Quote-mining Atheists

"I am an atheist. I do not believe in any god or gods or anything supernatural. So don't waste your time threatening me with eternal torture at the hands of some super being -- you might as well claim that I'm about to be serenaded by Alvin and the Chipmunks, I'm just not going to take it seriously.”

There are two issues here. One is the character of God. Another skeptic insinuated the same thing when he posted, “Can anyone interpret Numbers 31:7-18? Anyone?” The portion of Scripture tells how God told His people to kill every man woman and child and keep the virgin women for themselves. There are a number of other verses in the Bible that paint God as a merciless tyrant and if you so desire, you can “quote mine” them and have, what may feel to you, a good case against the character of God. As far as you are concerned, He is guilty of genocide. Add to that the terrifying threat of an endless Hell, and the worst of sinners feels justified in contempt for such a deity.

Let me tell you about my father. He regularly left my mom to take care of us kids (when he was around, there were times that he physically beat us). I remember him once killing a defenseless animal with his bare hands. With that information you would be quite justified in saying that my father was a tyrant--an abusive pig of a man.

Here’s some missing information. The reason he regularly left mom to take care of us was because he was a builder, and he was working long hours to make money to buy food for his beloved family. He did physically spank us when we lied or stole anything. He cared enough to correct us when we did wrong. Oh, and that helpless animal. He found it on the side of the road. It had been hit by a car and was dying. He put the poor animal out of its misery, and it grieved him to have to do it. My dad was a loving father and an extremely compassionate person.

Quote mine the Bible and you will paint God as a tyrant. But let me give you some more information. God gave us life. He gave us eyes to see the incredible creation he made for us. He gave us ears to hear wonderful music He created for us. He gave us taste buds to enjoy all the incredible variety of food he made for us. And we use His name as a cuss word. We are unthankful and ungrateful for the unspeakable goodness He lavished upon us. So what did He do? He became a perfect Man in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. The first time Jesus opened His mouth to preach, they tried to kill Him. Scripture records that humanity tried to murder Him ten times before He reached the cross. But that’s why He came. This incredible kind, loving and forgiving God is also a God of justice and truth. His very nature demands that when a man murders another human being he must be punished. His justice demands that when a man rapes a woman, he must be punished for his crime. His righteousness cries out for justice to be done when anyone transgresses His perfect Law. So what did this kind God do? He gave His life on an unspeakably cruel cross, taking the punishment for the sin of the world, so that evil humanity could escape being justly punished in Hell.

So when I see Bible quote mining, I have a balance. I don’t see my Father as a tyrant because Scripture gives me extra information that tells me that He is just and holy, and that all His judgments are righteous and true altogether. That terrible cross shows me that His wrath hasn’t changed, but it shows me unspeakable love and mercy, goodness and kindness, compassion and care.

That brings us to the second issue, the character of the questioner. Having asked these questions of thousands of people, I feel qualified to give the answer I think he would give me. How many lies have you told in your life? “Many.” “Perhaps a hundred?” “Easily.” “Have you ever taken something that belonged to someone else, even if it’s small?” “Yes.” Have you ever taken God’s name in vain?” “Plenty of times.” “Have you ever watched sex scenes in R-rated movies?” “Of course. Many times.” If a peeping Tom did the same thing through a bedroom window, we would call the police and have him arrested as some sort of sexual pervert, and yet you have done the same thing as a peeping Tom, only your “window” is a movie screen. So I take it that you also look at women with lust?” “All the time.”

So Mr. Questioner, you are a lying, thieving, blasphemous, sexual pervert, and you have the gall to stand in moral judgment over Almighty God! Who do you think you are? Who are you to reply against God? Lay your hand upon your sinful mouth, and humble yourself before the justice of God spills over onto you and you find Him giving you what you deserve.

God killed a man and his wife because they told one lie. You have told over one hundred, and yet He has let you live. This isn’t because He has changed His standards. He is simply extending His kind hand of mercy towards you, a liar and pervert.

If I have a question about the character of God, I have the good sense to hold my hand upon my mouth until I am in Heaven, and there God may see fit to answer it. But if you stay in your sins, you will get a satisfactory answer to a point where you will say, “Oh, I understand. I was wrong” will be of little consequence in Hell.

Mockers think that they have a “smoking gun” as evidence against God, and are the sort of people in the front row of a lynching mob. In truth, they are building their own gallows. They can’t see clearly because they have a sequoia in their eye.

If the skeptic still wants to complain that God killed women and children in the Old Testament, he should realize that He did more than that. He proclaimed the death sentence on the entire human race--every man, woman and child. We will all die because we have sinned against God. So if you are a skeptic, stop whining, get right with Him through the Savior, and escape the damnation of Hell, while you still have time.

Mistakes in the Bible

One reason the Bible establishes itself as being the Word of God is that it exposes the hidden heart-motives of mankind. It reveals that:

• He is in rebellion and loves to sin (Romans 3:10-18).
• He mocks the things of God because he loves lust (2 Peter 2:14, 3:3).
• He hates the light of the Bible because it exposes the darkness of his sinful heart (John 3:19-21).
• He thinks the things of God are foolish (1 Corinthians 2:14).
• He is hostile towards God (and will even deny His existence) because of His moral dictates (Romans 8:7).
• He is plagued every day by the fear of death (Hebrews 2:14, 15).

In his ignorance he searches for what he believes are “mistakes” in the Bible to justify his godless beliefs. He is like a man who diligently searches (with a magnifying glass) for a tiny fly dirt on the Mona Lisa, so that he can justify discarding the whole painting as junk.

Religious Hypocrisy

“Ray, I thought I'd share some fact with you. I just reviewed the FBI crime index, the teen pregnancy index, index of religion in the states, and index for each different religion in the states for 2007. The funny thing I found was that crime and violent crime rated highest in the most religious parts of America. Teen pregnancy did the same. The most concentrated area in America for both was not only the most religious portion of the our nation but also where Baptist was the leading church body. The less religious and more secular areas rate were significantly less in all categories mentioned. So if people who choose to not believe in God so they can do all the horrible things his rules tell us not to do, why isn't the less religious portion of the American population doing them? Just curious. Does this prove there is a correlation between religion, crime and teen pregnancy? Since this was just a quick run through with only a few sources used, I'd say no, but it really makes me wonder. It also greatly helps to refute some of your claims about those who reject your God.”

This is a good question, and it brings out the essence of what our ministry teaches. The modern church has proclaimed a false gospel that has produced millions of false converts (those we commonly call “backsliders”). Do a little study among your atheist friends, and you will find that many are in this category. These people are normally bitter at Christianity. They feel cheated; and so they should. They heard a false gospel, and had a false conversion, and the Bible warns that those who experience such, will end up in a worse state than before their so-called “conversion.”

However, even more tragic than the creation of false converts who fall away from the faith, is the category of false converts who stay within the Church. They profess the Christian faith, but as your statistics confirm, their hypocritical lifestyles don’t match what they profess. The Bible calls them “goats” among the “sheep.” In the Middle East it’s extremely difficult to discern goats from sheep as they flock together. However, a good shepherd can tell the difference. The day will come when the Good Shepherd will separate the sheep from the goats. The sheep (the true converts) will go into everlasting life, and the goats (the false converts) will go into everlasting damnation.

Here is the difference between the true gospel and the false gospel. The false message says that you should come to Christ “because something is missing in your life--you have a God-shaped hole in your heart. God has a wonderful plan for your life.” But there is no biblical precedent for a message of life-improvement upon conversion. None. In fact, the Bible says that you will have trials, tribulations, temptations and persecution.

The reason any of us should come to Christ is because we are deceitfully wicked sinners, and we desperately need a Savior. Without the mercy of God in Christ, we will come under God’s just wrath, and end up in Hell. We should come to Christ for no other reason.

The false message is very popular for obvious reasons, and that’s why popular preachers who preach the false gospel have such large followings. However, some people (like yourself), are beginning to see the discrepancy and asking why. It’s our earnest prayer that they listen to what we are saying, and reform the message that’s being preached.

The Almost Christian

The following (extremely applicable article) was written back in 1661, by Matthew Mead. It is taken from "The Almost Christian":

“There is a proud heart in every natural man. There was much pride in Adam's sin—and there is much of it in all Adam's sons. Pride is a radical sin, and from hence arises this over-inflated opinion of a man's spiritual state and condition: ‘The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: God, I thank you that I am not like other men— robbers, evildoers, adulterers’ (Luke 18:11). This is the unsaved man's motto.

