Tis the Season for a Testimony

I've felt a strong urge to bear my testimony over the past few days. And since the internet is full of testimonies (well founded or otherwise) what better place?

I grew up in the Mormon culture. It is a culture like none other. Many Christians believe it to be a cult (more on that later). I am very fond of the good upbringing and stabilization that church affords its members. However, I always found myself lacking. I would read a verse in the bible like the one that says "by grace ye are saved and not by works less any man should boast". I probably paraphrased, but anyone with a bit of Biblical training would understand where I'm going. The LDS church (fond as I am of Mormons) added a bit to that verse. They say that by grace we are saved after all that we can do.

Okay okay...LDS members claim that the bible has been translated a million times and things have been lost. I understand that...but consider this:

The one true living loving God who really loves and cares for his people and wants them to come to him and live with him probably wouldn't make it so hard to get there...right? After attempting to be Mormon for a good portion of my adolescence, I was finally starting to feel buried under guilt, shame, and all of the responsibility that Mormon's have in doing all they can do to get to heaven.

I talked to one of the Bishops who suggested that I read the Book of Mormon to get a better testimony of it and to pray Moroni's Prayer at the end asking with a sincere heart whether it was true. I thought, coming from the Bishop (pastor) I should probably give this a shot.

So I did...

I spent a few months reading the Book of Mormon, holy cow did it make me feel good to tell all of my Mormon friends that I had made it through this book. Any who, I read it. Then I asked with as much sincerity as I could muster for God to tell me whether it was true......and then, nothing.

more nothing....

I figured I wasn't being sincere enough, so I tried to invite the spirit...I cried, I read some more of the book...and asked again, "Lord, is the Book of Mormon true?"

more nothing....

Every Mormon I talked to told me that I should get a burning in my bosum confirming that the book was true. I got nothing... For several days I prayed and pleaded every night for the Lord to manifest the truth of the Book of Mormon to me, and every night I got nothing.

Obviously this cast a bit of doubt on the situation. I started to wonder if God really did exsist. I started to worry if whether or not I was sincere or if some sin was keeping me from hearing God speak to me. I had never heard him or felt him in the way I thought I should. I began to think deeper into the situation wondering, "if there is a God, and he knows me and loves me...why would it be so dang hard to hear him? Why would he make it so hard for his children to communicate with him? What I needed was a neon sign from him telling me whether it was him in my head or something else. I couldn't understand that if he wanted me in heaven so badly, why would he make it incredibly difficult to get there?

Well, these questions would never be answered fully, at least not be Mormon doctrine. I had to leave. I fell away from Church altogether, I was mad at God for never answering me that night, I was mad that my family wasn't what I thought a good family should be. I didn't understand why God put me in certain situations and never helped me get out.

What I didn't know, was that he was helping me get out. Not just out of my bad situations, but out of a church system that was slowing strangling my spirit from me. I wandered for a few years being mad at everything.

Eventually, I started feeling empty again. I wasn't making it financially, mentally, or spiritually. I needed to believe in God again. I wanted to go back to church. I almost made the mistake of rejoining Mormonism, but I really didn't want the judgment that unfortunately resides there for anyone who doesn't meet the status quo. I wanted the unconditional acceptance and love that they talked about so much in the bible. Why isn't that present in the LDS church?

I wandered a little longer thinking about going back, but something always kept me from that place...I just couldn't bring myself to walk back in there and have them call me sister White to my face, and talk about my life behind my back. Then a wonderful thing happened.

I went on a date with a great guy (now my husband). We had a terrific time and when I asked about a possible second date, he invited me to church with him. Imagine that! I thought, "This is great! I can go back to church and feed my starving soul". So, I went....

I had been to other churches before, but never ever in my life had I felt the spirit like I felt it that day. I was completely floored. It was the best experience of my life because it was almost like Jesus Christ himself had come down from heaven and invited me in. FINALLY!

I could finally hear the Lord clearly speaking softly to me! He said, "Come back and worship me in the right way. Come and meet me at my table and finally fill your life and your soul with my love for you." The church had an alter call that day and I practically ran down the isle! I wanted to finally meet the God that I had read about in the bible. I wanted to feel the love he had for me. I prayed to Jesus begging him to take me away, so that I could be with him. I begged him to accept me and love me and forgive me for being so bitter for so long.

Oh how it has changed me! My dear Jesus didn't just give me back my life he gave me back my life abundantly. In the space of six or seven months I lived my life like I had never lived before. I was finally saved and Jesus was so thrilled to finally have me with him. I say that as if I am talking about a true living friend of mine, because that is what my Lord is. I feel like I can take on the world with him near me, and all he wanted from me was a willing acceptance of who he truly is.

He told me that I now have a real truth for the first time, I was finally coming out of the darkness and into the light for him. He wants me to remain in the light with him, just as he wants you to finally come out of the darkness.

He loves Mormons so much, he aches for them. He knows how wonderful they are, he created them. I've begged him to redeem that church and he has told me that he wants to so badly because he knows and loves each one of them. Oh how he wants to show his love to them, in the right way. He wants them to feel the true spirit, he wants them to feel a spirit that is far greater and more powerful than the one they already feel. The spirit in the Mormon Church reminds me of how you feel during the end of a sad movie. The spirit was meant to be felt in such a different way. He wants to share that with the Mormon people and show them that they don't have to overcomplicate salvation. The work is done! He did it for them on the cross and only through him, through his grace we are saved....he wants to cry with them, laugh with them, and live in their hearts forever and ever. Amen.

A Christmas Twist

As I did last week I'd like to share from Max Lucado's When God Whispers Your Name. This chapter was really a good story to read during the Christmas season. I hope you enjoy it...
---------------------------------------
Gabriel must have scratched his head at this one. He wasn't one to question his God-given missions. Sending fire and dividing seas were all in an eternity's work for this angel. When God sent, Gabriel went.

And when word got out that God was to become man, Gabriel was enthused. He could envision the moment:

The Messiah in a blazing chariot.
The King descending on a fiery cloud.
An explosion of light from which the Messiah
would emerge.

That's what he expected. What he never expected, however, was what he got: a slip of paper with a Nazarene address. "God will become a baby," it read. "Tell the mother to name the child Jesus. And tell her not to be afraid."

Gabriel was never one to question, but this time he had to wonder.

God will become a baby? Gabriel had seen babies before. He had been platoon leader on the bulrush operation. He remembered what little Moses looked like.

That's okay for humans, he thought to himself. But God?

The heavens can't contain him; how could a body? Besides, have you seen what comes out of those babies? Hardly befitting for the Creator of the universe. Babies must be carried and fed, bounced and bathed. To imagine some mother burping God on her shoulder - why, that was beyond what even an angel could imagine.

And what of this name - what was it - Jesus? Such a common name. There's a Jesus in every cul-de-sac. Come on, even Gabriel has more punch to it than Jesus. Call the baby Eminence or Majesty or Heaven-sent. Anything but Jesus.

So Gabriel scratched his head. What happened to the good ol' days? The Sodom and Gomorrah stuff. Flooding the globe. Flaming swords. That's the action he liked.

But Gabriel had his orders. Take the message to Mary. Must be a special girl, he assumed as he traveled. But Gabriel was in for another shock. One peek told him Mary was no queen. The mother-to-be of God was not regal. She was a Jewish peasant who'd barely outgrown her acne and had a crush on a guy named Joe.

And speaking of Joe - what does this fellow know? Might as well be a weaver in Spain or a cobbler in Greece. He's a carpenter. Look at him over there, sawdust in his beard and nail apron around his waist. You're telling me God is going to have dinner every night with him? You're telling me the souce of wisdom in going to call this guy "Dad"? You're telling me a common laborer is going to be charged with giving food to God?

What if he gets laid off?

What if he gets cranky?

What if he decides to run off with a pretty young girl from down the street? Then where will we be?

It was all Gabriel could do to keep from turning back. "This is a peculiar idea you have, God" he must have muttered to himself.


Are God's guardians given to such musings?

Are we? Are we still stunned by God's coming? Still staggered by the event? Does Christmas still spawn the same speechless wonder it did two thousand years ago?

I've been asking that question lately - to myself. As I write, Christmas is only days away and something just happened that has me concerned that the pace of the holidays may be overshadowing the purpose of the holidays.

I saw a manger in a mall. Correct that. I barely saw a manger in a mall. I almost didn't see it. I was in a hurry. Guests coming. Santa dropping in. Sermons to be prepared. Services to be planned. Presents to be purchased.

The crush of things was so great that the creche of Christ was almost ignored. I nearly missed it. And had it not been for the child and his father, I would have.

