Saturday, January 19, 2008

Evolution: man without God

Man has been trying to get along without God ever since Adam and Eve rejected His command in Genesis 3. The greatest push to ditch God since the Tower of Babel, though, is probably
the "theory" of evolution. Though scientists or other proponents of the "ToE," as it's called, will say that the "Big Bang" is separate from evolution, the whole kettle of (rotten) fish is inextricably tied together.

For one, the universe has to be here for evolution to take place, even though the only place anything has ever evolved is in the minds of willingly ignorant scientists. Therefore, first of all, we must understand the fantastical origins these people propose. In essence, billions of years ago (they don't know for sure when) something (they don't know what) exploded (they don't know how). Then, somehow, this unexplainable explosion created the galaxies, solar systems, stars, planets, moons, asteroids, Martians and Earth.

The next big pile of dog doo-doo is better known as "abiogenesis," or the rise of living things from non-living things. Make sense? Didn't think so. Basically, they teach (whilst sucking on a bong, apparently) that after the Big Bang (see above), the earth was a blob of hot, molten rock that gradually cooled down and developed a hard rocky crust. Somehow the earth developed an atmosphere of primitive oxygen and hydrogen and it began to rain on the rocky crust. The rain created a sludge after a few million years, and a "simple," single-celled organism arose from the muck. Somehow this little critter found something to eat (he's the only organic material in the universe!) and someone to marry (huh??) and began the great process of Natural Selection.

Now Evolutionists take something like dogs, for instance, and say that since all these dogs came from a common ancestor (feasible, no problem there), then we all somehow came from that little sludge in the last section. Now, how they come to this conclusion I'll never understand; it's way easier when you just let God do it.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Why use something stupid like evolution when you're God?

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Bible Students vs. Willingly Ignorant Baptists

...and they never will agree till the end of the world. Literally.

It's so plain and simple. Some people haven't grown up past the baby Christian view of the Bible. They think the whole thing is written directly to them, so they get confused and misapply Scripture.

Only an open-minded student of the Bible will learn that God has written some Scripture TO us, and other Scripture FOR us. The majority of Scripture is written FOR us. We can learn doctrine (and who it's for), history, and spiritual applications from all Scripture. When you study doctrine, you must learn which doctrine applies to us and what applies to someone else. (it's pretty easy to figure out that we're not required to sacrifice goats and bulls in the Church Age). When you study history in the Bible, you get to know God. (history = His Story) When you study the spiritual applications in Scripture, you learn how to live a life that is pleasing to the Saviour.

Most Baptists are still at the baby Christian stage of seeing the Bible. Most of them don't know better. That's fine, someday the Lord may allow someone to come into their lives and teach them how to study the Bible, or a few might be intelligent enough to figure it out on their own.

Then you get the willingly ignorant Baptists. These are the Baptists that have been viewing the Bible the same simple way for SO many years that they can't change. Either that, or they became firmly hardened in their view quickly (like cement... they were soft in the beginning but dried too fast). These rock-hard Christians are completely unwilling to accept that the Bible is deeper than they perceive it to be. They'll tell you that they know they can't understand everything in the Bible, and that it's a deep Book, but their attitude betrays them. These Christians will probably never change and never have the joy of the Lord showing them the deep and amazing things hidden in His Book. Why would He bother with someone who thinks he/she already knows it all, anyway?

As far as I know, there isn't a true Bible student who ever goes back to that baby Christian view of the Bible and "rightly dividing". Once you've matured in your understanding of the Bible, why would you ever go back? That would be as stupid as a high school student in Algebra asking to be put back in 1st grade math.

Return to cyberspace

I guess it's not too bad out here; I used to be a very prolific poster and blogger (not as much the latter as the former) but I got really busy and didn't have as much time or interest in continuing the amount of online interaction. I just got back into it here within the last few days: a few interesting topics on a forum I'm a part of piqued my interest again and I tarted posting more. Then I got the bright idea to start a blog so I could post things I thought important. Of course the "bright" part is my own opinion, and to my knowledge there have been like two people that have viewed it so far. Not that I care of course; I wouldn't mind a little feedback though.

Anyhow, I'm back, temporarily anyhow; with wedding planning and the like I might run out of free time again; otherwise I'll be around, making people mad and stepping on toes like normal.

Friday, January 11, 2008

The sum is 9

I've always been fascinated with Biblical numerology; the meanings of numbers, times things show up in the Bible, and the correlation of Biblical history with more modern occurrences. Let's take a little walk through some of the more interesting things I've seen.

In the Bible, the number 9 signifies fruitfulness. Galatians 5 lists 9 fruits of the Spirit. Genesis 9:27 (2+7=9) is where the prophecy of the United States is found in scripture.

Gen. 9:27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

This isn't about Canaan or Ham and the rest: this is about Japheth being enlarged (Europe) and dwelling in the tents of Shem (Asiatic, i.e. American Indian). This literally happened with the settlers of one colony; the natives had left or been driven out, and their wigwams made good shelter for the colonists one winter.

Ok, back to the numbers thingie. Let's start with Jamestown (9 letters), which was founded in 1607. Shortly thereafter, some guys in England popped out this book...named the King James (9 letters) Bible, in 1611 (1+6+1+1=9). Then in 1620 (yep, 1+6+2=9) the first free colony in the New Word was established: Plymouth Plantation. The Mayflower (9 letters) landed with 99 passengers and crew aboard, one vociferous scoffer having died during the voyage.

Lots of 9s in there, no? Too many to be a coincidence, I think.

What is Truth?

