2012 Watch

Posted on August 19, 2010 by admin

Be ready for the 2012 Comet. Watch this video:

Posted in 2012 | Tagged , , , , , , | 20 Comments

2012 Comet

Posted on July 9, 2010 by admin

comet only 150x150 2012 CometOur 2012 prediction is based on a comet or possibly a group of comets hitting earth. This prediction was pulled directly from the Bible Codes.

We believe that a lot of the 2012 predictions were created to discredit revelations in the Bible. Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible (also known as the Torah). These five books are believed to contain secret codes put there by God himself. The odds are 10 million to 1 that the Bible Codes do not actually exist.

We also feel Wormwood (as referred to in the Bible) is the comet.

Two statements were found in the Bible Codes:

  1. Comet 5772 (2012) Earth Annihilated
  2. Comet It will be Crumbled I will Tear to pieces 2012

One suggests that a comet will hit earth in 2012 and the alternative suggests that the comet will be destroyed! (lets hope so anyway).

We hope that the second statement could mean that the comet is destroyed. However; there is a real fear that the second statement could mean the comet breaks up into multiple pieces before hitting the earth.

In order to believe that a 2012 comet is possible, you first have to believe that the Bible Codes (and the Bible for that matter) are in fact true/exist.

We think you might be pretty shocked at the credibility of the people who feel the Bible Codes are in fact true.

However; we also feel that they were placed in there to help and not hurt anyone. This could mean that if NASA (or any other space agency) believes that they are in fact true, then there is a possibility that the future could be altered.

Who knows what the US/Russia actually have sitting up in space right now? It’s possible that the comet has already been found and there is a team working to prevent it from hitting earth. Let’s hope so !

From what we understand, NASA is either tracking 90% of all NEOs or will be soon. The Near Earth Object Program is the website where NASA lists comets and asteroids that are being tracked.

Apparently, it is impossible for NASA or anyone else to find all of the asteroids and comets in our universe. But, we are encouraged that they continue to search for them.

Posted in 2012 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 807 Comments

2012 Calendar

Posted on July 8, 2010 by 2012

2012 Calendar

Our calendar magnet is a real 2012 calendar. So you can have it on the refrigerator for years!

Posted in 2012 | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Will Continue, Despite Opposition

Posted on May 20, 2010 by admin

space invaders 150x150 The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Will Continue, Despite OppositionThe search for other intelligent lifeforms in the universe is an idea that has been pursued with dogged determination by a few farsighted visionaries.  Along the way, it has faced repeated opposition from two areas: those who know little, and those who know much.  Despite the opposition, the people who believe in this quest, and believe that it will eventually be successful, keep looking for our neighbors in the galactic community.

The search for extraterrestrial intelligence started a long time ago, and it would be hard to pinpoint its exact beginnings.  It could be argued that it began when Percival Lowell first saw what he thought were canals on Mars, and speculated that he might be looking at the artifacts of an advanced civilization.  Lowell got that wrong, but he had the right idea.  Even at that early date, he was thinking that as our powers of observation and understanding increase, we might be able to see evidence of civilizations on other worlds.

But in modern terms, the search has involved monitoring parts of the electromagnetic spectrum to search for emissions from other civilizations.  That concept began with a specific event which took place in 1959, just two years after Sputnik was launched.  That was the year that Philip Morrison and Giuseppe Cocconi, two physicists at Cornell University, published a paper in the journal Nature proposing that messages could be sent over interstellar distances using microwaves.  This led to the possibility that by listening to microwaves, we might be able to detect signals from other worlds.  These signals might take two forms: either deliberate attempts to communicate with us, or unintentional “noise” from these civilizations’ in-planet communications.  It would depend on whether they knew we were here- and they might.  After all, our own noise had been leaking into space since Marconi built his first crystal set, and by 1959, there had already been plenty of time for it to reach nearby stars.  They- whoever they were- might even be answering us!  Shouldn’t we give a listen, and find out?