A proud man has an eye to see his beauty—but not his deformity. He sees his abilities—but not his spots. He sees his seeming righteousness—but not his real wretchedness. It must be a work of grace—which must show a man the lack of grace. The haughty eye looks upward—but the humble eye looks downward, and therefore this is the believer's motto, ‘I am the least of saints—and the greatest of sinners!’

"‘But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, 'O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner!' I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God!’ (Luke 18:13-14).

New Evolution Book

Some time ago I wrote about a crazy book called, The Wild World of the Future which showed pictures of what evolutionary scientists imagine the future will be like in millions of years time. It was a publication about their wild speculations of what animals will evolve into--the snail in 100 million years will be bigger than an elephant, etc. Immediately I was accused of being deceitful, because this was merely a book that was written for children.

Well, we found the adult version, with adult pictures, in adult words. This one is for the big people. Without an ounce of scientific evidence, they played the imagination game with the future in the same way they have played it with the past. What an intellectual embarrassment--that the crazy theory of evolution could be masqueraded as being “scientific,” and what's even crazier is that gullible people have actually swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

I noticed that the dummies folks have finally put out a book on evolution for dummies. I think they nailed it.

Fire in a Clinic

“Your turn for a quiz: You're in a fertility clinic, for whatever reason. It's a huge place. A fire breaks out and you can rescue either : (a) a screaming 2-year old girl, or (b) 100 frozen embryos. But NOT both. So--Which do you rescue, Ray? Would you really, actually, rescue the frozen embryos and let the little girl burn? But if you believe they're fully human--as you say you do--then wouldn't you have to?”

I can hardly believe that any human being could be so evil, as to create a scenario to try and justify the murder of children in the womb. I say “hardly,” because the Bible says that the human heart is desperately wicked, and adds the words “who can know it?” In other words who could know how wicked a person could become? I think we get a glimpse of it here in this man’s world view. I find it sickening, and pray that God would take this wicked man and change him, as He changed me, before the Day of Judgment.

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? I the Lord search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings" (Jeremiah 17:9-10).

An Interesting Quiz:

How would you respond in these situations?

1. A preacher and his wife are very, very poor. They already have 14 kids. Now she finds out she’s pregnant with the 15th. They’re living in tremendous poverty. Considering their poverty and the excessive world population, would you consider recommending she get an abortion?

2. The father is sick with sniffles, the mother has TB. Of their four children, the first is blind, the second has died, the third is deaf, the fourth has TB. She finds she’s pregnant again. Given this extreme situation, would you consider recommending abortion?

3. A white man raped a 13-year-old black girl and she’s now pregnant. If you were her parents, would you consider recommending abortion?

4. A teenage girl is pregnant. She’s not married. Her fiancé is not the father of the baby, and he’s upset. Would you recommend abortion?

In the first case, you would have killed John Wesley, one of the great evangelists in the 19th century. In the second case, you would have killed Beethoven. In the third case, you would have killed Ethel Waters, the great black gospel singer. If you said yes to the fourth case, you would have declared the murder of Jesus Christ.

God is the author of life, and He has given every single individual supreme value. Each life—whether inside or outside the womb— should therefore be valued by us. God knows the plans He has for each individual and has written in His book all the days ordained for us before one of them came to be. When we presume to know better than God who should be given life, we are putting ourselves in the place of God and are guilty of idolatry. From, The Evidence Bible.

PS. You were born in 1765. Your father started the highly successful Wedgwood pottery company. You have given birth to four children, now you are pregnant with another. It’s a huge inconvenience. You decide to terminate the pregnancy, because it’s your right to do what you want with your own body. Congratulations, you have just murdered Charles Darwin.

A Problem with Chocolate

When professing Christians have a problem with pornography, the answer is often put forward that they need to have an “accountability” partner. I’m not saying that is wrong, but I will say that it doesn’t deal with their problem.

If a man is playing the hypocrite and feels okay about looking at pornography (committing adultery in his heart--see Matthew 5:27-28), he probably feels okay about lying also. If he can regularly commit adultery, then he will have no problem lying to his accountability partner. So there goes the foundation for accountability.

The root cause of his problem is his love for sin, and the only way to deal with that root is to take the axe of the fear of the Lord to it. When someone genuinely becomes a Christian, God becomes his accountability partner.

Would you look at porn during a worship service? Probably not. Why not? Because you believe that you are in the house of the Lord. But God is just as much in your house as He is in a building we erroneously call a "church." He is omnipresent. Then add to that knowledge the following warning, and it will help you deal with your problem: "And if your right eye offends you, pluck it out, and cast it from you: for it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be cast into hell" (Matthew 5:29). When we fear God, we know that the "eye of the Lord is in every place, beholding the evil and the good."

Do you love chocolate? Could you give it up? You say that there's no way you could do that. How about if I said, "I am a doctor, and I know without a doubt that you have a condition that will kill you if you eat chocolate"? That knowledge changes the dynamic. If you trust me and therefore believe me, your good sense would keep you from indulging. With that thought in mind, meditate on these verses:

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust has conceived, it brings forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, brings forth death. Do not err, my beloved brethren" (James 1:14-16).

Is God Our Enemy?

“I know that we are to fear God because of His just punishment, but can you please tell me the reference to where the Bible says God is actually our enemy? Jesus actually said to his disciples that he was their "friend." Also, if your claim from the Bible is that, "our sins have made a separation between God and us so that He won't even hear our prayers" is true, then where does the logic play in that we are supposed to pray and ask for forgiveness from those sins? I can find no reference to God not hearing our prayers, but to the contrary.”

<< I know that we are to fear God because of His just punishment, but can you please tell me the reference to where the Bible says God is actually our enemy? >>

Colossians 1:20-22 says, "And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight..." ( italics added). The carnal mind is at enmity (in a state of hostility) against God... (see Romans 8:7). The unregenerate mind spits out blasphemy, unbelief and rebellion at God and His moral Law.

<< Jesus actually said to his disciples that he was their "friend." >>

Jesus said, “You are my friends, if you do whatsoever I command you" (John 15:14, italics added). You forgot the second part of the verse. We are enemies of God as long as we are friends with this sinful world (see James 4:4, 5).

<< I can find no reference to God not hearing our prayers, but to the contrary. Since we are born sinners and have to grow in our relationship to God through Christ, if He is not listening to our prayers from the beginning, then how can He forgive the sins that separate us from Him? >>

Here are two verses (there are others):

"If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me." (Psalm 66:18).

"But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear" (Isaiah 59:2, italics added).

If we remain in rebellion to God, clinging to sin, He will take no notice of our prayers (obviously He is omniscient and "hears" all things). The Scriptures tell us that He “resists” the proud and gives grace to the humble. That’s why a proud person can think that there is no God. He believes that his prayers didn’t make it above the ceiling. And he is right. He needs to approach God in humility of heart. That way He will listen.

Look at Isaiah 66:2: “For all those things has my hand made, and all those things have been, says the Lord; but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembles at my word.” God takes notice of the humble prayer. He forgives sin and reveals Himself (in salvation), only when there is repentance and faith in Jesus.

Ben Stein's Expelled Has Strong Opening Weekend

by Jennifer Mesko, managing editor

Documentary challenges evolution's dominance in the classroom.

Ben Stein's new documentary, Expelled, which chronicles the censorship of teachers, professors and students who question the theory of Darwinian evolution, performed well at the box office over the weekend.

It's a message that garnered Dr. James Dobson's endorsement and seems to resonate with Americans. The documentary, which opened Friday at 1,000 theaters nationwide, brought in $3.2 million. It finished fifth overall in per-theater earnings, according to Box Office Mojo.

Tom Neven, editorial director for Youth Outreach at Focus on the Family, called it a "very good showing."

"It shows that thousands of Americans decided to ignore the propaganda being put forth by those who would wish to expel Expelled from theaters," he said. "The campaign of half-truths and smear tactics actually caused many to want to see for themselves what the fuss was about, and they came out of theaters seeing that Ben Stein makes a good case — both on the screen and in his response to those who would censor him."

Mark Mathis, executive producer of the movie, said the strong showing should get Hollywood's attention.

"There's a lot of garbage out there in our theaters," he told OneNewsNow. "And when investors stick their necks out and risk their hard-earned money to see a movie like this produced, they're taking a big risk — and they're hoping that people will honor that and go see it."

Myths about 'Expelled' -- Chuck Colson

If you have heard of the new documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, [now showing], chances are you have heard all kinds of distortions and myths about it. So let me set the record straight about some of the most common myths.

Myth #1: Darwinists interviewed for this film were tricked into participating.