But out of the corner of my eye, I saw them. The little boy, three, maybe four years old, in jeans and high-tops staring at the manger's infant. The father, in baseball hat and work clothes, looking over his son's shoulder, gesturing first at Joseph, then Mary, then the baby. He was telling the little fellow the story.

And oh, the twinkle in the boy's eyes. The wonder on his little face. He didn't speak. He just listened. And I didn't move. I just watched. What questions were filling the little boy's head? Could they have been the same as Gabriel's? What sparked the amazement on his face? Was it the magic?

And why is it that out of a hundred or so of God's children only two paused to consider his son? What is this December demon that steals our eyes and stills our tongues? Isn't this season to pause and pose Gabriel's questions?

The tragedy is not that we can't answer them, but that we are too busy to ask them.

Only heaven knows how long Gabriel fluttered unseen above Mary before he took a breath and broke the news. But he did. He told her the name. He told her the plan. He told her not to be afraid. And when he announced, "With God nothing is impossible!" he said it as much for himself as for her.

For even though he couldn't answer the questions, he knew who could, and that was enough. And even though we can't answer them all, taking time to ask a few would be a good start.

Your Sack of Stones

I haven't had time to check the news but at work I have had time to read. I've been reading When God Whispers Your Name by Max Lucado. There were two chapters in there that I wanted to be able to share with all of you. The first I will post tonight and the second one late next week.
----------------------------------
You have one. A sack. A burlap sack. Probably aren't aware of it, may not have been told about it. Could be you don't remember it. But it was given to you. A sack. An itchy, scratchy burlap sack.

You needed the sack so you could carry the stones. Rocks, boulders, pebbles. All sizes. All shapes. All unwanted.

You didn't request them. You didn't seek them. But you were given them.

Don't remember?

Some were rocks of rejection. You were given one the time you didn't pass the tryout. It wasn't for lack of effort. Heaven only knows how much you practiced. You thought you were good enough for the team. But the coach didn't. The instructor didn't. You thought you were good enough, but they said you weren't.

They and how many others?

You don't have to live long before you get a collection of stones. Make a poor grade. Make a bad choice. Make a mess. Get called a few names. Get mocked. Get abused.

And the stones don't stop with adolescence. I sent a letter this week to an unemployed man who's been rejected in more than fifty interviews.

And so the sack gets heavy. Heavy with stones. Stones of rejection. Stones we don't deserve.
Along with a few we do.

Look into the burlap sack and you see that not all the stones are from rejections. There is a second type of stone. The stone of regret.

Regret for the time you lost your temper.

Regret for the day you lost control.

Regret for the moment you lost your pride.

Regret for the years you lost your priorities.

And even regret for the hour you lost your innocence.

One stone after another, one guilty stone after another.

With time the sacks gets heavy. We get tired. How can you have dreams for the future when all your energy is required to shoulder the past?

No wonder some people look miserable. The sack slows the step. The sack chafes. Helps explain the irritation on so many faces, the sag in so many steps, the drag in so many shoulders, and most of all, the desperation in so many acts.

You're consumed with doing whatever it takes to get some rest.

So you take the sack to the office. You resolve to work so hard you'll forget about the sack. You arrive early and stay late. People are impressed. But when it's time to go home, there is the sack - waiting to be carried out.

You carry the stones into happy hour. With a name like that, it must bring relief. So you set the sack on the floor, sit on the stool, and drink a few. The music gets loud and your head gets light. But then it's time to go and you look down and there is the sack.

You drag it into therapy. You sit on the couch with the sack at your feet and spill all your stones on the floor and name them one by one. The therapist listens. She empathizes. Some helpful counsel is given. But when the time is up, you're obliged to gather the rocks and take them with you.

You get so desperate you try a weekend rendezvous. A little excitement. A risky embrace. A night of stolen passion. And for a moment the load is lighter. But then the weekend passes. Sunday's sun sets and awaiting you on Monday's doorstep is - you got it - your sack of regrets and rejections.

Some even take the sack to church. Perhaps religion will help, we reason. But instead of removing a few stones, some well-meaning but misguided preacher may add to the load. God's messengers sometimes give more hurt than help. And you might leave the church with a few new rocks in your sack.

The result? A person slugging his way through life, weighed down by the past. I don't know if you've noticed, but it's hard to be thoughtful when you're carrying a burlap sack. It's hard to be affirming when you are affirmation-starved. It's hard to be forgiving when you feel guilty.
Paul had an interesting observation about the way we treat people. He said it about marriage, but the principle applies in any relationship. "The man who loves his wife loves himself" (Eph 5:28). There is a correlation between the way you feel about yourself and the way you feel about others. If you are at peace with yourself - if you like yourself - you will get along with others.

The converse is also true. If you don't like yourself, if you are ashamed, embarrassed, or angry, other people are going to know it. The tragic part of the burlap-sack story is we tend to throw our stones at those we love.

Unless the cycle is interrupted.

Which takes us the question, "How does a person get relief?"

Which, in turn, takes us to one of the kindest verses in the Bible, "Come to me, all of you who are tired and have heavy loads, and I will give you rest. Accept my teachings and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in spirit, and you will find rest for your lives. The teaching I ask you to accept is easy; the load I give you to carry is light" (Matt. 11:28-29).

You knew I was going to say that. I can see you holding this book and shaking your head. "I've tried that. I've read the Bible, I've sat on the pew - but I've never received relief."

If that is the case, could I ask a delicate but deliberate question? Could it be that you went to religion and didn't go to God? Could it be that you went to a church but never saw Christ?
"Come to me," the verse reads.

It's easy to go to the wrong place. I did yesterday. I was in Portland, Maine, catching a flight to Boston. Went to the desk, checked my bag, got my ticket, and went to the gate. I went past security, took my seat, and waited for the flight to be called. I waited and waited and waited --
Finally, I went up to the desk to ask the attendant and she looked at me and said, "You're at the wrong gate."

Now, what if I'd pouted and sighed, "Well, there must not be a flight to Boston. Looks like I'm stuck."

You would have said to me, "You're not stuck. You're just at the wrong gate. Go down to the right gate and try again."

It's not that you haven't tried - you've tried for years to deal with your past. Alcohol. Affairs. Workaholism. Religion.

Jesus says he is the solution for weariness of soul.

Go to him. Be honest with him. Admit you have soul secrets you've never dealt with. He already knows what they are. He's just waiting for you to ask him to help. He's just waiting for you to give him your sack.

Go ahead. You'll be glad you did. (Those near to you will be glad as well...it's hard to throw stones when you've left your sack at the cross.)

Alternatives to MySpace

I must say I found this article pretty cool...

Left Behind Games, an evangelical Christian software corporation spun off the best-selling book series, has launched a social-networking site that it promotes as a safe and profanity-free alternative to services like MySpace that have largely unregulated content.

I was curious about this so I went to the site they provided and registered. I had both good and bad opinions of the site.

The good news is that it IS porn free. I saw no advertisements showing a half naked chick on them. The look and feel are very similar to MySpace too so there is only a mild learning curve if you are used to MySpace. Also, what I'd say is probably good news, it isn't plastered with Christianese that would make non-believers steer clear. Its always best to encourage nonbelievers into our circles so that we can witness to them, hopefully, through our love and kindness.

The bad news is that though clean there is still people on there advertising their wares. I wasn't on the site two minutes when I already had a couple of users advertising horse saddles and the opportunity to work at home. This is also a Beta version at the moment too. So there are plenty of bugs. For instance they offer to email your friends for you to let them know about the site but yet, as far as I can tell, there isn't any place to actually DO that.

All that said, if they bring it up to par with MySpace I would more than recommend it to any Christian out there. Its a chance to have all the fun and communication that you do thru MySpace but without all the garbage that comes with it.

Link
----------------
Maker of Christian games launches social-networking site

Forward to Genesis

I found the following in the preface to Genesis in my Amplified Bible. Its too good not to share!...

Genesis, a Greek word meaning "origin" or "beginning", was the title given to this book by the translators of the third century B.C. Greek Old Testament known as The Septuagint. The first word in the Hebrew text, Bereshith, means "in the beginning" and is used as the Hebrew name for this book.

Although this book begins with the creation of the universe, the focal point is the creation of man. As the human race multiplies, the account is narrowed to certain genealogical limits...

Certain scholars question the historicity of the events recorded in Genesis 1-11. Although they regard them as "mythical" or "supra-historical" stories, they assert that these stories have religious value. This position is difficult to maintain in view of Christ's authority and attitude to the Genesis record as is reflected in the following passages: Matthew 19:4-6; 24:37-39; Mark 10:4-9; Luke 11:49-51; 17:26-32; John 7:21-23; 8:44.