Great scientific ideas often occur to unrelated researchers at about the same time, and this was no exception.  While Morrison and Cocconi were publishing their seminal paper, a radio astronomer in West Virginia named Frank Drake came up with his own modest project to listen for signals from the stars.  Beginning on April 8, 1960, and continuing for some weeks, Drake used the 26-inch radio telescope at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Green Bank to monitor two nearby stars.  This was the first modern SETI search.  It is now known as Project Ozma, named after Princess Ozma of Oz in the fantasy novels of L. Frank Baum.

Since that humble beginning, there have been about 100 SETI projects around the world, ranging from short efforts to others that have spanned years.  The search was dominated by the Russians at first.  In the 1960′s, radio astronomers in the Soviet Union used powerful antennas to search huge areas of the sky for emissions.  They were unsuccessful, but it was probably the Soviet effort that spurred NASA to get into the search.  In those Cold War days, the idea that the Russians might be the first ones to talk to the space people was intolerable to the U.S. government.  Not to be outdone, they started their own SETI project in the early 1970′s.

The planning for the U.S. effort was conducted at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California.  Here, a team of experts came up with a comprehensive study called Project Cyclops.  This report’s analysis of SETI science and technology issues provided the foundation on which much later work has been based.

Through the 1970′s, there were many SETI searches in the U.S.  Some of these have continued to the present day, taking advantage of enormous improvements in technology.  Leading the field are the Planetary Society’s Project META, the SERENDIP Project at the University of California, and the observing program at Ohio State University.

In the late 1970′s, the Ames Research Center and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, came up with a dual-mode plan for a major SETI search.  In this plan, JPL would systematically sweep all directions of the sky in a Sky Survey, while Ames Research Center would conduct a Targeted Search of 1,000 sun-like stars.  In 1988, after a decade of study and planning, NASA decided to fund the project.  Four years later, observations began.  Tragically, Congress pulled the funding for the program after only a year.

This decision was purely political, and had nothing to do with the importance of the project or its scientific merit.  Writing in the Journal of the British Interplantary Society, Stephen J. Garber of the NASA History Office blasted the decision as a short-sighted move based on pure ignorance.  Garber points out that the project was highly-regarded in the scientific community, both for the worthiness of its goals and the soundness of its methodology.  The decision to ax the program was simply based on the fact that the politicians who voted against it wanted the money for their pet projects.

The rhetoric that accompanied this decision was particularly nasty, with members of Congress sneering about “Martian hunting season” and “little green men.”  The politicians who said these things may have felt smug at the time, but their words will live forever in the annals of political shortsightedness and ignorance.  With the great strides that are now being made in astronomy and space exploration, it is entirely possible that those members of Congress will still be alive when first contact is made.  Their fumbling and backpeddling should be most entertaining.  

But the project that was cancelled by Congress still lives on, in an abbreviated form.  Part of the program has been picked up by the non-profit SETI Institute, and a smaller part by the grassroots SETI League.  Unfortunately, only part of the original plan has been funded to date.

However, this may be a good thing, in the longrun.  While the private funding has not been as great as the original funding canceled by Congress, it will certainly grow.  There is enormous public interest in SETI projects, and in the longrun, such projects may be funded better (certainly more consistently) by private contributors than by a fickle and non-scientific body like the U.S. Congress.  While SETI members were loudly outraged at the decision, and while it certainly was at least a temporary setback for the effort, it ensures that funding for the program in the future will be coming from a group of people who care about it and want it to continue, rather than from a government which is subject to budget problems, deficits, etc.