Not so. Each scientist interviewed for Expelled, on both sides of the evolution debate, knew who would do the interview and what it was for. Each of them signed a release, allowing the producers to use the footage of their interviews.

Myth #2: The film is anti-science.

Wrong again. Many distinguished scientists were interviewed for this film and given the chance to express their views. Just like their Darwinist counterparts, the advocates of intelligent design and their supporters who are interviewed are there to talk about science, not to dismiss it. These are people like Cambridge physicist John Polkinghorne; Oxford mathematician and philosopher John Lennox; journalist Pamela Winnick, who has received hate mail for covering the issue; and biologist Caroline Crocker, who was fired from George Mason University for discussing intelligent design in the classroom. Some of them are religious believers; some are not. But what they share is a commitment to science and the unfettered pursuit of truth. Expelled is not anti-science; it is anti-censorship.

Myth #3: Ben Stein, the actor and writer who hosts the movie, has lost his mind.

Bringing up this very issue in a conference call, Stein quipped that he probably has, “but it was a long time ago . . . probably sometime around 1958.” Well, I have known Stein well for years, and he is as bright as a button and anything but out of his mind. On a serious note, Stein and his film’s producers explained that the mud that people are flinging at him is just one small example of what happens to people who question Darwinian orthodoxy. The original idea for Expelled, said co-producer and software engineer Walt Ruloff, came to him when he was working on a project with a group of biotechnologists and learned “that there was a whole series of questions that could not be asked.”

The prevailing ideology among many scientists—it turned out—he concluded, was keep your mouth shut, take the research money, and publish only the data that fits with “the party line.” The issue that concerns Ruloff and the others behind Expelled is whether the scientific establishment in this country is going to allow genuine “freedom of inquiry,” or simply shut up—and slander—those who do not toe the line.

Given all this, Ben Stein states, “As long as the cause is right, I’m happy to be in an uphill struggle.”

Myth #4: Popular author and atheist Richard Dawkins tells Ben Stein in this film that there could have been a designer of life on earth, but it would have had to have been “a higher intelligence” that had itself evolved “to a very high level . . . and seeded some form of life on this planet.”

Well, actually . . . that one is not a myth. He really did say it—striking admission, though it is.

So, I urge you to go see Expelled . . . Believe me, in this case the truth really is stranger—and more compelling—than any fiction the film’s detractors could possibly dream up.

The Name Above All Names

I have said before, the most hated name in the world isn’t Osama Ben Laden, Hitler, or Judas Iscariot. None of those names are internationally used as a cuss word. By far the winner of despised names award is the name of Jesus Christ. He is an all-time Hollywood favorite. His name is used as a cuss word in books, magazines, on radio, TV, all over the Internet, and in everyday speech. Jesus predicted that the world would hate Him because He testified of their deeds, that they are evil (see John 7:7). The world hates Jesus for the same reason devious criminals hate the police.

Using His name as a cuss word isn’t the only way to deal with this problem of Jesus of Nazareth. There are other ways to wash your hands of Him. You can do what the Mormons did. Make up your own “Jesus.” Make him the brother of Lucifer. Nice. Or you can do what Islam did. Create a Jesus that didn’t die on the cross.

Or you could try and change the historical revelation of Jesus. In Amsterdam, "Basic Instinct" director Paul Verhoeven has written a book that contradicts biblical teaching by suggesting that Jesus might have been fathered by a Roman soldier who raped Mary. Apparently, Verhoeven, who is 69, has dreamed of even making a movie about Jesus' life for decades. He had better hurry. At 69, it won’t be long until he faces Him.

The Book of Acts tells us that a number of times the religious leaders forbad preaching “in His name.” They hated His name. Two thousand years later, nothing has changed. The 2008 Honorary Chairman of the National Day of Prayer is apparently refusing to pray in the name of Jesus. A receptionist with the NDP in Colorado Springs stated that the Honorary Chairman's prayer does not include the name of Jesus so as not to offend the Jewish participants in the event. It seems that they presume that Jews hate Him; one of their own. I’m Jewish, and I don’t hate it. I love it.

I can’t help but wonder how those who are offended by His name would react if I prayed and finished with " . . . In the Name of the perfect Son of God, who was born of a virgin, suffered and died for the sin of the world, rose again on the third day for our justification and is coming in flaming fire to bring vengeance on those who don't know God and refuse to obey the gospel of salvation. Hallelujah! Praise His glorious name. Oh how I love Him. Amen."

Astounding Arrogance

“To those who doubted that I was a 'True Christian' -- your arrogance is astounding. To those who questioned why I ceased to be a 'True Christian' -- I ate of the tree of knowledge. That is, I received an education, learnt to question, think for myself, and research. Knowledge is the enemy of superstition (and rule by authority), which is why it is roundly condemned in dogma and doctrine.”

Here comes some “astounding arrogance.” You obviously don’t know the biblical definition of a “Christian.” A Christian is someone who “knows the Lord” (see John 17:3). When you were in the Church, did you know Him? If you are a professing atheist, you will be forced to say, “I thought I knew Him.” So you didn’t. You just thought you did. You were deceived (it’s very common). You had a false conversion (see Mark 1:1-20). Another word for a false convert is a “hypocrite” (a pretender). The churches are full of them, and many who finally leave it gravitate to atheist groups, where they feel cheated by what they think is Christianity. In truth, they cheated themselves by failing to truly repent and come to know the Lord. You were right. You were simply superstitious. You didn’t think for yourself (very unwise). Judas was a false convert. He had no idea who Jesus was, and managed to fake it for three and a half years. How long did you last?

Intelligence Test

How clever are you? Then find 20 Books of the Bible that are hidden in the following paragraph. This isn't a trick--they are there. All 20 books. Hidden. Bet you can't find them:

There are 20 books of the Bible lurking somewhere in this paragraph. Those able to find all of them will hear great lamentations from those who have to be shown. One revelation that may help is that books like Timothy and Samuel may occur without their numbers. Also, keep in mind, that punctuation and spaces in the middle are normal. A chipper attitude will help you. (People love these kinds of puzzles, something in our genes is responsible.) While you’re looking, let’s consider an important question. You probably consider yourself to be a good person, but are you good enough to go to Heaven? From answers to the following questions, we’ll find out… Have you ever told a lie? Have you ever stolen anything, (regardless of its value)? Have you ever used God’s name in vain? And just one more, have you ever looked at someone with lust (sexual desire)? Answer all of these truthfully. Now comes the bad news. If you’ve told lies, that makes you a liar – that's a fact. Steal just one time, and that makes you a thief. If you’ve used God’s name in vain, that’s blasphemy. And Jesus said that if you’ve looked at someone with lust, you’ve committed adultery in your heart. These are just a few of God’s Laws (the Ten Commandments) that you’re guilty of breaking. When God judges you, you’re in a jam; especially since He has given you a conscience. (Isn’t it true that every time you’ve done wrong, you knew it?) God’s place of punishment for those who break his laws is Hell, forever. But God did a most remarkable thing so that you wouldn’t have to go to Hell. Jesus died on the cross to take the punishment for our sins, then he rose again defeating death. If you repent and put your faith in Him, you will be saved. The truth is that you are not a good enough to go to Heaven; it’s your job to admit it. Use your God-given will to live—let it drive you to turn from your sin (repentance) and put your faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Humble yourself and talk to God in prayer right now. Find a Bible believing church to fellowship at, and start reading your Bible every day—start with the book of John. We’re almost to the end of the puzzle. If you didn’t find all the Bible books, don’t let it get on your nerves. There is a website you can go to: http://www.needGod.com/answers/

Son Stroke

Two men were crawling through a desert, dying of thirst. One man managed to get to his feet, and stumbled over a small rise. To his utter surprise he found an oasis of cool fresh water. He fell into the water, drunk to his heart’s content, and ran back to tell his dying friend the good news.

He said, “There’s an oasis of water over that rise, come with me, drink, and you will live!” The dying man looked up, and said through parched lips, “You liar! I don’t believe the water is there . . . and you are a naïve fool to believe it. Don’t try and push your so-called water down my throat.

"I have proof that you are deceived--that hill you stumbled over is millions of years old. Besides, it’s my life, and I choose to stay here and die, you narrow-minded fool!”

“And He said to me, ‘It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts.’” (Revelation 21:6).