The book of Genesis, as the introductory book in the account of God's progressive self-revelation to the human race, is crucially important. It is quoted more than sixty times in the New Testament, where this revelation culminates in the person of Jesus Christ. In this way Genesis provides the historical account of the beginning of God's relationship with man foundational for and essential to a proper understanding of subsequent divine revelations.

American Tradition

My mother sent me this article. I'd like to know what you think. Read the article and comment on it...

Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran.

He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

A Palestinian woman holds the Koran during a Hamas rally against Israeli troops operation in northern Gaza strip November 3, 2006. Israeli troops shot and killed two Palestinian women acting as human shields between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian gunmen during a clash at a Gaza mosque on Friday, witnesses said, before the gunmen escaped. REUTERS/Mohammed Salem (GAZA)

First, it is an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism -- my culture trumps America's culture. What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book.

Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite book is. Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress. In your personal life, we will fight for your right to prefer any other book. We will even fight for your right to publish cartoons mocking our Bible. But, Mr. Ellison, America, not you, decides on what book its public servants take their oath.

Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath? And if not, why not? On what grounds will those defending Ellison's right to choose his favorite book deny that same right to a racist who is elected to public office?

This is only part of the article. What I'd like to say is I agree with the general point of the article. I don't want the swearing in of our political figures to become a farce. If we let whatever we hold most sacred to become our book of choice I could see someone who thinks he is funnier than he is wanting to swear in on a comic book or a book of political jokes.

Our country was founded on Christian principles whether or not all who signed our laws believed them or not. Let's keep the Bible as our book of choice and remember where we came from.

Link
------------------

America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on

Breathe Easy

I thought you all may enjoy a news article from a science website on the positive effects that church has on our lungs...

Going to church might help you breathe easier. A new study by Temple University's Joanna Maselko, Sc.D., found that religious activity may protect and maintain pulmonary health in the elderly.

“Pulmonary function is an important indicator of respiratory and overall health, yet little is known about the psychosocial factors that might predict pulmonary function. At the same time, religious activity is emerging as a potential health promoting factor, especially among the elderly. We wanted to determine whether there was a connection between the two,” Maselko said.

“Religious Service Attendance and Decline in Pulmonary Function in a High-Functioning Elderly Cohort,” published in the November 2006 issue of the Annals of Behavioral Medicine, was conducted while Maselko, assistant professor of public health, was at Harvard University.

Using peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), researchers measured pulmonary function in 1,189 study subjects ranging in age from 70 to 79 years. They found that regular religious service attendance (at least weekly attendance) was associated with a slower pulmonary function decline among men and women, compared to those who never attend services. The findings could not be explained by differences in smoking or physical activity.

Maselko and her colleagues believe that this is the first study to examine the relationship between religious engagement and lung function over time.

Religious activity could benefit health in a number of ways. Overall, going to church provides social contact and emotional support, thereby reducing the isolation that afflicts many elderly and boosting psychological well-being.

The researchers recommend that future research look at congregation specific benefits, as the current study focused on Christian religious services.

Maselko, a social epidemiologist and an expert in religion-health research, is currently looking at the relationship between spiritual coping and mental and physical health among individuals in India who are predominantly Hindu.

What do you think of this article? Do you think God has anything to do with it or is it more psychological? Let me know your thoughts.

Hope that was a healthy pickup for you today!

Link
------------
Go to church and breathe easier

ACLU against Prayer

The following post is directly from the ACLJ website and has been posted in its entirety. I feel that there really isn't any more I can say to add to what Jay Sekulow has said. It is important to know that there is a political battle being waged right now over our rights as Christians. What is decided now in our court system will affect what rulings are decided on in the near future. We, as Christians, may lose all rights sometime in the future but lets not let it happen anytime soon...

In its never-ending quest to remove all things religious from public life, the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) latest lawsuit against the Wilson County School District outside of Nashville, TN, represents a frontal attack on prayer in public schools. Wilson County is having to defend its right to allow the free exercise of religion in a public elementary school. The school system, along with its director and Lakeview Elementary School principal, are being sued by two parents on behalf of their son, a former Lakeview student. The ACLU has filed its lawsuit against two teachers as well. We represent the school principal and two of the teachers who have been sued for what the ACLU calls “illegal acts” that took place during the school year. What exactly are these “illegal acts?,” you might ask.

The complaint alleges that the “See You at the Pole” event, which takes places at school districts across America in September of each year, constitutes a violation of the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. In fact, the ACLU asserts that students and others read passages from the Bible, prayed, and made “references to Jesus Christ and Christian music.” The ACLU has alleged that the “See You at the Pole” event was unconstitutional despite the fact that former President Bill Clinton’s administration issued Religion in the Public School Guidelines that specifically say that the “See You at the Pole” event is constitutional and appropriate on public school campuses.

Not satisfied with simply removing student prayer at the “See You at the Pole” event, the ACLU has also sought to stop a parents group that meets on campus on a monthly basis to pray for the school, faculty, staff and students. The ACLU asserts that this prayer activity also constitutes “illegal acts” that must be stopped. The idea of parents gathering at their children’s school to pray should not pose a constitutional threat to anyone. If equal access means anything, you would think that it allows for parents to be given the same access rights as anyone else, and if they want to pray, they have the constitutional right to do so.

In addition to attacking the “See You at the Pole” event and the praying parents, the ACLU has also alleged that participation in the National Day of Prayer is also a constitutional crisis. The so-called champions of free speech in the past have sought to protect students’ right to engage in protest activities on public school campuses and keep speeches that are suggestive and inappropriate—all under the guise of the First Amendment. However, when students gather around a flag pole to pray or participate in the National Day of Prayer events, the ACLU sings a different tune. The ACLU even complained about the fact that students made posters to promote the National Day of Prayer events that were posted in the school hallways. The ACLU has forgotten that in 1969, they were involved in a case where the Supreme Court of the United States said that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” As our Senior Counsel Larry Crain said, “The Supreme Court has long held that there’s no constitutional conflict when students exercise their freedom of religion in public settings—even in public schools.”

Still not satisfied with simply removing prayer activities, the ACLU has also attacked the school district’s annual Christmas concert. Specifically, the ACLU actually alleges in their complaint that, “The Plaintiffs had no objection and were not offended by the Christmas program until its conclusion.” They went on to allege that “at the conclusion of the program, several kindergarten students role-played a nativity scene of the birth of Jesus.” Then students had the audacity to sing “Away in the Manger” and “Joy to the World,” which are, according to the ACLU, exclusively Christian in nature, celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ. Most of us understand that a school doesn’t endorse everything it fails to censor. School programs that include the singing of songs like “Away in the Manger” and have a live nativity scene are common throughout the United States and, indeed, around the world. The ACLU has, once again, shown its desire to engage in censorship.

We are hopeful that the ACLU will not succeed in its lawsuit. We will vigorously defend the rights of students to engage in religious expression on public school campuses, and we will certainly PRAY for the right result.

How Rude

Most Americans surveyed in a study released today say rudeness is on the rise in our society and 41 percent admit they too are sometimes a part of the problem. Unhappiness with reckless drivers, cell phone abuse, poor customer service, swearing and litter came from big cities and small towns in all geographic regions as large majorities of Americans say they believe life truly was more civil in the past. And American business is paying a price for the lack of manners - nearly half the people surveyed (46 percent) say bad service drove them out of a store in the past year...

Rudeness does seem to be an epidemic these days. I find people are shocked when I open a door for them or sometimes even when I use please and thank you.

It used to be that if you worked fast food and you cussed in front of a customer you would be written up at the least or possibly fired. Now the lady behind the counter may use as much as three to four explicatives in my presence while I order my chicken sandwich and I just have to endure it. hmmm

I think it is time for people to start getting back to not only obeying the Golden Rule but understanding why the rule exists in the first place. Yes, it is a God rule but he did have a reason for it.

Luke 6:31 (Amplified Bible)
And as you would like and desire that men would do to you, do exactly so to them.

You see selfishness is a sin that can blind us to all the good around us and the good that God has for us. The Golden Rule when applied to our lives forces us to put the good of someone else above our own and release God in our lives to do some awesome things.

We may not be able to change the world of rudeness around us but we can change the vast sea of rudeness in ourselves. I know we can make a difference in those lives we come in contact with. They say a smile can be contagious and a thank you can go a long way.

How can you apply the Golden Rule to your life today? What can you do to be more courteous and kind to those you come in contact with?