This article could end at this point, but if it did, it would be incomplete.  This is a complex issue, and there’s more here than just that tired old “scientists versus the politicians” scenario.  In all fairness, it must be admitted that some of the objections to the SETI program have come from people who know something about the subject, not just dumb politicians.  There have been scientists who have argued that the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or for any kind of life, is doomed to failure simply because the occurance of life is so unlikely.  These voices say that the appearance of life on Earth was a combination of exceedingly unlikely events and circumsances, including the size and mass of the planet, its distance from the sun, natural protection from harmful radiation, etc.  Given the unlikelihood of these factors, they say, we are almost certainly alone in the universe, and any attempt to look for life outside our lucky little planet will be futile.

In other words: we don’t expect to find anything, so why look?

Let us pause for a moment and think back over the history of the physical sciences.   Think of some of the great discoveries that have been made, things that had truly far-reaching implications.  You’re probably not a walking encyclopedia, but think of as many as you can.

Now ask yourself this: how many of those discoveries were expected?  Put another way: if the scientists of the past had only looked for things they were expecting, how many of those great discoveries would have been made?  Considering the number of surprises that science has given us over the centuries, the answer would have to be, not many.

In the area of space science in particular, it’s just been one surprise after another, ever since that famous night when Galileo pointed his homemade telescope at the sky and saw what he wasn’t expecting to see- ears on the planet Saturn!  Before that moment, if you had asked the man what he expected to see out there, it is very unlikely that “ears on Saturn” would have been on his list. 

So for those who cite scientific evidence for the position that life is supremely unlikely and may have only arisen here, there is an obvious answer: why do you think the surprises will quit coming now?  At a time when we can see more of the universe, in greater detail, than ever before, do you really think that we will start finding only “expected” things?  Why should it happen now, when it has never happened before? 

There are other arguments.  Some scientists have calculated that given the age of the universe, it is probable that we are latecomers in the universe, and that all the other starfaring civilizations have already already died out.  Maybe so- but how will you know until you look?

There are also those who say, after all these years of SETI programs all over the world, why haven’t we found anything yet?  Apparently these people are unaware of just how limited the search has been so far.  Faced with a huge electromagnetic spectrum, SETI researchers in the past have had to limit themselves to certain wavelengths.  Searches in the past have also been very limited in the areas they searched.  It’s a big sky out there, and they’ve had to restrict themselves to small patches.  Even the early Soviet efforts, which covered bigger areas of sky, were not even close to full surveys.  To date, the search has been spotty.  Both in terms of the number of frequencies searched and the amount of space covered, there is still plenty more room to search.    

A full discussion of this subject would fill volumes, and this article is admittedly an incomplete analysis.  But the point is short: science must always look for the things that seem unlikely.  Considering how many times the unlikely-seeming thing has turned out to be true, it would be foolish not to.  The scrap heap of science is full of ideas that seemed likely, until they were proven wrong.    

Sources:

“History of SETI” at the website of the SETI Institute:  seti.org/Page.aspx?pid=572

“History of SETI” (background) at the website of SETI:  seti-inst.edu/seti/seti-background/

“SETI: the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence” at the NASA website:  history.nasa.gov/seti.html

Posted in Articles, UFOs | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

France’s GEIPAN: Investigating UFOs for More Than 30 Years

Posted on April 13, 2010 by admin

ufos 150x150 Frances GEIPAN: Investigating UFOs for More Than 30 YearsOf all the nations of the world, only France has a branch of the government which is openly dedicated to the investigation of unidentified flying objects, and the dissemination of the information to the public. Called GEIPAN today, it has existed in one form or another since 1977. Despite strong opposition, budget cuts etc., GEIPAN keeps rising from its ashes and still exists today. In over 30 years of operation, it has investigated thousands of accounts of mysterious objects coming from the sky. While the vast majority of these have been revealed to have normal, down-to-earth explanations, there is a small and persistent minority that have not.