Another Expelled Review

Steve Camp doesn’t pull any punches. This is what he said about the movie:

“I went tonight and saw Ben Stein's controversial and stimulating documentary on the issue of Intelligent Design (ID) vs. evolution called, "Expelled - No Intelligence Allowed." It is the most successful movie release of a documentary in the history of American film... bar none. It is well-researched, equitable, factual, enlightening, educational, and wonderfully entertaining. Mr. Stein is single-handedly demonstrating in this documentary what the universities have neglected for years: freedom of speech and freedom of inquiry that is based upon logic, truth, and systematic discovery evidenced in the factual. I hope this is a portent of things to come. This film is a must see.”

A True Atheist

“I was a true atheist, addicted to pornography and a big fan of torture. I hated the Bible and literally looked at "contract killer" as a career option. I favored Darwinian abortion of potentially disabled children and agreed with the majority of Adolph Hitler's statements about the disabled and invalid. I fantasized about murder and contemplated suicide and held nothing but hatred in my heart for anyone who told me I was wrong. In Short, I was the most degenerate scum to ever walk the Earth. That God saved me is still so far beyond my comprehension I have to wake up every day and think "wow."

“Nowadays, I work at the church I once hated going to. I greet daily a pastor I once did everything in my power to ignore, and I serve as an assistant to a youth leader I once despised. I play in the Sunday band and teach drums to young boys of the congregation for extra income. I teach Sunday school and am a regular fixture at the weekly prayer meetings and church events. People who have known me throughout the process have told me how astonishing it is to have seen the transformation. But no one is as impressed as me with how God has changed my heart and my life.

“So, that's me. I'm a 6'6", 19 year old motorcyclist who plays drums, carries a Bible, vacuums a church, writes scripts that will never be made films, and carries around a hefty supply of the Way of the Master Radio on his IPod.” Jacques Reulet

More About Hitler and Atheism
<< Lately, Ray Comfort finally came out of the closet on his blog to admit that he does not believe that Hitler is an atheist. "I have never claimed Hitler was an atheist. He believed in God and used Christianity for his own politician (sic) agenda." >>

No sane person would argue with the claim that Hitler was a wicked man. But he wasn’t brainless. He believed in the existence of God. Even though I use the word “atheist” to refer to a certain group of people, there is no such thing. According to the Bible the word is synonymous for the word “fool” (see Psalm 14:1). Only a fool denies the light God has given to every man via the conscience, creation and common sense. Remember that the definition of an atheist is “someone who pretends that there is no God.” The only reason I allow so-called atheists to spout their foolishness on this site is because, as Christians, we genuinely care for them and hope that they will (like Jacques) think about the claim that God offers everlasting life to those who repent and trust the Savior.

Wonderful Atheists

We were in Santa Monica, Southern California, looking for colorful interviews for the Third Season of our television program, especially for the opening four episodes. One program was called “Joe Average.” It opened with a man named Joe getting out of bed, making some toast and honey, drinking a glass of milk, then going outside in the early morning sunlight and checking his garden and the day’s weather. The script says, “Joe is a typical man. He doesn’t think much about the creation that surrounds him, let alone the Creator. Even though God gave him life itself, if you asked Joe if God had ever done anything for him, he probably couldn’t think of one thing. It’s just another average day for Joe Average. Not quite. There is nothing 'average' about Joe or what he has done that morning. He’s actually a miracle machine that no man-made mechanism could ever begin to even imitate.” Then the program talks of the marvel of his body, and where his milk, toast, and honey came from. It’s a wonderful and unique episode.

I stopped a couple on rollerblades and asked if they would like to be on television, talking about what they believe happens after someone dies. They looked at each other and said, “We’re atheists!” It told them how much I love atheists, and they gave their consent to be on the program.

First question: “Has God ever done anything for you?” Their answer was a predictable “Nothing.” I said, “He gave you life.” Again, a predictable “Our parents gave us life.” I said, “That's right. And their parents gave them life, right back to Adam.” He agreed, then said, “No!!!!,” He laughed, and added “You got me!” That set a relaxed tone for the interview.

I said, “I have a task for you. Make me some milk, from nothing.” He looked a bit puzzled and said, “We would need a cow.” “Okay then, make me a cow, from nothing.” He said he couldn’t do it. His wife agreed. So I asked where the first cow came from. “Evolution.” How did evolution create the cow? A predictable “The big bang.” Where did the materials come from for the big bang to happen? He didn’t know.

When I asked them both to make me some honey, from nothing, they went back to the bee, and ended up with the same dilemma. They had no idea what happened “in the beginning.”

I asked them to surmise that there was a God in the beginning, and a Heaven and a Hell. Were they good enough to go to Heaven? A predictable, of course they were . . . that is, until they saw the perfect righteousness of God's Law--they were guilty of lying, stealing, blasphemy and adultery of the heart (lust). If there was a Hell, they both admitted that they were going there when they died. Did that concern them? It did. I then explained that 2,000 years ago, a legal transaction took place between God and man.

When Jesus of Nazareth suffered and died on the cross, He was paying the fine for the moral Law that each of us has transgressed. Because of His suffering death and resurrection, God can now legally dismiss our case. We can leave the courtroom. He can commute our death sentence and let us live.

I explained the necessity of repentance and faith, and how (if the husband cared about his wife and five kids) he needed to get right with God. He looked at me with wide-eyes and said, “I have never had anyone explain that to me before . . .” It was a wonderful interview with a couple of very nice people. It was also just what we needed for the program. It wasn’t the first time atheists turned out to be a God-send.

A Good Question

"How do you discuss Hell and Heaven and ‘counting the cost’ of discipleship in bold, honest, loving truth...yet not use Heaven as a draw card or reward...and not use Hell as a scare tactic. I don't want to have people leaping to Jesus just so they don't get burned, it's not really any different then leaping to Jesus so they'll have a better life is it (humanism -- or the end of being is the happiness of man)? Wouldn't that more than likely create as many false converts?”

Think of story Jesus told of the Prodigal Son (see Luke 15:11-32). The father had great pleasure when the son came into a right relationship with him. He cried, “Father, I have sinned against Heaven and in your sight, and am no more worthy to be called your son.” Obviously, his father would not have rejoiced in the same way if a happy and impenitent son had returned with a prostitute on each arm. It was his humble turning from his sinful lifestyle that pleased the father (see verse 22). The son’s happiness was irrelevant at that point of time. Righteousness was the issue.

Humanism has no concern for righteousness. Its chief goal is the prodigal’s happiness, whether he’s in or out of the pigsty.

Christianity’s goal is absolute righteousness, which we are told in Scripture will ultimately result in the glory of God and the pleasure of man. That’s why we must always focus on man’s depravity (revealed by the moral Law) and God’s righteousness (revealed in His Law and in the cross--see Romans 1:16-17). The gap between depravity and holiness will reveal the need for righteousness. Happiness is not the issue at hand. It is irrelevant to the gospel proclamation, even though (because of God’s kindness) it is ultimately the end result.

However, we need never feel any sense of guilt because we responded to the gospel with a desire to live. It was self-preservation that helped to motivate the prodigal to get up out of that pigsty (“I perish with hunger”--Luke 15:17), and every sane human being has also been given an instinct for self-preservation. We have been endowed by our Creator with the good sense to know that life is better than death, and that Heaven is better than Hell. We came to Christ because of a hunger and a thirst for righteousness, and the ultimate end of righteousness will be pleasure forevermore, to the glory of God.

This May Become the World's 2nd Most Hated Book

Evolution--A Fairytale for Grownups. 101 questions to shake believer’s faith in the theory.

From the Introduction: “I don’t claim to be a great expert on the subject of evolution, but I have quoted well-known evolutionists, who reveal in their own words, the unscientific nature of that in which they have so blindly placed their faith. So it’s now up to you to make a choice as to whether you are a believer or not, and then to follow the implications. When you read this book, keep in mind the wise words of Richard Dawkins: ‘And, next time somebody tells you that something is true, why not say to them: ‘What kind of evidence is there for that?’ And if they can't give you a good answer, I hope you'll think very carefully before you believe a word they say.’”

• “I would rather believe in fairy tales than in such wild speculation.” —Ernst Chain, Nobel Prize winner

• “The Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.” —Michael Denton, Molecular Biologist

• “Darwin’s evolutionary explanation of the origins of man has been transformed into a modern myth, to the detriment of scientific and social progress.” —Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist

Philosopher Malcolm Muggeridge warned that evolution will be “one of the great jokes in the history books of the future.” Millions are convinced that the theory of evolution is a proven scientific fact, which is a sad testimony to human ignorance and naivety. Hopefully, you will “think very carefully” after hearing evidence from leading evolutionists and scientists, as they reveal the baseless and unscientific nature of the theory of evolution.