Link
----------------
Land of the Rude: Americans in New Survey Say Lack of Respect is Getting Worse

Charles Jackson and an Update on Me

Some of you may have noticed that I haven't been posting very often as of late. I must admit that I wish I had more time to update. Let me just tell you what's been going on in my life.

First, praise God, I got promoted at work recently. With this new job I now have more responsibilities and less time to post a good article. Plus I'm usually too tired to do the research and decide what I should write on.

Second, starting Nov. 26th I will be starting an online class with Answers in Genesis. I want to be able to give complete information rather than have to rely strictly on what I find on their website. By taking this class I will have even less time for the blog and those blogs I do write myself will probably be based on science more and current events less.

Lets not even mention the Holidays!

With that said I know you all may have questions you want answered or articles you think may be good for this site. If so please drop me a line. The time consuming part is the research and decision making process. If you ask me questions I won't have to decide what to write on and can jump right in. If you send me an article then very little research will have to be done.

My friend Thomas met Charles Jackson recently while he was in their area and sent me an article a few days ago from their local news...

The "Lucy" fossil that many scientists claim supports the theory of evolution may have been fake - and some Unioto High School students Monday learned about the thinking behind that claim.

Creationist Charles Jackson, who has a doctorate in science education, was invited to the school to speak to the fellowship of Christian students, an organization students said was about 40 members strong. The students who attended the event gave up their lunch period to hear Jackson speak.

His message to the students was clear - you can't believe in the book of Genesis and support the theory of evolution. In one comparison, Jackson likened modern evolutionists to "the dark side" of the force in Star Wars.
"In 'Star Wars,' you remember Luke asked Yoda, 'Is the dark side stronger?'" Jackson said. "Yoda said, 'No it's not,' in the same way the theory of evolution is not stronger than creationism."

Jackson had a number of slide show presentations that showed the various pieces that put holes in the evolution theory. One was the Discovery of "Lucy", a fossil many scientists believe is a key link between ancient man and human beings we stand as today.

"Lucy's bones were altered to make it appear she had human hips, when, in fact, the fossils showed she was built more like a chimpanzee," Jackson said. "Lucy's brain was only a third the size of ours and (she) weighed only 60 pounds."

Evolutionists reconstructed the fossils, Jackson said, because they would have discounted the theory of evolution in their original form.

"They said a deer had stepped on the bones and caused the fossil to fuse in the wrong shape," Jackson said. "So they reconstructed the findings. If you can take that and call it science, you have no business being a scientist."

Some say Jackson's comments have no business being in a school setting, not only because of the separation of church and state, but because of disputes over "facts." Many creation scientists often distort the facts, said Dr. Lawrence Witmer, a professor at Ohio University, a paleontologist who studies extinct organisms.

"People have their beliefs and that's fine," Witmer said. "What I'm concerned about (is) his people distorting the facts, especially in a public school."

Although he prefers to leave the creationism vs. evolution debate aside, Witmer said it's difficult for most scientists working in the field to deny the theory of evolution.

"Most paleontologists in the field, in a sense, prove evolution every day," Witmer said. "Lucy is not a modern human, it's a transitional model, and that's what you would expect in evolution - transition."

The fact that the "Lucy" fossil most closely resembles an ape makes sense, said Witmer, as it is one of the older fossils paleontologists trace to humans.

"As you go back in time, there are people who have more ape-like features," Witmer said. "We have a wealth of fossils that document evolution. "Lucy" is just one fossil on the very diverse evolutionary tree that document human progress."

Although Jackson's statements may go against evolutionary theories taught in biology classes, his message resonates with the students. Many students laughed as he tossed barbs at modern evolutionary thought. He's spoken to the same group before, said senior Eric Kimsey, who attended Jackson's presentation.

"He was here once before," Kimsey said. "Our group just tries to have a presence as Christian students. I liked having (Dr. Jackson) come in today."

Link
---------------
Creationist tells student group of 'fake' fossil proof

Such a Time as This...

Recently Chris and I went to go see “One Night with the King.” It’s a new movie in theaters that is about the story of Esther. I thought it was an awesome movie…of course my husband being the analytical type had to pick out all of the little discrepancies. However, as a Christian…and a woman I highly recommend it... That movie and some of my stray thoughts during my time with Jesus are the subject of this post. I was driving down the road (sometimes that’s the only time I can find to spend time with Jesus nowadays) and I was thinking about the movie.

I had always had a fascination with the way people lived in the past. Not just a thousand years ago but how they lived in Columbus’ day and in the civil war era. I had just always wondered how they got by without things like a shower or a hair dryer. Haha! On this particular day I was wondering why I wasn’t born then instead of now in this time period. I was a little selfish in my reasoning/thinking. If I was living in that era maybe I wouldn’t have to go to my boring 8-5 and listen to people complain on the phone all day. Haha!

Then Jesus in his infinite patient way told me that he put me here now because he has a plan and this is where I fit in. He put me here for a time such as this; it’s not an accident that I wasn’t born in medieval or colonial times, and between you and me, I’m glad I get to have a shower every day!

“For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father's family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this?" Esther 4:14 (NIV)

It’s the same thing with everyone who reads this. Whether you know God or not, he put you here for a reason. He put you in this time for a reason. You were not an accident (no matter what the circumstances were surrounding your birth). You may never go down in a history book like Esther and they may never make a movie about your life. But if you are written in Christ’s book, that’s really the only one that matters anyway.

A Date with DNA

Recently, I have had discussions with another Christian on the validity of claims by the Answers in Genesis group. I have yet to give insight into the alternative claims given but needless to say I still hold firm to the findings of Answers in Genesis. Below is an article posted on their site explaining recent research into the breakdown of DNA...

DNA, the complex molecule of heredity, can be observed in the laboratory to hydrolyse (break down) by itself. We have already commented in Creation magazine on the discovery of DNA in magnolia leaf fossils which are supposed to be around 20 million years old according to evolutionary assumptions, and suggested that this seemed rather unbelievable for a complicated molecule which progressively disintegrates all by itself (Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 22–23).

Now Brian Sykes in the prestigious journal Nature clearly states that the rate at which DNA breaks down in the laboratory is such that after 10,000 years no DNA should be left. Writing about the magnolia leaf fossils (and others in the same ‘ancient’ layer found to also have DNA, including oak, cypress and tulip tree fossils) he says:

‘This means these compression fossils defy the prediction, from in vitro estimates of the rate of spontaneous hydrolysis, that no DNA would remain intact much beyond 10,000 years. What a good job not everybody knew that, grant reviewers included.’(Bryan Sykes, in Nature, Vol. 352, August 1, 1991, p. 381. In this context, his statement is sarcastic. Sykes is not denying that the fossils are multimillions of years old. He is saying that if the inferences from the laboratory data had been completely trusted, no one would have bothered to look for DNA in such old sediments. The fact that it exists is to him evidence that the inferences were wrong, not the age.)

One can clearly see the following sequence of logic in evolutionary circles, which is important to keep in mind now that we are seeing more and more reports of ‘ancient’ DNA (and proteins).

1. In the absence of the repair machinery of a living cell, DNA breaks down, by itself, at an observed, measurable rate which would mean that after 10,000 years there should be none left.
2. Therefore, any specimen which has DNA still in it cannot be more than 10,000 years old.

However:
3. Intact DNA has been found in specimens which evolutionists ‘know’ to be millions of years old. (Because it is found in layers which, according to the geological age-dating system, are assigned this age—17–20 million years in the case of the plant fossils mentioned here.)
4. If this system of vast ages is not correct, the whole evolutionary scenario collapses.
5. Therefore, the logical deduction in the first two points above (based on real science—that is, an observable process) must be flawed. There must be some special conditions which can somehow ‘hold up’ the breakdown of DNA quite dramatically.

Notice how point 3 brings in the assumption/belief that the vast evolutionary age assigned to these fossils is correct. That belief becomes the justification for discarding the prima facie implications of the laboratory data.

Creationists who maintain that none of the fossil-bearing layers are more than 10,000 years old can rightly view the finding of DNA in such layers as positive evidence for this assertion, until and unless there is some definite demonstration (apart from pre-existing belief in evolution’s long ages) of how any conceivable ‘special conditions’ can hold up the breakdown of this complicated, fragile chemical.

Ted Haggard's Statement

Okay, so yesterday Ted Haggard confessed to most of what he was accused of. He has been removed completely as a pastor of his church and he requested the following be read at yesterday's services...

My Dear New Life Church Family,

I am so sorry. I am sorry for the disappointment, the betrayal, and the hurt. I am sorry for the horrible example I have set for you.

I have an overwhelming, all-consuming sadness in my heart for the pain that you and I and my family have experienced over the past few days. I am so sorry for the circumstances that have caused shame and embarrassment to all of you.

I asked that this note be read to you this morning so I could clarify my heart's condition to you. The last four days have been so difficult for me, my family and all of you, and I have further confused the situation with some of the things I've said during interviews with reporters who would catch me coming or going from my home. But I alone am responsible for the confusion caused by my inconsistent statements. The fact is, I am guilty of sexual immorality, and I take responsibility for the entire problem.

I am a deceiver and a liar. There is a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I’ve been warring against it all of my adult life. For extended periods of time, I would enjoy victory and rejoice in freedom. Then, from time to time, the dirt that I thought was gone would resurface, and I would find myself thinking thoughts and experiencing desires that were contrary to everything I believe and teach.

Through the years, I’ve sought assistance in a variety of ways, with none of them proving to be effective in me. Then, because of pride, I began deceiving those I love the most because I didn’t want to hurt or disappoint them.

The public person I was wasn’t a lie; it was just incomplete. When I stopped communicating about my problems, the darkness increased and finally dominated me. As a result, I did things that were contrary to everything I believe.

The accusations that have been leveled against me are not all true, but enough of them are true that I have been appropriately and lovingly removed from ministry. Our church's overseers have required me to submit to the oversight of Dr. James Dobson, Pastor Jack Hayford, and Pastor Tommy Barnett. Those men will perform a thorough analysis of my mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical life. They will guide me through a program with the goal of healing and restoration for my life, my marriage, and my family.

I created this entire situation. The things that I did opened the door for additional allegations. But I am responsible; I alone need to be disciplined and corrected. An example must be set.

It is important that you know how much I love and appreciate my wife, Gayle. What I did should never reflect in a negative way on her relationship with me. She has been and continues to be incredible. The problem was not with her, my children, or any of you. It was created 100% by me.

I have been permanently removed from the office of Senior Pastor of New Life Church. Until a new senior pastor is chosen, our Associate Senior Pastor, Ross Parsley, will assume all of the responsibilities of the office. On the day he accepted this new role, he and his wife, Aimee, had a new baby boy. A new life in the midst of this circumstance—I consider that confluence of events to be prophetic. Please commit to join with Pastor Ross and the others in church leadership to make their service to you easy and without burden. They are fine leaders. You are blessed.

I appreciate your loving and forgiving nature, and I humbly ask you to do a few things:

1. Please stay faithful to God through service and giving.

2. Please forgive me. I am so embarrassed and ashamed. I caused this and I have no excuse. I am a sinner. I have fallen. I desperately need to be forgiven and healed.

3. Please forgive my accuser. He is revealing the deception and sensuality that was in my life. Those sins, and others, need to be dealt with harshly. So, forgive him and, actually, thank God for him. I am trusting that his actions will make me, my wife and family, and ultimately all of you, stronger. He didn’t violate you; I did.

4. Please stay faithful to each other. Perform your functions well. Encourage each other and rejoice in God’s faithfulness. Our church body is a beautiful body, and like every family, our strength is tested and proven in the midst of adversity. Because of the negative publicity I’ve created with my foolishness, we can now demonstrate to the world how our sick and wounded can be healed, and how even disappointed and betrayed church bodies can prosper and rejoice.

Gayle and I need to be gone for a while. We will never return to a leadership role at New Life Church. In our hearts, we will always be members of this body. We love you as our family. I know this situation will put you to the test. I’m sorry I’ve created the test, but please rise to this challenge and demonstrate the incredible grace that is available to all of us.

Ted Haggard

Let us continue to be in prayer on this situation. Let us pray for Mr. Haggard and his family. Let us pray for the local church that will be struggling with issues of betrayal. Let us pray for the church in general as we struggle not to be disillusioned by such a public church figure being brought down.

Project Cuddle

Men should never have to say the word cuddle...or type it for that matter. That's just a known fact. The words cuddle, cute, pretty, snuggle, doiley and fung shui all fall in this category.

Or so I've been told. But today we'll make an exception for the following...

Project Cuddle is an organization designed around the idea that all children deserve homes and that no child should be abandoned just because the mother doesn't want him/her.

Project Cuddle® is the result of one woman's crusade to help prevent infants from being abandoned. Debbe Magnusen and her husband Dave fostered over 30 drug-exposed babies, while raising two biological children. They eventually adopted five beautiful little ones. Thus,Project Cuddle's® crisis line was formed from the living room of Debbe's home, with the hope of ending baby abandonment.

On July 8, 1996, the 24 hour toll-free crisis hotline was unveiled to the public. Within 12 hours, Project Cuddle® received its first crisis call. A frightened young woman called and said "I saw you on TV and I know the trash is bad for the baby. You better figure out what to do with this baby or I'm going to put it in the park." The woman had no prenatal care and assumed she was due in the next week.

With only days to orchestrate a safe and legal alternative to abandonment, Project Cuddle® was able to retain an attorney, a family wanting to rescue and adopt the baby, as well as an obstetrician, hospital and social counselor. Debbe Magnusen coached this woman through the delivery of a beautiful baby girl. After the baby was delivered into the arms of the adoptive parents, the birth mother said to Debbe. "I feel like I've done something good for the first time." The woman did not break the law, the baby was safe and a rescue couple was overjoyed at having a new daughter in their lives.

This group is really changing lives and deserves our prayers and support. Be sure to check out how you can help.

Oh, by the way, John Stamos is their spokesperson. He was on the Ellen Show and had the following to say on video:

Ted Haggard

Sorry for the lack of posts this last week. Things have been busy and I've been lazy. Bad combination.

Many of you probably have already seen the news on Ted Haggard this week...

I really don't have time to post my own thoughts but the evidence is still coming in so I'm sure there will be more to say later. Here is what I found posted on Think Christian.

The Associated Press is reporting this morning:

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. Nov 3, 2006 (AP)— The president of the National Association of Evangelicals, an outspoken opponent of gay marriage, has given up his post while a church panel investigates allegations he paid a man for sex.

The Rev. Ted Haggard resigned as president of the 30 million-member association Thursday after being accused of paying the man for monthly trysts over the past three years.

Haggard, a married father of five, denied the allegations, but also stepped aside as head of his 14,000-member New Life Church pending an investigation.

“I am voluntarily stepping aside from leadership so that the overseer process can be allowed to proceed with integrity,” he said in a statement. “I hope to be able to discuss this matter in more detail at a later date. In the interim, I will seek both spiritual advice and guidance.”

The acting senior pastor at New Life, Ross Parsley, told KKTV-TV of Colorado Springs that Haggard admitted that some of the accusations were true.

“I just know that there has been some admission of indiscretion, not admission to all of the material that has been discussed but there is an admission of some guilt,” Parsley told the station.

I’m in shock, although after numerous evangelical leaders have admitted to sexual sin, I’m not surprised. Deeply saddened, but not surprised.

Some things to keep in mind. First and foremost, Haggard is innocent until proven guilty. Second, Christians need to being praying for Haggard, his family, his 14,000 member church, the National Association of Evangelicals, and Christians who may have their faith in the church shaken by these allegations.

Here is what one of the commenters had to say. This has not been verified, though I hope it is true, so please keep that in mind.

TheDenverChannel.com is reporting that the mega-church pastor and president of the National Association of Evangelical’s accuser, Mike Jones:

“. . . underwent a polygraph test Friday morning and the results were revealed on the Peter Boyles show on KHOW. According to the polygraph administrator, Jones’ responses indicated deception.

“The polygraph examiner said the questions he failed were: Did you lie when you said you had a sexual relationship with Ted Haggard? Did you lie when you said you had a sexual affair with Ted Haggard over a period of three years?”

TheDenverChannel.com

Stem Cell Ads

Recently you may have seen the following ad with Michael J. Fox on tv...

After watching that ad it makes it hard for me to say this, but I can't condone the research Mr. Fox wishes to have done - not if it means destroying human life. Seeing him sitting there unable to control his body makes me seem like a monster to say those words. I think he deserves the best treatment money can buy. He's a great man. But I can't condone killing thousands of unborn just so he can live.

I'm glad to know that I'm not alone in this thought, though. There are those who are willing to stand up and speak the truth. Recently Kurt Warner put his two cents worth into an ad against the same bill Michael J. Fox is for:

Warner, who led the St. Louis Rams to two Super Bowls and remains a highly popular figure there, joined St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Jeff Suppan, among others, in the television spot against the amendment.

He equates the use of an embryonic stem cell for research to taking a human life.

"I am all for finding a cure for any and every disease known to man," Warner said in an interview with The Associated Press after the Cardinals practiced Thursday, "but there are certain issues that outweigh just finding a cure and doing research, and life is one of those.

"I think life is too sacred to ever take it in any circumstances, even for the cure of a disease or something like that."

The amendment is at the center of the critical race for the U.S. Senate in Missouri. Democrat Claire McCaskill supports the amendment and Republican incumbent Jim Talent opposes it.

Please note there are other avenues worth exploring that do no involve killing unborn babies:
Murder and Hope
More on Stem Cells
Adopt a Snowflake

As a side note, I do not in any way condone Rush Limbaugh's actions in retaliation to Michael J. Fox's ad. They were rude and unjustified. I don't agree with Mr. Fox but I certainly won't support all opposers of the ad if they're going to act like Rush.

Misconceptions of Evolution and Creation

Jim, I'm finally ready to reply to your comments as well as your more recent posts too.

I just want to let it be known that this post by itself in no way proves Creationism. Rather, it is meant to raise questions about the Theory of Evolution and to answer a few questions regarding Creationism (or the Theory of Creationism to be fair). Before throwing speculation at specific quotes found here please read the entire article provided by the original author.

Quotes from Jim italisized-

As Dr, Ham says, same evidence, different interpretation. Only this one actually satisfies what we know is settled science through the fossil record.

What does the fossil record actually tell us? Do they tell us that they were formed over billions of years? Not at all.

Can science help us decide how fast fossils form, and how fast those sedimentary rock layers pile up? That’s what I wanted to know when I signed up for courses like Stratigraphy that deal in part with rates of sediment-layer formation.

Surprisingly enough, just about everybody—creationist, evolutionist, and everyone in between—agrees that individual fossil specimens themselves begin to form very, very rapidly! If a plant or animal just dies and falls to the ground or into the water, it’s quickly broken up and decomposed by scavengers, wind and water currents, even sunlight. Fallen logs, road kills, and dead aquarium fish don’t just become fossils, nor did the millions of bison slaughtered in America’s move west.

Read the rest of this article here.

Okay then, do the fossils tell us how old they are based on where they were found in the earth? Not quite.

It has been claimed that the geological column as a faunel succession is not just a hypothetical concept, but a reality, because all Phanerozoic systems exist superposed at a number of locations on the earth. Close examination reveals, however, that even at locations where all ten systems are superposed, the column, as represented by sedimentary-thickness, is mostly missing. In fact, the thickest local accumulation of rock is only a tiny fraction of the inferred 600-million year’s worth of depositions. The global ‘stack’ of index fossils exists nowhere on earth, and most index fossils do not usually overlie each other at the same locality. So, even in those places where all Phanerozoic systems have been assigned, the column is still hypothetical. Locally, many of the systems have not been assigned by the index fossils contained in the strata but by indirect methods that take the column for granted — clearly circular reasoning. Thus the geologic column does not exist and so does not need to be explained by Flood geology. Only each local succession requires an explanation and Flood geology is wholly adequate for this task.

This is a link on Answers In Genesis pointing to an outside source located here.

The Flood? How would that affect the layers of earth supposedly layed down over millions of years?

Although most people relate the Flood to “forty days and forty nights of rain,” the Bible says that the Flood began when “the fountains of the great deep burst forth.” It seems that most of the water came from below, not from above. Few people realize what a tremendous amount of water is found in molten rock (magma) trapped beneath the earth’s surface! When a hole or crack develops in the solid rock capping the more liquid magma, the pressure release causes the super-super hot water to flash into steam, and “BOOM” we have an upward-outward rush of vapor, gas, dust, and ash, producing a volcanic explosion and/or an outpouring of liquid rock on the surface (lava)! A geologist looking for a way to start a worldwide flood could hardly come up with a better mechanism than breaking up the “fountains of the great deep!”

As the volcanic fountains opened up in what is now the Grand Canyon area, the colossally stupendous force just pushed the pre-Flood or early Flood rock aside and tilted it up. The Precambrian rocks in the inner gorge are indeed cracked and tilted, and igneous intrusions cut across and between them, marking, I am suggesting, the beginning of Noah’s Flood, recorded for our study.

The first Flood current in the area came with such tremendous force that it sheared off the tilted Precambrian rocks in virtually a straight line, producing the so-called “angular unconformity” diagrammed in Fig. 34. Science tells us that the tilt-and-shear could not have happened slowly and gradually. One of the tilted units (the reddish Hakatai Shale) is so soft and crumbly you can dig it out with your fingernails. Another is so incredibly hard (the Shinumo Quartzite) that researchers can barely knock off a piece with a hammer. Had the rocks been tilted up slowly and eroded gradually by rain drops and rivers, the crumbly rock would be all gone, leaving valleys, and the hard unit would stick up in ridges and hillocks. The two different rock types would result in a very wavy contact being formed at the angular unconformity between the tilted layers and the first horizontal unit, the Tapeats Sandstone. Instead, it looks as if the Flood current that eventually deposited the Tapeats came in with such titanic force that the hard and soft rocks were sheared off almost equally in a nearly straight line.

Read the rest of this artice here.

However, the idea that we have to squeeze out of history evidence that dinosaurs walked with humans because [Ham believes]the Bible says so is unwise. Ham is risking misleading other Christians by taking an inexact understanding of biblical creation and using it as a litmus test for belief.

Okay, so I know this comment was directed primarily towards my post on dragons. I recognize that the article was simplistic but it wasn't meant to go into the great intricasies of proof. It was an email meant for those who already share a common view. With that said, what is the evidence for it?

The word ‘Behemoth’ (Job 40:15) is literally a plural form of a common Old Testament (OT) word meaning ‘beast’. However, practically all commentators and translators have agreed that here we have an intensive or majestic plural, so that the meaning is something like ‘colossal beast’. This case is similar to the word ‘Elohim’ (the most common name of God in the OT), which is actually a majestic plural form, but is always used with a singular verbal form, just as is encountered in this passage. Also, we read in verse 19 that Behemoth was the ‘chief of the ways of God’, which suggests that Behemoth was one of the largest (if not the largest) of God’s creatures...

...The interpretation that Behemoth was an elephant is very old and was common among mediaeval scholars. The original KJV-1611 had a marginal note ‘Or, the Elephant, as some thinke [sic]’. But the French Protestant pastor Samuel Bochart in his Hierozoicon (1663), which analyzed the animals in the Bible in great detail, suggested that Behemoth was a hippopotamus, and this has since remained as the most common interpretation. The suggestion of a dinosaur has only arisen in relatively modern times...

...Bearing all this in mind, we will now consider the key clause in Job 40:17a. First of all, here are some of the English translations of the clause that have been done:

* KJV: He moveth his tail like a cedar.
* NASB: He bends his tail like a cedar.
* NIV: His tail sways like a cedar.
* NKJV: He moves his tail like a cedar.
* REV: His tail is rigid as a cedar.
* RSV: He makes his tail stiff like a cedar.
* RV: He moveth his tail like a cedar.

Older translations are also of interest:

* Septuagint (Greek): He sets up/erects (estesen) his tail like a cypress.
* Vulgate (Latin): He ties up/binds (constringit) his tail like a cedar.
* Luther (German, 16th C): His tail stretches (streckt sich) like a cedar.
* Statenvertaling (Dutch, 17th C): According to his pleasure (Als ‘t hem lust), his tail is like a cedar.
* Diodati (Italian, 16th C): He raises (rizza) his tail like a cedar.

As can be seen, the translations have varied significantly! The reason is that the Hebrew verb in this clause is very problematic, so we shall study it in some detail...

To read the read of this article click here.

Days and Yoms and Meanings
The Hebrew word for “day” that is used in Genesis does mean “day” but has more than the one definition “24-hour day”. We say “back in the day” or “in the days of apartheid” when we are really talking about a span of years. 2 Peter 3:8, which quotes a Psalm, reminds us that a day is like a thousand years to God, and a thousand years is like a day. It could have been six eras that could range from a day to hundreds of millions of years.

That is a well establish reason that Theological Evolutionists give to bridge the gap between creation and evolution. Does it hold up to Biblical study?

To understand the meaning of ‘day’ in Genesis 1, we need to determine how the Hebrew word for ‘day,’ yom, is used in the context of Scripture. Consider the following:

* A typical concordance will illustrate that yom can have a range of meanings: a period of light as contrasted to night, a 24-hour period, time, a specific point of time, or a year.

* A classical, well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon8 (a one-way dictionary) has seven headings and many subheadings for the meaning of yom—but defines the creation days of Genesis 1 as ordinary days under the heading ‘day as defined by evening and morning.’