The creation of this organization is the culmination of a long history of interest in unidentified flying objects by the French government. Writing in International UFO Reporter, a publication of the J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies, Gildas Bourdais relates that he was told by Jean-Luc Bruneau, former inspector general at the Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique (CEA) that even in the 1960s, there was a proposal to create a government research group on extraterrestrial life and UFOs. The initiative for the proposal came from the military staff of President Charles de Gaulle, with his approval, and was also supported by Yves Rocard, a top French physicist at the Ecole Normale Superieure and one of the fathers of the French atomic bomb. The result was a proposal by Bruneau for the creation of a project to investigate phenomenes aerospatiaux non-identifies (unidentified aerospace phenomena). Unfortunately, the political turmoil of May 1968 in France caused this proposal to be postponed, and it was never taken up again. Thus the French government missed an opportunity to begin its studies in this area at this early date. The proposal was forgotten for a time, then revived in the 1970s.

The organization, as it eventually took form, came out of initiatives that were begun in the early 1970s, and officially came into existence in 1977.

This organization has existed in at least three different forms, each with a different name. These have all been branches of the French space program, the Centre National d-Etudes Spatiales (CNES). In 1977, CNES established GEPAN, the Groupe d-Etudes Phenomenes Aerospatiaux Non-identifies to investigate UFO reports. To head the group, CNES selected Claude Poher, a CNES engineer who had already done analyses of files containing several thousand observations worldwide. A scientific advisory board was picked which included noted astronomers, physicists, legal experts and other imminent citizens.

In reading about those early days, the figure of Claude Poher, the first head of GEPAN, emerges as a fascinating and perhaps even heroic person. He and his small staff (six or seven) meticulously investigated hundreds of accounts, and when Poher became personally convinced that UFOs were real and of extraterrestrial origin, he bravely weathered considerable criticism and even ridicule by openly saying so. If the theme hadn’t already been overdone, this man and his work would make a great TV series.

It is worth noting that GEPAN and its descendant organizations have never been affiliated with any civilian UFO groups, and have never even gotten along with them very well. Claude Poher held a gathering of more than 100 people from 40 civilian UFO groups, but while this affair was touted loudly in the popular press, it probably did more harm than good. The gathering proved difficult to manage, and fell apart in confusion. This caused an outcry from UFO enthusiasts, who seemed to feel that GEPAN had never intended to give out any meaningful information, and had staged the whole affair to create the illusion of openness. No other events of this type were ever held.

The first meeting of the Scientific Council took place in December 1977, and the second in June 1978. The result of these two meetings was the preparation of a 670-page report. The report detailed the investigation of 10 major cases and several hundred less detailed ones, which fell into four categories in these percentages:

A- perfectly identified
B- probably identified (total of A and B) 26%
C- insufficient information 36%
D- unidentified 38%

In the June 1978 meeting, Poher said that in regard to the last group, his group had concluded that there was a material phenomenon behind the observations, and that in 60% of those cases, the description of this phenomenon was “of a flying machine whose origin, modes of lifting and/or propulsion are totally outside our knowledge.”

In 1979, Claude Poher left the hotseat at the head of GEPAN and went on a sailing trip around the world with his family. When he returned, he assumed a position at CNES, and while he was not vocal about UFOs after that, he is known to have kept an interest in the subject.

From 1979 to 1983, the head of GEPAN was Alain Esterle. This was something of a golden age for the organization. The staff expanded to 10, and the group investigated some of their most important cases. Of these, there are two that stand out, the Trans-en-Provence case in January 1981 and the “L’Amarante” case in October 1982.

The Trans-en-Provence Case, which took place outside the French town of that name, involved an eyewitness account of a local resident, Renato Nicolai. Nicolai was working outside when he heard a strange whistling sound and saw a saucer-shaped object about eight feet in diameter land about 50 yards downhill from him. It only stayed there for a moment, then lifted and flew away without a sound. It left burn marks on the ground.

