil.
> by Dr. Benjamin Wiker
This article and reading it brought to mind that there are two sides to that equation.

My first reaction was that I could have told them that if they read Romans, they would find that God wrote his laws into peoples’ hearts, whether or not they had ever heard of the laws of Moses, or the gospel of Jesus Christ:

Romans 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

But then comes the other side of that equation:

Proverbs 22:15 ¶Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

Even Benjamin Spock who damaged my generation with his book that told our parents’ generation that a child never needed corporal punishment, repented later in life and admitted that some toddlers need at least an occasional swat.

That law of Romans 2:15 is the basis for understanding there is a natural law. It is the legitimacy for the birthright of “unalienable rights” that is explicit in the United States Declaration of Independence.

The intuitive idea that there is such a thing is shared by all mankind, and is the premise for the idea that one nation can call another to account for violations of “human rights” or “civil rights”. In the reality of the United Nations political order, though, it exposes that attempt at new feudalism.

Among other things, declarations of human rights for people, for children, always have a hidden catch-phrase in some form or another. The Chinese leader threw it back at Bill Clinton, in fact, almost verbatim from one of those “governance” documents: “….except where restricted by law…”

One of the most basic precepts in applying the idea of “natural rights” which derives from “natural law” to governing philosophies is “…That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…” Thinking about it, this is a direct application of the Golden Rule:

Matthew 7:12 ¶Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

But that’s also why “moral philosophies” can be so dangerous, also, if they are just simply “made up” as one goes along, or in the hands of a perverted heart. It is a salve to cover the sin. Thus the new shadowy plutocrats pushing the UN dictatorship structure consider the masses as asses that need to be controlled and handled for their own good, the same justification always used for ruthless rulers and totalitarians. They promote destructive practices under the guise of “rights”: prenatal infanticide, sodomy, the murder of the old and infirm, provoking the natural covetous condition of men to get the poor to rush to slavery by telling them they will rob the rich for them.

But God is watching and will shorten the days of judgment for the elects’ sake, which are those who have accepted the truth and the love of God and seek to do his will and help their fellow man…


Geocentricism and the Bible

June 12, 2010

I’m very definitely and unequivocally and strongly in the camp of the undecided on this one. Maybe 50-50. I’ll read the discussion but do not come down conclusively, at least yet. But people who are of the most faithful teachers and true to the Word who have declared geocentricity true, so for me it is a view that demands respect.

But it is not true that “every” verse used by geocentricists refuses a different interpretation. Note that “allegorical” interpretations of the verses they use do not convince me, and those are almost always arguments used by liberal theologians who have a “cafeteria” approach to the Bible, picking and choosing what they like.

“Allegorical” might be the word used by liberal theologians, but most non-geocentricist YECs do not regard those verses as “allegorical”, but “positional”, or “perspective-based”.

There is ONE verse in Joshua used by geocentricists, however, that does not help their case, and may in fact mitigate against the impact of other verses that are less ambiguously “pro-geocentric”, the ones that speak of a “fixed earth”. The parallels of the verse in Joshua with the movement-and-stationary implications of the other verses make it a legitimate item in considering the case against Biblical geocentricism, in my opinion.

Joshua 10:12 Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

Geocentricists point to Joshua’s ordering the sun to “stand still”, and the next verse alludes to it by repeating it, “stood still”. Looking at verse 12, Joshua’s order was to stand still “upon Gibeon”, and the Moon, “in the valley of Ajalon”.

But any geocentricist admits that Joshua did not mean this in the sense that someone in Gibeon would be crushed by the sun standing still upon him. If you were in the valley of Ajalon, would the Moon accompany you there, or would it be directly above, or would you see that Moon at an angle similar to Joshua’s?

That valley (Ajalon) was at the horizon from Joshua’s perspective. But for folks that were standing right there physically “in the valley of Ajalon”, that Moon would be near the horizon, and neither “in the valley”, nor would it even be directly overhead that valley.

Geocentricists have answered this by noting that the second verse, which relates the resulting event, makes no allusions to Joshua’s geographic landmarks. This is a valid point but this point is also mitigated not only by the direct context of verse 12 but in verse 13 itself.