* A number, and the phrase ‘evening and morning,’ are used for each of the six days of creation (Genesis 1:5,8,13,19,23,31).

* Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with a number 410 times, and each time it means an ordinary day9—why would Genesis 1 be the exception?10

* Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with the word ‘evening’ or ‘morning’11 23 times. ‘Evening’ and ‘morning’ appear in association, but without yom, 38 times. All 61 times the text refers to an ordinary day—why would Genesis 1 be the exception?12

* In Genesis 1:5, yom occurs in context with the word ‘night.’ Outside of Genesis 1, ‘night’ is used with yom 53 times—and each time it means an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception? Even the usage of the word ‘light’ with yom in this passage determines the meaning as ordinary day.13

* The plural of yom, which does not appear in Genesis 1, can be used to communicate a longer time period, e.g. ‘in those days.’14 Adding a number here would be nonsensical. Clearly, in Exodus 20:11 where a number is used with days, it unambiguously refers to six Earth-rotation days.

* There are words in biblical Hebrew (such as olam or qedem) that are very suitable for communicating long periods of time, or indefinite time, but none of these words are used in Genesis 1.15 Alternatively, the days or years could have been compared with grains of sand if long periods were meant.

To read the rest of this article click here.

Trees can’t bear fruit in a day.
God and Science has a webpage explaining how a literal 6 day creation was not the intended meaning of the Genesis narrative. It takes aim at Day #3 - The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. God can do anything but a plant cannot bear fruit in one day. The danger of a highly literal interpretation is that here we make a mistake that an atheist will be quick to point out.

Evolutionists can't make claim to this because the idea behind it is false reasoning. It is based on the presupposition that macro evolution occured. If we take the shackles off our God and allow him to be the God who raised himself (Christ) from the dead, healed the sick, caused a virgin to give birth, made thousands of prophecies that came true, parted the Red Sea, caused a global flood and said "Let there be light" - if we allow this God to exist in our minds - we will find that it is not impossible for this God to create trees that bear fruit in a day.

But the problem is not whether we know for sure that God did it all in 6 24-hour days, the problem....is sin.

Not ironically I agree with you that the problem is sin. But the problem of sin raises questions about whether or not we take a literal or interpretive view of scripture.

I'm going to end with this final piece from Answers In Genesis found here. I think it sums up the rest of what I want to say nicely. I don't like doing pieces this long so if you have any further questions (or rebuttal) that I need to answer please help me out by pointing out one thing at a time. Love you, brother!

For the Christian, which history of death you accept has major theological implications.

1. If a Christian accepts the history of death over millions of years, then when God stated in Genesis 1:31 that everything He had made was ‘very good’, this would mean that death, suffering, violence, and diseases like cancer (as represented in the fossil record) were also ‘very good’. This situation is represented in the following diagram:

This view of history, if consistently applied, would lead to the situation summed up by the heretical Bishop John Shelby Spong:

‘… But Charles Darwin says that there was no perfect creation because it is not yet finished. It is still unfolding. And there was no perfect human life which then corrupted itself and fell into sin … . And so the story of Jesus who comes to rescue us from the fall becomes a nonsensical story. So how can we tell the Jesus story with integrity and with power, against the background of a humanity that is not fallen but is simply unfinished?’4

Bishop Spong accepts the history of death over millions of years. As a result of this, he cannot accept a perfect creation that was marred by sin. Thus, the groaning (death and suffering, etc.) we observe today has continued for millions of years. This is also true of all ‘long-age creationists’. These are those who accept the secular belief in an old world, while opposing evolution in favour of ‘progressive creation’ or ‘intelligent design’.

2. However, if a Christian accepts the history of death as given by a literal reading of the Genesis account, then this history can be represented by the following diagram:

The perfect creation with no death, disease or suffering is described as ‘very good.’ The Bible makes it clear that God does not delight in death. We read in Ezekiel 33:11, ‘Say unto them, As I live, said the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn you, turn you from your evil ways; for why will you die, O house of Israel?’ God takes no pleasure in the afflictions and calamities of people (death etc.).

The Bible makes it obvious that death is the penalty for our sin. In other words, it is really our fault that the world is the way it is—God is a loving, merciful God. When we sinned in Adam, we effectively said that we wanted life without God. All of us also sin individually (Romans 3:23). God had to judge sin, as He warned Adam He would (Genesis 2:17, cf. 3:19). In doing so, God has given us a taste of life without Him—a world that is running down—a world full of death and suffering. As Romans 8:22 says, ‘the whole creation groans and labours with birth pangs’. Man, in essence, forfeited his right to live.

However, even though we are sinners, those who have turned from their sin and trusted Christ for forgiveness will spend eternity with their Creator in a place where righteousness dwells—and there will be no more crying, suffering or death.

The true history of death, as understood from a literal Genesis, enables us to recognize a loving Creator who hates death, the enemy that will one day be thrown into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14).

Which history of death do you, the reader, accept? Is it one that makes God an ogre responsible for millions of years of death, disease and suffering? Or is it one that correctly places the blame on our sin, and correctly represents our Creator God as a loving, merciful Saviour who wept at the tomb of dead Lazarus (John 11:35)?

Drunk Driving - Murder?

My brother pointed this article out to me. I had seen this on the news but hadn't heard how the trial had gone.

So, many advocates were cheered when a Long Island, N.Y., jury last week convicted Martin R. Heidgen, 25, of murder for killing two people in a head-on collision with a limousine on July 2, 2005. Still, it was such a rare event that advocates, prosecutors and defense lawyers are still trying to figure out its implications.

Will murder charges help deter drunken driving? Will juries convict these drivers, knowing that they will be in prison for a long time? And is it fair?

The trial certainly did raise questions for the future. The question I'm asking is the last one - is it fair?

At first I leaned towards no. Millions of Americans drive drunk daily and no one gets hurt. They don't do it to intentionally seek harm to someone. They have just lost perspective due to intoxication. It would be hard to tell millions of "voters" that they may need to cut down on their drinking habit because they potentially could get charged with murder.

Then my wife pointed out the vehicular manslaughter is the same whether alcohol is involved or not. If I, being in complete control of my faculties, run a red light and kill an elderly man I could be charged with vehecular manslaughter - regardless of the fact that I am sober.

So why shouldn't a stronger charge be put in place for those who knowingly go out drinking with the intention of driving home later. Its like adding fuel to a fire, you know it will explode. A gun can be used for things other than murder but if pointed at an unarmed person even in fun it could become murder. A knife has many other uses than murder but, again, if in the wrong place at the wrong time the charge could be murder. A car is transportation and if not used properly can result in a manslaughter charge. Add an additional component knowingly and it, in my eyes, is murder.

I acknowledge that this could still be up for debate and would love to hear your comments but currently I agree with the verdict of this trial.

Link
--------------
Alcohol, a Car and a Fatality. Is It Murder?

Tired

Just letting those of you who read this regularly and/or receive the email that I'm having a busy week and may not get to things as quickly as I've done in the past.

Jim, I will be responding to you still so please have patience. Tommy, Rachel and anyone else who may have sent me articles to use I will probably still use them but, as I said, delayed.

God bless!

Video on Drugs and TV

This is a redo. My loving wife pointed out a few errors in my video so I redid it, rerendered it, reuploaded it and remade this post. Not much difference but I didn't want typos.

The following video is the news for today. This video is created by myself using a recent episode of "Heroes" and information from the following article:
Cocaine Epidemic Feared As Cocaine Deaths Nearly Double In Florida Over Past 5 Years

At the Feet of Jesus

When I first started going to church, I really wanted to get involved. I wanted to bring something of myself into the congregation. So I signed up for the Children’s ministry on Sunday nights. I committed myself to spending every Sunday taking care of everyone’s toddlers and infants. At first it was great. There weren’t any problems because I had spent a few summers as a nanny and I knew my way around dirty diapers.

After a while though, I started to feel really empty. I thought that I could go to the other service the church had and still get my time with Jesus and serve in the afternoons. It didn’t always work out that way and more often than not, I’d skip out altogether. I was really missing spending time with the Lord. Not to mention my fiancé at the time who went to both services with me. We would drive home afterwards and he would attempt to tell me about the lesson, but usually I had missed it all and he wasn’t fabulous about relating it to me. (Sorry honey).

I started reading more scripture and found a verse in Luke where Jesus was eating dinner at Mary and Martha’s home. Martha was getting upset because Mary was weeping at the feet of Jesus and not helping in the preparation of the meal. She even goes to the Lord and says that he needs to tell Mary to help her in the kitchen. The Lord replies that Mary has chosen to worship and be with the Lord and that will not be taken away from her.