Softcover, 160 pages. Now available: http://www.livingwaters.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=163

Science Fiction

“Weemaryanne said...Now let's hear your answer to Rufus' question: Just how intelligent is a designer who puts nipples on a creature that will never suckle an infant?”

I could say that male nipples are God's thumb-tacks to keep the chest in place, but I'm sure one or two atheists would take me seriously. Still, it sounds better than the theory that they are the evolutionary beginnings of making men capable of nursing.

Talking of crazy imaginations, I just purchased a book called The Wild World of the Future. It’s a publication that imagines what animals will look like millions of years into the future. Professor Neil Alexander, the leading biologist who helped design many of the incredible creatures pictured in the book, encourages readers to make up their own creatures. He says, “Be bold when you imagine the animals of the future.” It's a good exercise. Evolution is all about imagination.

You too can play the game and do what the scientists have done. The sky is the limit. Take for instance, the common backyard snail. On page 21 you can see what they imagine it will look like in 200 million years time. It will have evolved into a 12 inch high creature (about the size of a rabbit), and it will hop (like the rabbit). Its skin will be scaly as it will have evolved into a reptile. It could rightly be called a “snabbit.” In just 100 million years, the slow-moving 3-foot high tortoise will have evolved into a massive creature 40 times heavier than an elephant, and at 23 feet high, it will be the biggest creature on earthIt will give up its hard shell, and have feet like an elephant. It could be called a “Tortephant.” You can see a picture of it on page 50. Also in 200 million years time, one species of fish will have evolved wings and it will be able to truly fly. This isn’t a stretch of the imagination because many evolutionists really believe that some dinosaurs developed feathers and became birds. Scientists have called the amazing flying fish a “flish.” I didn’t make up that name. It’s in the book (page 74). You can also meet the “bumblebeetle.” No explanation needed for that one.

Obviously, this book was written for children, and it is billed as the "Companion book to the Discovery Channel series: The Future is Wild" (page 96). For those adults who want to play "imagine," there's a book called Future Evolution , in which the author "foresees humankind's evolving alongside machines, in company with genetically altered plants that will infest the world as weeds and cloned animal species devoid of any evolutionary spark."

In April of 2007, during the ABC Nightline atheist debate, Kirk Cameron and I produced imaginary pictures of what we imagined would be genuine species-to-species transitional forms. We called one a “Crocoduck,” and another was called a “birddog.” This was to show exactly what evolutionists believe, but can’t back up through the fossil record. We were ridiculed, called stupid, and told that we didn’t understand evolution. However, these books vindicate us (not that we needed it). They have done with the future, what evolutionists have done with the past. They have made a mockery out of science.

A Dirty Double Standard

When a sixteen-year-old apparently called authorities from a religious sect in Texas and said that she had been sexually abused, a small army was sent and over 400 children were taken from the compound. So, it’s clear that America feels strongly about the sexual abuse of children. Explain then why Roman Catholic bishops and cardinals, who were accused of covering up sex scandals within the church or abusing children themselves, were not prosecuted. According to NBC News "not a single one of the 19 accused bishops lost his title or was prosecuted." The pope simply paid off the folks with a couple of billion dollars.

Some have insisted that there was an urgency with the sect's case, but not with the pedophilia within the Catholic church. They maintain that there is therefore no link between the two issues. That doesn't address the fact that these so-called men of God betrayed their office, they betrayed the trust of parents, and they seriously violated the law. If time lessens guilt, then let's not raid compounds immediately and prosecute sex offenders. Instead, let's leave the issue for 20 years. Time will eradicate their guilt.

There is a double tragedy with this double standard. The media loves to call the Roman Catholic church “Christian,” when its official doctrine of justification by works flies in the face of the Bible. If the difference between Catholic and Christian isn’t made clear, I can understand why so many reject what they believe is "Christianity." The great loss will be theirs, because they are throwing out the baby of everlasting life with the very dirty bathwater of religious hypocrisy.

Skeptic's Question

“What dishonesty! NASA claims the maple seed is ‘intelligently designed’??? What a liar! Are you capable of honesty when it comes to science? Ray, what is the intelligent design in fish that live in caves and produce non-functional eyes? What about the intelligent design in the coronary artery? We have one artery to supply the heart with oxygen...one artery. If this one vessel gets clogged....coronary. Intelligent design adds redundancies, especially on vital parts to prevent the machine from breaking down. You are telling me that this is the best that Jesus could do?”

Clost…It seems obvious to me that fish that live in dark caves under the water don’t need functioning eyes because it’s dark down there. Regarding your clogged arteries problem-- lay off the double-double cheese burgers, the cigarettes and the alcohol, get plenty of exercise, and you won’t clog up your coronary artery. Then you can die healthy. You should also remember that you have been designed with only one esophagus. I wouldn't clog that up either. Same with the brain.

I’m not being sarcastic here, but can you tell me why you believe that evolution "designed" the heart with one coronary artery? Or perhaps you could tell me how you would have designed it? Two arteries? Three?

I have a few other questions. Which came first--the blood or the heart that pumps the blood? Did the body evolve a heart because it needed it? How did the body survive when the heart hadn't yet evolved? Or was the body alive without a heart? How did that work?

Did skin exist before the blood formed? How did that stay alive without blood? Why did blood form and how did it live without oxygen pumping though it? If it was able to live in that state, where did the oxygen come from, and why did the blood suddenly need oxygen to keep it alive? Did lungs form because they were needed to pull in oxygen for the heart? How long did it take for the lungs to evolve, and how did the heart survive without it?

One more. Why have you been reading the posts of a brainless liar for all these months? I think it would be wise to stop, because you and your atheist friends are just encouraging me. I like you being here, but you should understand that you are promoting Intelligent Design every time you write to me. That’s not good for the dying cause of evolution or for atheism.

Expelled!

Ben Stein will be on Larry King Live Tuesday night.

The Helicopter Design

A heat wave had suddenly hit Los Angeles, and our air conditioner decided to take a break. A friend who owns an air-conditioning business immediately came around to our house and fixed it, much to our relief.

As he was leaving, I handed his wife a copy of How to Know God Exists--scientific proof of God. As I did so, a maple seed fell from the heavens and hit me on the nose.

I was amazed, because every time I picked up a maple seed I would say that it was clear evidence of intelligent design. Each one was an intelligently designed miniature helicopter. However, the one that hit me was no miniature. It was by far the biggest one I had ever seen, and there wasn’t a maple tree anywhere near our house. Of course, skeptics will say that I’m lying about its size, so I took a picture of it just for them.

Am I saying that this was a sign from God? Of course not. It was a maple leaf hitting me on the nose, reminding me of the genius of God’s creative hand.

I’m not the only one who thinks that it is intelligently designed. The University of Indiana said “A maple seed offers us many opportunities to learn about science, technology, and design.” The design of the seed teaches science. They are talking about “intelligent” design.

NASA says something similar, “Maple seeds are superb auto rotating helicopters. They begin rotating almost from the moment they are released from the tree . . . The center mass of the seed is shifted well to one end while its center of lift is approximately in the middle. In a complicated process, the forces at work as the seed falls combine to begin a circular rotation of the seed about its center of mass.” Again, they are saying that the maple seed is “intelligently” designed.

I hope you agree with these scientists. However, if you can’t see intelligent design in the wonderful creation, look again . . . it’s as plain as the nose on your face.

A Skeptic's Question

“Michael Shermer was raised in a fundamentalist Christian home. He presumably came home one day and told his parents something like this: ‘Mom and Dad, I've been studying biology in college and you know what you and Pastor Bob taught about how everything was created all at once? Well, as it turns out, there's a couple of centuries worth of evidence to show that it didn't happen that way.’ If you were in their place, what would you say to your kid?” (Michael Shermer is the publisher of Skeptic magazine).

Michael, I know that we encouraged you to give your heart to Jesus when you were a little boy. We were wrong to do that. That is the recipe for a false conversion. We should have instead taught you the Ten Commandments--that God considers lust to be adultery, and hatred to be murder; that lying lips are an abomination to the Lord. Then the fact that Jesus paid your fine--by suffering for your sins to save you from Hell, would have made sense to you. You need to repent and trust the Savior to escape God’s eternal justice. When you do that, you will come to know God. Not know "about" Him, but you will know Him personally. He will transform your life and grant you the gift of everlasting life. John 14:21 is either true or it isn't: "He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." As you obey Him, His presence will become more real to you than the early morning sunlight. That’s the first thing you should know son.

The second, my boy, is that there is a theory out there that contradicts God’s Word. It says that man wasn’t made in God’s image, but that we evolved, over a long period of time, from primates. When you are told this, I want you to ask questions about it. I want you to be the ultimate skeptic. Don’t just believe it. The entire theory stands or falls on whether or not there is proof. So, ask for scientific proof.