That’s because verse 13 repeats the “perspective” view. In the plain English of both 1611 and 2010, we always say the sun “goes down at sunset”, or “the sun sets in the west”, meaning the horizon to the west, and “the sun rises in the east, moves across the sky, and sets in the west”. Geocentricists use the same expressive conventions, in full confidence of its geocentricist implications, and yet without considering that when the sun sets in Miami, it is rising in Hawaii.

So the sun “hastened not to go down about a whole day”, in Israel/ Palestine, in Bethhoron, or Azekah, or Makkedah. The only reason Joshua would pronounce this command is also that the sun was nearing the horizon, shortly before sunset, and shining “upon Gibeon”.

At the same time it “hastened not to go down about a whole day” while “upon Gibeon”, it was “hastening not to rise” in the Hawaiian islands. This is perspective language, not absolute motion language.


Signs, Beast, Covenant, Abomination, Tribulation, Rapture, Wrath, Armageddon, Millenium

June 12, 2010

In that order, that’s what the last few years of the present world order of man’s and the devil’s rule on the earth, ending up in the Millenium when Jesus Christ rules the earth.

Even one is worth it…

June 10, 2010

–and be not overcome with bitterness.–

(Pre-script: I thought of this missionary at an orphanage in Honduras raising some 22 children with a bit of help from such people as some of the readers of this blog, and shared the story with him, but it is a good story with a lesson for all of us..)

I just got back from a meeting with some of the local missionaries I worked with before and with whom I fellowship regularly, and one told a most inspiring testimony related to your own labor of love.

A Swedish couple in the 1920s or so went to what was then the Belgian Congo as missionaries, inspired to do work for the Lord, and arrived at a missionary center there. After awhile they joined another couple to go deeper into the country, and they found a certain tribe they felt led to.

But the chief told them they had their own gods, and didn’t want them coming in and offending his gods, so they settled a short ways outside that village and built their own little mud hut. The chief only let one little boy visit them to sell them food and wares.

The other couple quickly tired, seeing no opening to witness, but the Swedish wife witnessed faithfully to that boy over time and eventually led him to receive Christ as Lord and Saviour. Meantime, she had been stricken with malaria and other diseases, and then she was pregnant.

The chief allowed a midwife to help with the birth, but some twenty days later the wife died.

The husband was heartbroken and became very bitter, and became very angry at God. After giving up everything to go to a primitive place, after sticking it out, faithfully, and only one child as fruit, and now my wife has died, he told God. So angry was he that he left, he gave up the baby girl to a couple from America, and went back to Sweden.

That girl grew up in the States, the couple avoiding international travel for her sake, and after living in a few different places, found herself in Seattle, knowing from youth that she was born of, or adopted from, Swedish parents.

Although she did not know any Swedish at all, one day in the mail came a mailing like a newsletter completely in Swedish! She leafed through it and found her eyes gazing at a picture of a gravestone with her (Swedish) mother’s name on it!

The translator she found told her the article was about how that boy, led to the Lord and taught how to read and write by the couple, had gone back to the village and began leading other children to receive Jesus. Those children began telling their parents about this gospel and they began getting saved, and finally the whole village was a shining light on a hill.

The boy growing up began visiting other fledgling congregations in the area and helping them grow, and witness to their neighbors and eventually the gospel changed the whole nation. All from the witness of that one boy.

The daughter, now grown, decided to seek out the father in Sweden. He had remarried and had several grown children there. They told her it would do him good to see her but not to mention God at all because he always got angry at every mention. But she told him anyway, and told him the story, and his last week was a much happier one at knowing it was not in vain.

Every little seed you plant in those kids’ hearts is a big deal to them, infancy to even past teenage years. You have made them your life, and it is an investment that will pay eternal dividends no matter what. Don’t let the devil discourage you, just pour your heart into them, pour the truth into them, pour the love of God in Christ Jesus and the living word of God into them, and you will change Honduras, you will change the world.

—Your brother in Christ,

See their link: