Thursday, November 22, 2007

Tryptophan Overdose

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! Count your many blessings.

Wednesday, November 21, 2007


I'm sure this is the gist of most U.S. automated phone conversations, these days:

"Hello, you have reached the English Department of Mierda University. We appreciate your call.

"For Spanish, press 1.
"For Arabic, press 2.
"For Italian, press 3.
"For French, press 4.
"For Swedish, press 5.
"For Russian, press 6.
"For Cantonese, press 7.
"For Japanese, press 8.
"For Portuguese, press 9.
"For Esperanto, press 10.
"For Afrikaans, press 11.
"For Tagalog, press 12.
"For Egyptian, press 13.
"For Hindi, press 14.
"For Mohawk, press 15.
"For Pidgin, press 16.
"For Gaelic, press 17.
"For Hittite, press 18.
"For Quechua, press 19.
"For Klingon, press 20.
"For Yiddish, press 21.
"For Sanskrit, press 22.
"For Nahuatl, press 23.
"For Rapa Nui, press 24.
"For Sumerian, press 25.
"For Carib, press 26.
"For Rasta, press 27, mon.
"For Maori, press 28.
"For Zulu, press 29.
"For Etruscan, press 30.
"For Vulcan, press 31.
"For Quenya, press 32.
"For Cthulhuian, press 33.
"For Ebonics, slam tirty-fo, nigga.
"For English, press *666, and we'll transfer."

Stupid or Sellouts?

I was just reading a report that I received from the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. According to this update, eight states currently are working toward driver's licenses for illegal aliens. These include:

· Hawaii
· Washington
· Oregon
· Utah
· New Mexico
· Michigan
· Maine
· Maryland

You know, this is somewhat like passing laws to make sure that muggers are properly trained in the use of the firearms they point at their victims. Or maybe seeing to it that the burglar utilizes proper glass-cutting technique, during breaking and entering. Asinine doesn't even begin to cover it. Licenses are gateways to legitimacy, in the U.S. Why in the world would illegal migrants stop their efforts to break into this country, when we not only forego punishment, but reward them for their behavior? This is common sense 101. That many seemingly don't get it means one of two things: either they have a black hole between their ears, or they laugh to scorn the rule of law, national security, or the preservation of our heritage. There's nothing complicated about it.

Monday, November 19, 2007

God Values Us

A recent discussion at Vox's involved scripture's stance on slavery. I'm not terribly interested in getting into this subject; rather, I want to address a couple of Vox's remarks in the "Comments" section:

In elaborating upon his opinion on this topic to a reader, he said:

My essential point is that I don't believe God cares about humanity in the same way that you do.

Man is not His fellow, and He has very clearly expressed His total disregard for human judgment of His actions.

Obviously we are interesting to Him. But is it doubtful that we are important to Him.

I readily agree with his second statement, but find the first and third strange or incomplete. The notion that God doesn't care about humans in the same way that humans care about others is true--but that's not the end of the story. He cares about us more than anyone else--other human beings included. How else do we explain His vast, overwhelming qualities such as compassion, love, patience, and mercy illustrated throughout the entire Bible? Qualities that go far beyond what humans are able or willing to give? Qualities that are expressed without blemish of sin?

As for the third statement, scripture again suggests that God finds us important. Matthew 10:29-31 tells us: Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows. Luke 12:6-8 essentially repeats this declaration.

John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

It's difficult for me to understand how anyone could read the Gospels or New Testament and reach the conclusion that we are unimportant or of little importance to God. Scripture implies the exact opposite, in the strongest possible terms. That the Bible even exists refutes this position. That God reveals Himself to us in any capacity indicates otherwise. That Jesus came and suffered and bled and died in perhaps the most horrifying method of execution imaginable so that we may enter into Heaven and be with Him makes the claim dubious.

I'm flabbergasted that God loves us or finds us important in the least, but all of scripture, from beginning to end, makes it crystal clear that He does.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

. . .And the Truth Shall Make You Free

This one's for Merkur and B and others who lean toward atheism/agnosticism.

I've had doubts, myself, at one time or another. I'm not a mindless God-bot or wild-eyed, frothing zealot. But those doubts have proven fleeting. When I look at the creation around me, and I read the Bible, I can come to no other conclusion save that God is real, and that He reveals Himself through His Word.

I've evaluated other religions. I've studied Islam's teachings and history extensively, and have given lesser degrees of time to studying other belief systems. I blindly accept nothing. From my efforts, I've determined that Christianity makes more sense, is more logical, and corresponds to observable reality better than any other religion. It is a reasonable faith. Hebrews 11:1 defines faith thusly: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Biblical faith is not an appeal to gullibility.

I humbly ask that each of you maintain or cultivate an open spirit of inquiry. Be a seeker and a lover of truth. This is not a throwaway issue; it's an important topic, regardless your stance on whether or not God exists. If God is real and has expectations for us, we should expect that He would communicate this information. The Holy Bible purports itself to be just such a news bulletin to the world. If He sent His Son Jesus as a willing sacrifice for the sins of men--again, as scripture and history proclaims--His is an offering we cannot ignore. This is the most earth-shattering declaration and revelation in all of history. Nothing trumps the urgency of our decision for or against Him. In Matthew 12:30, Jesus said: He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. So there is no middle ground for us to dabble in, no neutral position. As the old Rush song, "Free Will" says: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." That's the way salvation works; non-acceptance is rejection, by definition. John 3:16-18 tells us: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Now, on the possibility that the above information is accurate, no one can afford procrastination or the luxury of remaining dubious. We scoff at our own peril. I'm not scare-mongering, here; I'm attempting to impress upon you the significance and gravity of the situation.

Please don't take my word for it. Look into the matter for yourselves. Study the Bible. Examine Christian history and the effects of God's Word on human behavior. I recommend beginning with The Gospel of John. This book was written specifically for unbelievers; you'll see what I mean when you read the first few verses. It's the most powerful description of humanity's flawed relationship with its Creator that I've ever read. And of His grace and love.

The whole Bible is a how-to book on living for God, leading others to Him, and getting into Heaven. It's a simplistic description, I know, but distilled into its essence.

Beyond the Bible, many books make a solid case for God's existence, and Christianity's truth. Examples include: Mere Christianity, by C.S. Lewis; The Case for Christ, The Case for a Creator, and The Case for Faith, all by Lee Strobel. Other great books include: What If Jesus Had Never Been Born?, and What If the Bible Had Never Been Written?, by D. James Kennedy. These offer popular, easy-to-understand treatments of the subject matter, and make a good starting point. I'm sure my readers easily can add to this list.

I want you to understand that I'm not pontificating or talking down to any of you. Once I was lost, and it was only by God's mercy that I was found. He has made this unearned gift available to everyone, if he or she just comes to Him and accepts it. Don't be one of those who misses out on the very purpose for which he was created: fellowship with God.

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.--2 Peter 3:9

And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.--Luke 11:9-10

Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.--John 8:31-32

Monday, November 12, 2007

Miraculous Intervention?

I often hear sceptics say that miracles never happen. Even Christians sometimes wonder why they aren't more prevalent. And then I read stories like this:

Dolphins save surfer from becoming shark’s bait --

Surfer Todd Endris needed a miracle. The shark — a monster great white that came out of nowhere — had hit him three times, peeling the skin off his back and mauling his right leg to the bone.

That’s when a pod of bottlenose dolphins intervened, forming a protective ring around Endris, allowing him to get to shore, where quick first aid provided by a friend saved his life.

I'm not convinced that this constitutes a miracle, but I'm open to the possibility. It's not the first story I've read about dolphins or other animals jeopardizing themselves for a human's safety. Is it an instinctive act, or something more? I don't know the answer, but I do believe that miracles happen. I think the so-called dearth of miracles indicates that people don't look in the right places, or don't recognize them when they see them.

Saturday, November 10, 2007

Unfortunate News

It seems that a fellow blogger has decided to give up blogging, due to personal problems.

Roci, if you're reading this, I enjoyed your blog and your comments, here. I hope you're able to overcome this rough road set before you, and see a reconciliation in the near future.

May God bless and take care of you and your family.

Tuesday, November 6, 2007

The Proof Is in the Pudding

In the last post's comment thread, a commenter named B said:

The athiest's argument is actually "There is no god because it has not been proven."

First, I think one's reasoning for declaring God nonexistent is not germane to my point. The unfortunate reality is that atheists lay claim to knowledge that they do not--and cannot--possess. The reasons behind this belief are extraneous to whether or not this is an act of extreme hubris.

I'd also like to point out that B reinforces my earlier contention, in suggesting that he knows why atheists insist that God is imaginary. Individuals express different reasons for reaching the same conclusions. B may have his reason for disbelief, and the atheist professor at the local community college may hold yet another rationale. Aldous Huxley, a proponent of Evolution and grandson of "Darwin's Bulldog," Thomas Huxley, provided this insight into his own beliefs:

‘I had motive for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics, he is also concerned to prove that there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do, or why his friends should not seize political power and govern in the way that they find most advantageous to themselves. … For myself, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political.’--taken from Ends and Means

So here we have an atheist stating that his unbelief is a product of a desire for unrestricted personal behavior, not "because God has not been proven."

Stating that there is no God, because His existence remains unproven, is like suggesting that Attila the Hun never lived, since you find the evidence of his life inconclusive. It's a non sequitur. Proclaiming something untrue due to incomplete evidence is a statement of faith, not science or reason. If I say "I don't know," or "I'm not sure," these are honest admissions. "God isn't real," however, reveals an inherent assumption that one has all the facts at his disposal, when the evidence unambiguously suggests otherwise.

The distinction between atheism and theism isn't faith; both require it. The difference is that, while theists place their faith in God, atheists put their faith in themselves.

It's also worth noting that literally billions of people have weighed the evidence for God in the balance, and have reached the conclusion that He is a fundamental part of reality. So the atheist's assertion that "There is no God, because it has not been proven," is a statement of opinion.

B continues: The only people claiming omnipotent knowledge are actually religious people; does knowing the truth make them God?

This is inaccurate, I'm afraid. Proposing that God exists is not the same sort of claim as insisting that He's fictional. One merely requires evidence; the other has a prerequisite of omniscience. Hundreds of books have been written making the case for God. A few brief examples: every effect has a cause; in human experience, life only springs from life, never from inanimate matter; living organisms show evidence of design, in structures that have irreducible complexity; that forces of chance could produce repeated beneficial mutation-- which in turn produces higher life forms--is statistically impossible; that the existence of reason, itself, presupposes logical, non-contradictory laws. How did blind chance produce workable logic?

One could provide numerous other examples. The point is that the case for God can be and has been made, and in a very convincing manner. True, the proof is not 100% air-tight, but it does exist in copious quantities, for those interested in examining it with an open mind. Atheism, on the other hand, must somehow prove a negative--that God does not exist. This necessitates universal knowledge, which is unavailable to humans. Nor is the limited available evidence sympathetic to a belief in God's fairy-tale quality.

Following the accessible evidence to a reasonable conclusion does not require a claim of omniscience; atheism's accuracy, by definition, cannot be known without it.

Sunday, November 4, 2007

The Fool Hath Said. . .

I think it's interesting how atheists fall back on the cushion of science in defending their evolutionist beliefs and portraying themselves as eminently rational beings immune to that worst of all human traits: bias. No, atheists exemplify objectivity, as is apparent when they crow "There is no God!" without a shred of evidence backing this naked, flabby assertion.

I think it should be stated often--in blunt, clear terms--that atheism is the diametric opposite of a rational belief. I can think of no more egregious example of irrationality than presupposing the harboring of knowledge unobtainable by humans. How does one even begin proving God's nonexistence?

In some aspects, it seems a form of gnosticism, an embracing of "hidden" or "special" knowledge to which the average simian descendant isn't privy. Knowing with certainty that God doesn't exist requires universal knowledge; universal knowledge is omniscience; omniscience is a commonly understood attribute of God, never one of humans.

So the atheist's argument in a nutshell is: "There is no God. I know, because I am God!" This is paradoxical. It is irrational. And it is an uber-obnoxious form of hubris.

The longer I ponder the subject, the more convinced I become that atheism and arrogance go hand-in-hand. The two are inseparably locked together, like a croc and its wildebeest snack, the federal government and your bank account, or Hillary Clinton and a child's pulsating jugular. Indeed, atheism is an actual expression of arrogance, in and of itself. I have never come across an exception to this rule. Not once.

Returning to science for a moment, I find it ironic that atheists and agnostics use it as a tool for belittling Christians. For it was Christians who largely established and fleshed out the institution of science as we understand it, today. It was those poor, froth-mouthed religious zealots who forged the implement that atheists cherish above all things.

It's like someone contracting Frankenstein's monster for a hit on the good Doctor, himself.

Saturday, November 3, 2007

Idiocy Enrhymed

An atheist couldn't subsist
When he made the Grim Reaper's checklist.
He went straight below,
But he suffered no woe,
For he knew that Hell cannot exist.


The atheist went straight to Hell
Without fond "Adieu!" or "Farewell!"
He said: "This is wrong;
I just don't belong.
I'm not part of myth's clientele."