I think I titled something this a long time ago, but I like it so here we go again. The phrase "What is truth?" is from Pilate, right before he condemned Christ to death. Here's the passage:

John 18:38
"Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all."

He had Truth standing in front of him, but he was too blind to recognize it! Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life." John 17:17 says "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." 1 Kings 17:24 "And the woman said to Elijah, Now by this I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in thy mouth is truth."

So many people today have the truth right in front of their noses, but they haven't the foggiest idea what it is. Of course I'm speaking of the Bible issue; that's one of my hobby horses I like to pull out from time to time. God said He'd preserve His word. God said His word is given by inspiration. God said His word is perfect, pure, holy and righteous. Everyone should be able to agree on that; anyone who believes in the true God, that is.

But here's where everyone, IFBs included, starts stumbling and stuttering. The problem is that though everyone will agree that God's word is perfect, pure, "inspired," inerrant, etc., very few know where to FIND that word of God. Hence the deal about the "Alexandrian Cult," which Dr. Ruckman likes to harp on, and then there's the TR crowd that think the Bible derives Its authority from some moth-eaten manuscripts that only scholars can read.

A man named James White wrote a book titled "The King James-Only Controversy." Or favorite Bible Believing satirist fired back with a book titled "The Scholarship-Only Controversy," basically showing how White not only lied at least 16 times in his book, but also puts the authority of the Scriptures not on the Scriptures, but on the "learned men" that can study "The Greek and Hebrew."

However, even IFBs have fallen into the same trap, if not as far, by things such as the aforementioned statements by Ross. "The Bible this" and "the Bible that," followed slyly by "The King James translation" yada yada. See the difference? Bet you would have missed that if someone didn't show you!! That's how these shiesters like to work: in retail it's called Bait and Switch. You make the person think you're talking about a certain subject, then carefully change the object of the discussion without the person noticing, so he thinks the original object is still being discussed. Basically, Ross doesn't believe any existing Bible anymore than he believes in the Tooth Fairy. And that is EXACTLY how it works worldwide: people believe all this high-sounding, great stuff about the "Bible," then turn around and demean the "King James Version" or "translation of the Bible" etc.

There IS no other Bible, and contrary to Dr. Cloud's belief, the King James Bible or Authorized Version is NOT an edition of the Textus Receptus. The KJB was translated after being compared to over 300 manuscripts in 20-40 languages. While the vast majority of these were from the Antioch family of manuscripts, some of the readings follow the corrupt Latin Vulgate instead. Why is that? God wrote It, not those translators. He put what He wanted in there, so HE Authorized It, not King James. The king just paid for it.

No, Ross won't fess up; he's too embedded in his lies and deceit to realize it himself. SOP for the Alexandrian Cult, and now, as evidenced, it's seeped its way into "IFB" circles as well.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Blogs are great for ranting

I love popping up and flaring my nostrils online; no repercussions, I can delete comments, and there's a spell check feature. Quite handy, that.

Basically, I've been toying around with this guy named Randy Ross on here: you can probably find him if you search; I'm not linking to his midden heap. Yes, he has some decent articles about simple things like Santa Claus and the like, but some of his other stuff is total poison. Take his advice about computers, for example. Now, every logical individual knows that a good computer system shouldn't need anti-virus, anti-spyware and anti-spam software on it; it shouldn't have all those security issues in the first place. But he goes off talking about firewalls and virus checkers and internet blockers like he doesn't know the first thing about computers. (Not entirely true; he hacked his MySql database and got my password from a phony userID I had on his site; he subsequently shut down my associated Yahoo e-mail address. Not a total idiot, computer-wise anyhow.)

Actually, humor aside, the real problem with his stuff is the apparent innocence and authenticity of it. Take this, for example:

  1. The Bible is inspired by God (2 Tim 3:16-17, 2 Pet 1:21, )
  2. The Bible is without error (Psa 12:6, Psa 19:7-8)
  3. The Bible is complete (Rev 22:18-19, 1 Cor 13:8)
  4. The Bible is preserved (Mat 24:35, Psa 119:89, 1 Pet 1:23, 25)
  5. The Bible is our final authority for faith and practice (2 Tim 3:16-17, Rev 22:18-19)"
Sounds good, does it not? Of course it does, it's completely Biblical. But THAT'S wherein the problem lieth; look at what follows.

6. While the King James translation is not directly inspired (the Apostle Paul, for example, did not speak Victorian era English), the KJV is the faithfully, divinely preserved, text of God's Word for English speaking man."

BLAM! Lookie there. Mr. Ross just bombed big time! Of course, Paul didn't speak English! What kind of an idiot thinks that has to be stated?? The big problem here is that Ross is casting doubt (however slyly) on the SCRIPTURAL definition of inspiration. We'll get into that later, but this is something that I disagree on just about EVERYONE with, even Dr. Ruckman, who Ross, for some reason, believes that I follow. I follow no man but Christ, and Paul, because of his command to do so.

Basically, a God that could inspire men to WRITE His Book, and then NOT inspire those who translated It
is impotent and weak. Interesting "God" you have there, Ross. Why does the modern "IFB" (Independent Fundamental Baptist) mind have so much trouble wrapping itself around that? If He did it once, HE for dang sure can do it again! You limit the Holy One of Israel through your unbelief, ladies.

Ok, I'll shut up for now, but I'll probably be back...I like dropping little comments on him, and since he's a little more accountable now, he shouldn't be refusing them. Of course macho guy has to reply (that rhymes!) to make sure he looks smart and spiritual, so that'll give me something else to rant about.