Nicolai called the local police, who interviewed him and referred the case to GEPAN. When that organization investigated the scene, they found that the ground at that spot had been compressed with a mechanical pressure of four or five tons, and heated to about 300 to 600 degrees C. When the soil was analyzed, traces of zinc and phosphate were found. Analysis of alfalfa plants growing near the spot showed chlorophyl levels 30 to 50 percent less than expected. This is a finding more consistent with very old leaves on the verge of death, but in this case, the leaves were young and should have had higher chlorophyl levels. This is regarded as one of the most well-substantiated UFO cases on record, since it involves mechanical evidence of the presence of the object, chemical evidence from the soil, and a curious and unexplained effect on local plant life.

Damage to plants has occurred in several other UFO sighting cases, including the “L’Amarante” case. This event took place in Nancy, France in 1982. The eyewitness was a biologist who saw an ovoid object silently descend into his garden, where it hovered motionless about a meter from the ground for some 20 minutes. When it rose and flew away, the witness said the grass underneath it rose up straight, an effect associated with very strong electrical fields. When GEPAN investigators investigated amarante plants near the site, they found that the leaves had withered and the fruit had burst open as if it had been cooked.

Not surprisingly, GEPAN faced opposition from some in the French government, who claimed that it was a waste of funds. In 1988, GEPAN was quietly closed down after repeated budget cuts, and was replaced by another organization called SEPRA (Service d’Expertise des Phenomenes de Rentrees Atmospheriques) or Atmospheric Reentry Phenomena Expertise Department. The UFO aspect was downplayed, and the group was more concerned with any objects coming into Earth’s atmosphere, which could include defunct satellites, rocket stages, etc. During this period, the actual study of UFO cases was poorly funded.

SEPRA ended in 2004, and the story could have stopped there. Fortunately, the organization was reborn in 2005 as GEIPAN- with the “I” added for information. In keeping with that addition to its name, the group made all of its old files, dating all the way back to the 1970s, available online in 2007. Not surprisingly, the public interest was enormous, and the website immediately crashed from the traffic. GEIPAN has since made available files going all the way back to sightings from the 1950′s.

Some people undoubtedly hoped that when GEIPAN released these files, a great truth would come out: proof positive of the existence of UFOs, or at least of old attempts to cover up the proof. Those people were disappointed, for while the files are extensive and contain many cases to make you wonder, there is still no absolute proof either way. Many strange things have been seen coming from the sky, and many investigations have taken place, but none of them has provided positive proof that these things are, or are not, of extraterrestrial origin.

But the investigation goes on, as it should. It is undeniable that something is happening in some of these cases. People have seen things, and in some cases, those things have left measurable physical traces.

We have reached the point now where a simple denial that UFOs exist just seems ignorant. Such a denial would be based on the assumption that space beings who can travel between the planets are simply absurd, and could not possibly exist- and we know that isn’t true.

We know it, because we are almost those beings, ourselves. UFOs and the beings who pilot them should be believable to us now, because we are on the verge of that kind of technology, and will have it within a foreseeable future. When we get it, the roles will be reversed. Even within the solar system, science has proven that the chemical constituents of life are quite common, and while the discovery of intelligent life near home is quite unlikely, there is a whole universe full of possibilities out there. We are at the beginning of interplanetary travel, and our probes are already scanning the sky in search of places where creatures like ourselves might exist. At some point in the future, if we can survive long enough, we will find a planet very much like Earth, with inhabitants who are just as smart as we are, but not as advanced. When that happens, our spacecraft will be the UFOs. The locals will point and babble when we pass over, and try to figure out who and what we are. Perhaps we will be the ancient astronauts, strangely-dressed creatures who descend from the sky bearing miracles. Or maybe we will just be a mystery.

That scenario will happen, sometime and somewhere, if we continue to expand into the universe. It seems inevitable, and it also seems inevitable that it should have happened many times as civilizations have grown up and begun to explore the worlds around them To deny that it could have happened here seems to be an ignorant attitude handed down from a bygone age, when extraterrestrial life did not seem as likely as it does now.