They say that all the animals we have now were not as we see them. They were radically different. Dinosaurs, over millions of years, became birds, fish became lizards, dogs were something else, primates evolved into human beings, etc. So, when they tell you this, ask why there are no species-to-species transitional forms in the fossil record. Why is there no evidence anywhere (in the billions of bones of dead animals) of any species becoming another species?

When they maintain that there are masses of fossils that prove this, don’t take their word for it. Press the issue. Blind faith is another word for ignorance. Say you want facts. Ask for specific scientific evidence of species-to-species transitional forms in the fossil record. When they say that museums are full of them, don’t just believe it as they do. Press the issue again. They will talk about variation (evolution) between species. That's not Darwinian evolution. It's a rabbit trail. Ask again for just one example of species-to-species evolution.

They will try and sidetrack you by talking about moths being stuck to trees, vestigial organs, mutations, bipedalism and mitochondrial DNA. Or they will maintain that there is something called "observed speciation," or try and dazzle you with names like Sinosauropteryx and Ambulocetur and other pseudo-intellectualisms. Then they will say that they aren’t experts, and use words like “maybe, possibly, perhaps, probably.” When they say that science has the proof, somewhere, push it. Demand evidence like your life depended on it. Tell them that you want to use your God-given brain to make a rational decision regarding evolution. You want to know if it's true. Stay open-minded. If it is true, then embrace it. If it's not, reject it.

If they maintain that there’s just a “handful” of bones to prove it, don’t believe them. There are none. They don’t have any evidence anywhere for their theory. None. It’s all blind faith, conjecture and a wild imagination.

So Michael, you will have a choice between the two beliefs of the origin of mankind. There is no fence to sit on. Was it evolution or were we intelligently designed by God? You can either rest in the evidence of the God you know personally, or you can turn your back on Him (and His gift of everlasting life), and blindly have faith in an unscientific theory. And why would an intelligent person do that? However, the choice is yours son.

Lunch with a Christian

I noticed that one or two cynically said that they would like to see the atheist's perspective of our lunch. So here it is:

Had a good lunch today with Ray Comfort. Why do you ask would I consider spending an hour with an evangelical Christian preacher saving souls through open-air preaching? Isn't he the 'enemy'? Previously, we spoke to each other at the pier, and even though we have several major disagreements, we also exchanged some thoughts on what we do agree on. I thought it was a worthwhile venture -- and it was.

Ray generally thinks most atheists are like the ones he debates on national TV. Of course, those atheist debaters pull no punches and let Ray have it -- and sometimes not in a nice, gentle way! I wanted to let him know that most unreligious people and atheists are just like him, you and me -- trying to make a living and stay afloat while seeking their own truth about our natural world.

Ray introduced me to his wife, his CFO, and all the other employees of his 'Living [Waters] Ministries' non-profit center in Bellflower, CA. Even though I introduced myself as "Bruce -- the good atheist" everyone was friendly and even chuckled a bit at the obvious ironic intro (an atheist visiting an all-Jesus-loving, bible-thumping ministry).

Before lunch, Ray showed me his bicycle he rides to work every day. I learned he doesn’t own a car, but borrows his wife's car when he needs to. He doesn't like faith healers (a common opinion with me) and doesn't like the Catholic church's spending policies. In a short recorded interview after lunch, he said he doesn't consider himself 'religious' -- meaning he is trying to save souls through his ministry and doesn't belong to any [particular] Christian denomination. His ministry is a 501C3 non-profit group and his income is listed for the public to see. He owns the same $195,000 house that he purchased 19 [13] years ago. He flys coach everywhere he goes, and doesn't ask for any fee for speaking -- only if the congregation takes a collection does he get paid. He does ask for 1000 in attendance due to some previously low-attended seminars he went to somewhere in Idaho, far from any airport or major city.

Even though we are worlds apart theoletically, Ray impressed me with many humorous and sometimes corny jokes and gags around his office, was genuinely friendly, humble and honest. I hope he learned from our lunch that all atheists are not like the one's on TV. I learned that all preachers on TV are not like the one's -- well, on TV!

This blog entry proves that some ideas can be agreed upon -- even with the widest separation of ideologies. Maybe it could be a lesson for other extreme thinkers.

Pregnant Woman

Some time ago a pregnant 34 year-old woman appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show because she had facial hair that grew as a result of hormonal drugs. Oprah called the hairy woman’s pregnancy "a new definition of what diversity means for everybody." Sorry Oprah, it wasn’t. Women with facial hair have always been around. Ask Barnum and Bailey. Their circus had a pretty diverse humanity, from the fat lady, to the wolf man, to the bearded lady.

She paraded her guest as “diversity” because the woman pretended to be a man. This used to be called “cross-dressing,” something practiced by weirdoes. Saying that she is a man is almost as dim as modern day evolutionary “discoveries,” that are announced in the name of science.

By “diversity” Oprah presumably meant that it was a breaking away from what is normal. Or to be more specific, it is a breaking away from the shackles of what is often called the Judaic/Christian ethic. What do Jews and Christians have in common? It’s the Ten Commandments. The Scriptures tell us that the sinful mind of mankind is in a place of hostility to those Commandments (see Romans 8:7). Humanity wants to diversify from "You shall not commit adultery" (which includes lust and fornication).

However, the moral Law is written in stone. It’s not going away, and it will be the holy standard by which God judges this sinful world on the Day of Judgment. It’s because of that Law, that we need a Savior. The gospel provides the ultimate diversity from death.

Lunch with Another Atheist

The boss of a "backyard" atheistic skeptics club recently asked me to have lunch with him. Bruce was a nice man, so we made a date to eat together. After saying grace, we chatted for about 40 minutes and then went back to our ministry to answer some questions his fellow skeptics had formulated. As we sat down, he boldly put a small recording device into my top pocket. I felt as though I was being set up, but decided to see where he was leading me.

They were the usual questions skeptics ask. Here are a few, from memory: “Why do you reject all the evidence of evolution given by paleontologists?” I told him that I was a skeptic by nature, and that evidence for evolution given by paleontologists should be viewed with great skepticism, because they had big motives for lying. If a paleontologist comes up with any sort of evidence, he could find his face on the cover of National Geographic, with world-wide TV interviews, a book deal, and big honorariums for speaking engagements. So the modern paleontologist has a huge incentive for twisting the truth, just a little.

The next question was “Why doesn’t God show Himself by doing a little miracle, like simply moving a glass of water on the desk in front us?” I told him that over lunch he mocked the miracle of God causing the sun to stand still for Joshua. That was bigger and better than the moving glass. Besides, if he wanted an audience with the Queen of England, she doesn’t come on his terms, he comes on hers. He mumbled, “Good analogy.”

He then asked me why there were so many religions. I told him that man messes up everything to which he puts his hand--especially religion, that I hate religion, and I explained that the difference between being a Christian and being “religious” is something called “works righteousness.” Religious people think that they can earn (or bribe) their way to Heaven by doing things--fasting, praying, facing Mecca, doing good works, etc., when eternal life is a free gift of God. It can't be earned. I said that I would rather be called “stumpy” than “religious.” Religion has caused untold wars and misery throughout history, it’s the opium of the masses, and I don’t run around in a white robe sprinkling water on people.

He also brought up the “banana” argument. Years ago, I published a booklet called “The Atheist Test”: http://www.livingwaters.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=231

In the booklet, I compare a banana to a coke can (with its own tab, etc.). It’s a parody, using a little humor to make a point. “The Atheist Test" has proven to be very popular (over a million have sold). However, it wasn’t too popular with atheists. They removed the coke can portion of the parody, maintained that I believe the banana is proof for God’s existence, and sure made a monkey out of me.

As I was answering his questions, I was thinking that things weren’t going the way my friend expected. I became convinced that he wouldn’t post the interview on the skeptics' website. It wasn't good for his cause.

The next time I saw Bruce, my thoughts were confirmed. He said that he had decided not to post it because I had mentioned the Bible too many times. If I recall correctly, I may have referred to it 2-3 times. Besides, he was in the broadcasting business, but I guess he must have forgotten about something called “editing.”

The incident confirmed what I had believed all along. The skeptic isn’t interested in truth. He only wants to confirm his presuppositions. That's why they have their club--to build up each other in their faith (beliefs). How true that “Men love darkness rather than light; neither will they come to the light, least their deeds are exposed.” Oops. I quoted the Bible.