“As Jesus and his disciples were on their way, he came to a village where a woman named Martha opened her home to him. She had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord's feet listening to what he said. But Martha was distracted by all the preparations that had to be made. She came to him and asked, "Lord, don't you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself? Tell her to help me!"

"Martha, Martha," the Lord answered, "You are worried and upset about many things, but only one thing is needed. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her."” Luke 10: 38-42

It just happens that the next church service I went to the pastor spoke on this very same scripture that the Lord had put into my heart not two days before. Jesus was trying to tell me not to wear myself so thin that I forget to be with him. That I was so new to the faith I should be learning about Jesus right now and serving later when I am called to it.

I’m not saying that you shouldn’t serve in your church and your community. I’m only pointing out that your acts of service should be done because the Lord has asked you to do them. Not because you are trying to prove to the Lord what a wonderful giving person you are. He already knows you’re wonderful! He created you!

The Question of Dragons

The following was emailed from Answers in Genesis and I thought you may like to read:

Q: Do creationists believe flying dragons were mythical?

A: The pictures of flying dragons we see in movies and books may be a bit fanciful. But they are probably based on memories from people who did see such flying creatures, perhaps pterodactyls.

In the 5th century BC, Herodotus, the famous Greek historian, wrote about the “winged serpents” of Arabia. Their descriptions fit what we know about pterodactyls. Similar reports of such creatures come from Ethiopia and India. And there are people living today in the jungles of Southern Africa who say they’ve seen flying reptiles—though they call them “kongamato.” Even the Bible, in the book of Isaiah, talks about flying serpents that lived with people.

Evolutionists insist that the flying reptiles became extinct with the dinosaurs millions of years ago. But the Bible and ancient records give evidence that such creatures lived with people not so long ago.

Furthermore, it shouldn’t surprise those who believe in the book of Genesis if such a flying reptile was still living today. After all, the Bible says that God created all the land animals on the sixth day of creation.

A Good Witness

Christian Post writes about a teacher who is suing a church for discriminating against her for getting pregnant out of wedlock...

DALLAS (AP) — A church preschool teacher who became pregnant out of wedlock sued her employer, saying she was forced to sign a pledge that she would stop having sex until marriage.

Freda Brown also claims in her federal lawsuit that First Baptist Church of Dallas leaders asked her inappropriate questions and reduced her compensation.

The suit was filed last week after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission determined that Brown had been discriminated against because of her gender and pregnancy.

A First Baptist spokeswoman referred calls to the church's attorney, John Harrison, who said he had not yet talked to church leaders about the lawsuit.

Brown was not married when she became pregnant with her first child. When the church discovered she was pregnant in May 2005, staff members invited her to a meeting and told her that premarital sex was wrong, according to the lawsuit.

She said she was asked questions about her sex life including, "Were you a virgin when you had sex with the child's father?" and "Why can't you just get married to the child's father?"

At another meeting, Brown said the human resources director told her that she was "not living a Christian lifestyle" and that she would have to sign a statement agreeing not to have premarital sex if she wanted to keep her job.

In June 2005, First Baptist told her that she would be suspended with pay until she had her baby, Brown said. She filed a complaint with the EEOC and was allowed to return to work but she was made a part-time employee and lost insurance benefits, according to the lawsuit.

The EEOC determined discrimination and retaliation did occur. The agency was unable to settle the matter and provided Brown with a "right-to-sue" letter.

First off lets consider that the woman should have known better than to get pregnant outside of marriage and not expect a Christian school to have a problem with this. A lesson for young ladies - don't become a Christian teacher if you can't live up to the expectations of the position!

James 3:1 (New International Version)
Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

The second issue is the way the church treated her. A lesson for the churches with schools. If you want your teachers (and other leaders) to live a lifestyle of righteousness put it in writing and have everyone sign the document before hiring them! It is not fair even by the teachings of Jesus to expect something from someone without letting them know that it is to be expected.

James 3:2 (New International Version)
We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check.

Lets put this all together now for if you've noticed these two verses are naturally side by side:

James 3:1-2 (New International Version)
1Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. 2We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check.

What more do these two verses say to you?

Link
Teacher Sues Church Over Premarital Sex Issues

Self Abortion is NOT okay!

This makes me angry! I don't think I can even say any more about it until I calm down. Here is what I have for now...

I'm just going to post the first part of this article with these words: Love the sinner hate the sin. I forgive the woman but I do not and will not condone her actions. To top it off I can't believe the courts ruled this way!!

Oct. 19, 2006 — A Virginia judge has dismissed charges today against a young woman who shot herself in order to kill her unborn child in a case that has angered anti-abortion activists.

Tammy Skinner was a poor, desperate 22-year-old with two young children and another one on the way.

* Related: Was Killing Her Own Fetus a Criminal Act?


She said her boyfriend wouldn't pay for an abortion, so she carried her pregnancy to term.

Then she did the unthinkable.

Prosecutors say that on the morning she was scheduled to give birth, Skinner drove to an auto dealer's parking lot, took a gun, and shot herself in the belly, killing the fetus in an act of self-abortion. Skinner was charged with carrying out an illegal abortion.

Is Skinner a criminal?

Today, a Virginia judge said no. The charges were dropped, her case dismissed.

Should he have ruled otherwise?

The law in question states that it is illegal to administer or cause an illegal abortion on an expectant mother.

But Skinner's defense lawyer, Kevin Martingayle, argued that the law did not make it a crime for a mother to cause her own abortion. Ultimately, that argument convinced Circuit Court Judge W. R. Carter.

If someone else had pulled the trigger, he or she would be criminally accountable. Because it was the pregnant woman herself, no crime was committed, the court ruled.

But the Commonwealth of Virginia filed a direct indictment against Skinner, putting her case back in the courtroom.

Skinner's case has legal analysts scratching their heads and anti-abortion activists pounding their fists.

To those activists, this is an unequivocal case of murder coupled with a failure of the courts to catch it.

Link
-------------------
Judge Dismisses Charges Against Woman Who Killed Her Unborn Child

Evolution of the Grand Canyon

Answers in Genesis has a new article out that describes the Grand Canyon from a creationist's perspective...

I must say that I found this article pretty awesome! It is much too long to put everything it had to say on this post. I would like to post a few of my favorite points though and encourage you to go take a look yourself! It will be well worth your time considering it answers some very fundamental questions about the timeline of the earth.

The elevation problem:

Where did the Canyon itself come from? The Flood may have stacked the rock like a giant layer cake, but what cut the cake?

One thing for sure: the Colorado River did not do it. The Colorado River starts about 12,000 feet (ca. 3,500 m) up in the Rocky Mountains of western Colorado. By the time it gets to the Grand Canyon area, it’s at about 5,000 feet (1,500 m). And that’s the problem. Grand Canyon is definitely not a lowland valley. The North Rim of the Canyon is over 8,000 feet (2,500 m) high! For the Colorado River to carve the Canyon, it would first have to hack its way half a mile (over 700 m) uphill! Water just doesn’t do that, especially when there’s the opportunity to flow downhill in a different direction. For this and several other reasons, even evolutionary geologists no longer believe that the River slowly cut the Canyon over 60 million years.

The Mount St. Helen's example:

Less dramatic in scale, but directly and awesomely visible, was an eruption of Mt. St. Helens. We have described the first eruption in May of 1980, as the force of water flashing to steam blew the top 1300 feet (400 m) off the north side of the volcano. More to the immediate point was the explosion in June of 1982. The heat generated from that explosion melted frozen mud, producing a mud flow that filled up the North Fork of the Toutle River. The smoke cleared five days later to reveal that the mud flow had been eroded into a zig-zag main channel with many sharply tapered side canyons. Horizontal bands of sediment, some thick, and some exceedingly fine, lined the walls of the newly formed canyon. Right before our eyes, a small volcano (which never even produced a lava flow) had stacked up horizontal bands of sediment, and cut channels through it, forming a 1/40th size “scale model” of Grand Canyon in just five days! All sorts of features once thought to take millions of years of time were formed, instead, by a lot of water in just five days! And my wife and I got to see it on a dizzying flight down the length of that “Little Grand Canyon.”

Evidence in vast locations:

The asteroid catastrophes some evolutionists postulate are dramatic, and so is the Biblical narrative, as it tells how “all the high mountains under the whole heavens” were once covered with water. If that were so, we ought to find billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. Grab your pick and shovel and go looking, and what do you find? Billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth! Right up to sea creatures fossilized in the high Himalayas, it looks like the scientific evidence in God’s world encourages us to trust the Bible as God’s Word!

Once again, I encourage each of you to visit this site and especially this article and read for yourself the awesome wonders of God!