Sources:
Louange, F. and Velasco, J-.J.: Surrock Panel Report-Physical Evidence Related to UFO Reports- Appendix 1, excerpted in UFO Evidence: ufoevidence.org/documents/doc537.htm

Poher, Claude: GEPAN Report to the Scientific Committee, June 1978, excerpted in UFO Evidence: ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1626.htm

GEIPAN Wikipedia entry: wikipedia.org/wiki/GEIPAN

Trans-en-Provence Case Wikipedia entry: wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-en-Provence_Case

Bourdais, Gildas: “The Release of the French UFO Files” in UFO Digest, January 29, 2008: bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_flyingobjects29.htm

“France Opens Secret UFO Files Covering 50 Years” in UFO Evidence: ufoevidence.org/documents/doc2028.htm

“GEIPAN UAP Investigation Unit Opens its Files” at the website of the Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales: cnes.fr/web/CNES-en/5866-geipan-uap-investigation-unit-opens-its-files.php

Posted in Articles, UFOs | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Gambling and the Christian (A Christian Perspective)

Posted on December 14, 2009 by admin

gambling 300x212 Gambling and the Christian (A Christian Perspective)Gambling has affected practically every culture in our present world. In establishments where lottery tickets are sold, we can observe people scrambling to buy  the winning lotto ticket. When someone wins the lottery, the media is sure to exploit it from every possible angle, in hopes of drawing in more desperate, and often times poverty stricken, seekers looking for financial freedom. Yet it’s not just lottery tickets that are gaining notoriety. Gambling comes in many different forms: Slot machines, horse races, card games (most notably on-line Poker), sports betting, and more. Regardless of it’s appeal to “get rich quick”, gambling has become one of the most financially destructive forces today. Not only has it proven to deplete the gamblers financial resources, but it breaks up marriages, leaving individuals hopeless, addicted, and sometimes to the point of eventually ending their lives. Furthermore, and even more worrisome for the modern church, is its infiltration into the body of Christ. There are many Christians who are caught up in this seductive fantasy of chance, which has become a form of enslavement. With it’s appeal to quick riches in the midst of economic ruin, is it any wonder people are taken in? It draws in people from every walk of life, promising them instant fame if luck would so destine them. It exploits the poor and leaves people in financial ruins: Not to mention how easily accessible it has become if you have a computer and Internet connection. Some are so enslaved to this game of luck/chance that they may try to justify it by putting ‘skill’ into the equation. But, in all honesty, does ‘skill’ really play a big part in the game of chance? And do the scriptures have anything to say about gambling? What has God said about gambling, if anything at all.

Scriptural references against Gambling

In the book of first Timothy 6:10 we read, “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.” This begs the question: Does gambling qualify as the love of money? Absolutely. The love of money is the motivating factor behind gambling, regardless of the form it comes in. Money itself is not sinful, but the ‘love’ of it is. It is so damaging that it can even cause believers to turn from Christ, forsaking him as their first love, resorting to rather serving mammon instead of God. Jesus said in Matthew 6:24, “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.” Jesus knew the destructive force of gambling.

Luke 12:15 reads, “Then he said to them, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.” Gambling promotes greed by leaving people wanting for more. Even any amount they may have won, they give back to gambling, in hopes of gaining more and more financial wealth. It’s a vicious cycle that spirals in only one direction: down.

In Philippians 4:11-13 we find an exhortation to be content in all things. “I am not saying this because I am in need, for I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. I can do everything through him who gives me strength.” Yet, gambling spawns the exact opposite: discontentment. Those who participate in gambling activities are more times than not dissatisfied with what they do have and are left yearning for more.

Gambling is a violation of the 8th commandment: Exodus 20:15, “You shall not steal.” Various card games involve deception and dishonesty in order to take any monetary values another has. Some people have lost their entire savings and assets to gambling, while the winner, on the other hand, walks away momentarily satisfied with another man’s wealth. This is contrary to God’s commands. James 2:15-16 reads, “Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?” The scriptures are constantly exhorting us to give to the poor, reach out to the needy, give what we have in order that others may be blessed of God. Is this what takes place when one invests what they have in gambling? On the contrary, we find the poor being exploited through casinos (whether on-line or in big cities), as they give their last pennies in hopes of instant fame.