Don't miss this movie! Coming on April 18th

EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed starring Ben Stein follows his journey around the globe where he proves that scientists, educators and philosophers are being persecuted in a modern day witch hunt because they dare to go against the theory of evolution. These pillars of education are being fired, ridiculed and ostracized for merely challenging Darwin's theory.

Kirk's Comments: "I saw EXPELLED and thought it was a tremendous! The sheer intellect on the ID (Intelligent Design) side of the debate clears the notion of 'fairy tales' and the honesty of famous atheists like Richard Dawkins and his minions is shocking. Ben Stein does an excellent job using humor, tenacity, and personal passion to expose the anti-God, anti-American, Big Science agenda, linking Darwin's theory to the horrors of the Holocaust. A must see for every believer, agnostic, and atheist."

Ray's Comments: "If you have felt frustrated by all the lies about Intelligent Design, you will be thrilled with this movie--especially the concluding interview with Richard Dawkins. Please, go to EXPELLED! Take your church, your youth group, your neighbors, your mother. It will spark interesting conversations."

The secular media are going to ignore this movie. So what can you do to help promote it? You can call your local theater, speak to the manager and ask him to screen the movie. Tell him that you will push it through your church, and that you will bring a group of people. If he gets it in, make sure you keep your word. You can also visit the EXPELLED website for more information on making sure this movie is shown in your city: http://getexpelled.com/grouptickets.php

Mutating Theory

Many people have been led to believe that organisms often develop favorable mutations based on their environments. For example, it’s often thought that bacteria can become resistant to antibiotics, thus proving that they evolve. But the website “Understanding Evolution” (produced by the University of California Museum of Paleontology and the National Center for Science Education), explains how mutations work:

“Mutations do not ‘try’ to supply what the organism ‘needs.’...For example, exposure to harmful chemicals may increase the mutation rate, but will not cause more mutations that make the organism resistant to those chemicals. In this respect, mutations are random—whether a particular mutation happens or not is unrelated to how useful that mutation would be.”

To illustrate, they explain that where people have access to shampoos with chemicals that kill lice, there are a lot of lice that are resistant to those chemicals. So either: 1) resistant strains of lice were always there—and are just more frequent now because all the non-resistant lice died; or 2) exposure to lice shampoo actually caused mutations that provide resistance to the shampoo. Based on the scientific evidence, they conclude that “the first explanation is the right one and that directed mutations, the second possible explanation relying on non-random mutation, is not correct.”

After numerous experiments, researchers have found that none unambiguously support directed mutation. In the case of bacteria, scientific experiments have proved that “the penicillin-resistant bacteria were there in the population before they encountered penicillin. They did not evolve resistance in response to exposure to the antibiotic.”

Therefore, mutations are not logical adaptations that make a creature better suited for its environment. They are completely random—the result of mindless, undirected chance.

Even if these random mutations could happen to cause a lump of a wing to begin to form, how would that help the creature to survive? In evolutionary theory, natural selection will enable the survival of creatures that develop some sort of benefit. But until it becomes a fully formed wing, any stub would be more of a detriment than a benefit. Consider the following observations from noted evolutionists:

“The reasons for rejecting Darwin’s proposal were many, but first of all that many innovations cannot possibly come into existence through accumulation of many small steps, and even if they can, natural selection cannot accomplish it, because incipient and intermediate stages are not advantageous.” — Embryologist Soren Lovtrup

“But how do you get from nothing to such an elaborate something if evolution must proceed through a long sequence of intermediate stages, each favored by natural selection? You can’t fly with 2% of a wing...” — Paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould

“Darwinism is claiming that all the adaptive structures in nature, all the organisms which have existed throughout history were generated by the accumulation of entirely undirected mutations. That is an entirely unsubstantiated belief for which there is not the slightest evidence whatsoever.” (emphasis added) —Molecular biologist Michael Denton

Mutations do not work as a mechanism to fuel the evolutionary process. They are random instead of purposeful, and they only modify or remove information, but never add it—a requirement of the theory. Any mutation that supposedly creates a transitional form would be far more likely to doom the poor creature than to help it up the evolutionary chain. But don’t just take my word for it. About 150 of the world’s leading evolutionary theorists gathered at a Macroevolution Conference in Chicago to consider the question, “Are mutation and natural selection enough?” Evolutionist Roger Lewin sums up the conclusion of the conference:

“The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution. At the risk of doing violence to the positions of some of the people at the meeting, the answer can be given as a clear, No.”

Please thoughtfully read this response from evolutionist Michael Denton, author of Evolution: A Theory in Crisis. Asked in an interview if Darwinian theory adequately explained what we see in nature, he very honestly admitted its weaknesses:

“The basic pattern it fails to explain is the apparent uniqueness and isolation of major types of organisms...It strikes me as being a flagrant denial of common sense to swallow that all these things were built up by accumulative small random changes. This is simply a nonsensical claim, especially for the great majority of cases, where nobody can think of any credible explanation of how it came about. And this is a very profound question which everybody skirts, everybody brushes over, everybody tries to sweep under the carpet.

“The fact is that the majority of these complex adaptations in nature cannot be adequately explained by a series of intermediate forms. And this is a fundamental problem. Common sense tells me there must be something wrong.”

Evolutionary theory is a “nonsensical claim” that is a “flagrant denial of common sense,” yet this is the story that we’re told repeatedly is a proven fact. There is something wrong.

Excerpted from How to Know God Exists: Scientific Proof of God (Bridge-Logos).

Spurgeon Must Have Had a Blog

"Out of the sweetest flowers chemists can distil poison, and from the purest words and deeds malice can gather groundwork for calumnious report. It is perfectly marvellous how spite spins webs out of no materials whatever. It is no small trial to have base persons around you lying in wait for every word which they may pervert into evil . . . How far abroad men will go to publish their slanders! They would fain placard the sky with their falsehoods. A little fault is made much of; a slip of the tongue is a libel, a mistake a crime, and if a word can bear two meanings the worse is always fathered upon it." Charles Spurgeon

Microevolution vs. Macroevolution

It’s important to realize that there is such a thing as microevolution—that is, variation within species. Look at the variety within dogs—the tiny Chihuahua to the huge Great Dane. Both are dogs and they have incredible differences. But they are still dogs. Or look at horses. Within the horse family are the donkey, zebra, draft horse, and the dwarf pony. All are different, but all are horses. There are huge variations within the human species. Think of all the different features from Asian to African to Aboriginal to Caucasian. But we are all within the same species, Homo sapiens.

Darwin’s theory of evolution, however, is based on the concept of macroevolution. This is the inference that successive small changes seen in microevolution (these variations within species) can accumulate and lead to large changes over long periods of time. In macroevolution, one kind of creature (such as a reptile) becomes another kind of creature (such as a bird), requiring the creation of entirely new features and body types. This would be a bit like observing a car going from 0 to 60 mph in 60 seconds, and inferring that it can then go 0 to 6,000 mph in 100 minutes—and become an airplane in the process.

That’s quite an assumption, and it puts a tremendous responsibility on mutations to accidentally create complex new body parts, and on natural selection to recognize the benefit these new parts will eventually convey and make sure the creatures with those new parts survive. As Stephen J. Gould explains,

“The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase: natural selection is the creative force of evolutionary change. No one denies that selection will play a negative role in eliminating the unfit. Darwinian theories require that it create the fit as well.”

Let’s take a closer look at how mutations and natural selection supposedly work to create the amazing complexity of life in our world.

It Doesn’t Add Up
The first problem we find is that the variations we see in microevolution are always within limits set by the genetic code. Fifty years of genetic research on the fruit fly have convinced evolutionists that change is limited and confined to a defined population. Despite being bombarded with mutation agents for half a century, the mutant fruit flies continue to exist as fruit flies, leading geneticists to acknowledge that they will not evolve into something else. This confirms Gregor Mendel’s findings in the 1800s that there are natural limits to genetic change.

Genetics professor Francisco Ayala is quoted as saying: “I am now convinced from what the paleontologists say that small changes do not accumulate.” Small changes aren’t the only thing that doesn’t add up. But more importantly, the amount of change isn’t really the issue.

Mutations can only modify or eliminate existing structures, not create new ones. Within a particular type of creature, hair can vary from curly to straight, legs can vary from heavy to thin, beaks from long to short, wings from dark to light, etc. But the creatures still have hair, legs, beaks, and wings—nothing new has been added.

If you recall, in our DNA book, a mutation is a mistake—a “typing error.” In the genetic blueprint, the letters that define these features can occasionally be rearranged or lost through mutations, but none of this will account for the additions needed by macroevolution. Remember, in the molecules-to-man theory, everything evolved from simple cells to complex life forms. So if a fish were to grow legs and lungs, or a reptile were to grow wings, that creature’s genetic information would have to increase to create the new body parts. This would be equivalent to a “telegram” giving rise to “encyclopedias” of meaningful, useful genetic sentences.

Think how much more information there is in the human genome than in the bacterial genome. If macroevolution were true, where did all that vastly complex new information come from? Scientists have yet to find even a single mutation that increases genetic information. As physicist Lee Spetner puts it, “Information cannot be built up by mutations that lose it. A business can’t make money by losing it a little at a time.”

Excerpted from How to Know God Exists: Scientific Proof of God (Bridge-Logos).

In Case You Also Took my Last Post the Wrong Way

"ForHisSake said... Ray, WOW! What a revealing and disappointing post. You actually said, "A few minutes later, as we were packing up our gear, I looked over to the punks and noticed that Degenerate was now standing up. He was a big boy. My head came up his shoulders. I thought to myself that the next time I go eye-to-eye with some degenerate punk, I'd better do it standing up, so that I can at least see the size of the dog, and figure if it’s worth the effort."

"Worth the effort"? What has happened to you?

All I can think of is Christ as he drew pictures in the dirt while the mob wanted to stone the adultress. I will pray for you and your ministry, but I will not recommend your ministry to anyone.

The fact that you even forgot to pray should be a huge red flag to you. Who is it about? What has it become? And who have you become?

You are wearing His Name in a very public way. That is an awesome responsibility to represent Him without bring dishonor or shame to His name. I feel you have been guilty of both.

I know you won't post this, but, I hope you read it for it is sent in love for you, love for lost souls and most importantly love for my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."

MY ANSWER: Whoa! My apologies for not making this clearer. Regarding the "forgot to pray." I have risen up around midnight for the last 25 years most nights each week to pray. Our team always prays before we leave to preach open air, but this day as they were setting up, I was caught up filming when they began and we neglected to pray that day just before we stood up. It was perhaps the first time it happened in over two years of open air preaching. So, I believe in prayer. Regarding your take of my wording "worth the effort." As you can see from the change in the post, I meant "worth the effort of going eye to eye with a punk and getting a knuckle sandwich(a punch in the face)." Forgive me again for not making myself clear.

Make Sure You Pray

Recently, after preaching open air at Huntington Beach, our small team (Scotty, Carol and Anita) realized that we forgot to pray just before we preached (although we had prayed before we drove the distance to Huntington Beach). It hadn’t been a good day. So the next week we decided to make sure that we asked for the help of God, and take a moment to resist the enemy.

As we set up, I looked over at a young man who was playing a guitar about 20 feet from us. It was obvious that his voice would cause confusion when we preached. As I was thinking about the problem, a very upset and obviously frustrated man approached me and said that we were nothing but a nuisance, and that we should go away. He owned a bicycle company that transported people rickshaw-style up and down the long Huntington Beach pier. He said that we were bad for business. Very bad. He had his opened cell phone in his hand and threatened the call the police to have us removed.

Another very anti-Christian man, who, on two occasions chewed me out, was setting up about 50 feet from us. His act was to hammer a nail into his nose. That’s a hard act to follow, and it would obviously draw away our crowd. So we prayed for God’s help with these things, and resisted the spiritual strongholds.

Minutes later, without any encouragement from us, the guitar player came over and said he was moving much further away, and for some reason John Nailhead packed up his hammer and left a minute or so later.

As I stood up to speak, I said to our team that I would rather be visiting a dentist than trying to pull in a crowd. They agreed. It's not an easy thing to do. A few people started gathering around as I asked a few trivia questions. Then Anita (after being chained up in a straight jacket by Scotty and Carol), began to escape from the jacket. I was thinking that that could help get some attention when, suddenly, John Nailhead jumped into the crowd and screamed, “It’s a fake! It’s a fake! That’s a fake straight jacket. Let me chain her up. I’m a professional escape artist!” I told him that he could chain Anita up after he let me hammer a nail into his head. For some reason he didn’t like my idea, so he left, but not before he had doubled our crowd. It was wonderful.

A few minutes later the police did arrive, presumably after Mr. Frustrated's call. However, they simply told some kids not to ride their bikes on the pier, and left us alone.

After I preached, I left Scotty with a good-sized crowd, took my hand-held camera and began interviewing people for our TV program. As I did so, a man in his early twenties enquired as to what kind of questions I was asking. I didn’t want to engage him in a conversation because he was riding a rickshaw, more than likely one owned by Mr. Frustration. Despite this thought, I asked him if he would like to do a quick interview. He did, and after going through the Law and hearing the Gospel, he humbly surrendered his life to Christ. I gave him some literature, two CD’s, we hugged and I moved on quickly in case his boss showed up with his cell phone in his hand.

I did some more interviews and went back to the open air. When that ended, I approached some very rough-looking “punks” who were sitting on the ground and asked one with a huge Mohawk if he wanted to do an interview. As I was explaining that I wanted to know his thoughts on the afterlife, his friend asked why I hadn’t asked him for an interview. I could feel his anger. Then he spat out “Get out of here now!” I leaned over to him, took off my sunglasses, put my eyes about 12 inches in front of his face and said, “I’m an American citizen. I love this country, and nobody is going to tell me to get out of here. This is not Iran. What’s your name?” He said it was “Degenerate.” We were like a couple of growling dogs with our back-fur stirred up, staring each other down. I thought to myself, “What am I doing? I’m in for a knuckle sandwich.” After a moment, his fur went down, so I asked him if he wanted to do an interview. For some reason he declined.

A few minutes later, as we were packing up our gear, I looked over to the punks and noticed that Degenerate was now standing up. He was a big boy. My head came up his shoulders. I thought to myself that the next time I go eye-to-eye with some degenerate punk, I'd better do it standing up, so that I can at least see the size of the dog, and figure if it’s worth getting a knuckle sandwich.

I then went back to the pack of punks and asked Degenerate if he and his friends would like me to buy them some pizza. For some reason he declined, but I was surprised by his politeness. I guess my growling and my little stare-down wasn't a failure after all. Maybe it’s true that it’s not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog . . . and, of course, the power of prayer.

Signs of God's Dealings

America is nine trillion dollars in debt. For those who normally don’t count that high and are not familiar with how much that is, a “trillion” is a thousand billion. That’s no small change. Ironically, 1.7 trillion of that debt is to Arab nations, 200 billion to China and 125 billion to Russia. Think about those nations for a minute.

Over two million houses are in foreclosure. Two million. A gallon of milk costs as much as a gallon of gas, and a gallon of gas is costing an arm and a leg. Add to that the incredibly bad news that we are not winning the war over cancer--over 2,300,000 Americans will get cancer in the next year, many of whom will be children, and you can see that we are in serious trouble.

ABC News recently published an article titled “More Than 60 Percent of U.S. in Drought.” We have become used to seeing onslaughts of floods, hurricanes lining up on our coasts, and killer tornadoes by the dozens ripping up the nation like there’s no tomorrow. And, of course, we are in a war that it seems we can’t win.

The above are all signs of God’s dealings with a sinful nation. If you find that hard to believe, read Deuteronomy 28 and see what God warned would happen to Israel if they forsook His Commandments and turned their backs on Him. Hold onto a pen and underline places where Scripture warns that they will get into financial debt and become the tail, not the head. Look again at the nations to whom we are in debt. Underline how God says that aliens will flood the country, or that their enemies will overcome them, or that disease will plague them.

When you hold your pen also hold on to your theology, because that chapter will destroy any image of God as being a celestial Santa Claus. He is a God of Justice and truth as much as He is of love and mercy. To have a mere one or two virtues of His character in your image of God, and to leave out the others, is to have an idol in your mind.

We are no different than ancient Israel. We are a nation that has forgotten God and created other gods before Him. He lavished His goodness upon us and we have blasphemed His holy name. Instead of honoring the God who gave us life, we have bowed before the golden calf of Wall Street (which is melting before our eyes). We have also embraced the foolish, unsubstantiated, unscientific theory paraded as the gospel truth called “evolution,” and when the blossoms bloom, mother nature is praised for what she has made. Our churches are filled with preachers who preach another gospel, portraying God as a divine butler.

As a nation, we have forgotten God. Almost. When there’s a tragic disaster and people are killed and property destroyed, insurance companies call it “An act of God.” Perhaps they have been reading the truths of Holy Scripture.

Abraham Lincoln said, “We have been preserved these many years in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us! It behooves us then to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.”

“Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalm 33:12).