Gambling is distrusting God. Philippians 4:19, “And my God will meet all your needs according to his glorious riches in Christ Jesus.” Not only does gambling result in not trusting God to meet ones needs, but it is irresponsible stewardship of what God has blessed one with. It is, in all reality, no stewardship at all. Everything should be done for his glory, not our own. 1 Corinthians 10:31 says, “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.” We are exhorted to support our families, give to the needy, give to the church for the edification of the body; not gamble away our resources, steal from the poor, use deception, trickery, and falsehood (as in card games) to gain your neighbor’s wealth. Exodus 20:17, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.” Yet gambling, in particular card games, causes one to covet another man’s wealth. Matthew 25:14-30 is a parable which presents illustrations of irresponsible stewardship versus wise stewardship in regard to talents (or money) that God gives to some. In the parable, it describes a man, who was given money, as going ‘to work’ to multiply what he was given.  The second man does also. But the last man hid his talent, buried it in the hole and hung around. He was a sluggard, lazy, and was cast out because of this. The last illustration can be equivocated with a gambler burying his money in a game of luck/chance. The idea of putting physical effort into a blue collar job has become completely unappealing. Quick riches that require hardly any labor are sought after at any sacrifice. In this respect, not only does gambling promote laziness but it demeans the God given place of work. Gen. 3:19, Proverbs 12:11, Proverbs 13:22, Ephesians 4:28, Colossians 3, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Tim. 5:8 point to God’s divine plan for ‘work.’

Probably one of the most telling verses given about gambling is found in Isaiah 65:11-12. God gives us insight into this game of luck/chance. He calls it idolatry and treats it as such.

Isaiah 65:11-12

“But as for you who forsake the LORD
and forget my holy mountain,
who spread a table for Fortune (bringing wealth to an idol – bowing to luck)
and fill bowls of mixed wine for Destiny, (bringing wealth to an idol – bowing to chance)
I will destine you for the sword,
and you will all bend down for the slaughter.”

Conclusion

Casinos, whether in America, abroad, or on-line, are filled with covetousness and deception. Gambling franchises of all types promote greed, selfishness, irresponsible stewardship, and idol worship. Gambling squanders away resources, exploits the poor, spawns discontentment, promotes the love of money, and relies on luck/chance. All of these are things that God expressly forbids and condemns.

(All verses are taken from the NIV translation)

Posted in Religion | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Purpose of Romans

Posted on December 14, 2009 by admin

romans 300x196 The Purpose of RomansOn the surface, the book of Romans seems to be free of conflict.  There is no doubt that Romans was written by the apostle Paul (Coffman viii).  Charles Hodge stated in his book that, “There is, therefore, no book in the Bible, and there is no ancient book in the world, of which the authenticity is more certain than that of this epistle (Hodge 9).”  There are very few critical problems that can be found in the epistle.  Concerning critical problems, some radical scholars have brought attention to the last chapter of the book.  Even under the greatest scrutiny there is almost no basis for these allegations (Coffman xiii).  Conflict does enter the picture when one begins to question why Romans was written and what its purpose was.  This issue has come to be defined as “The Romans Debate (Johnson 3).”  Over the next few pages some of the perspectives that have been offered concerning the purpose of Romans will be explained briefly.

Before taking a look at some of these perspectives it will help to explain a few of the background details concerning the book of Romans.  It was probably written during the third missionary trip that Paul took.  The actual place the letter was written may have been in Corinth.  It was most likely composed in the later months of A.D. 56 or early part of 57 (Boa, Kruidenier 5).  Tertius, a friend of Paul, helped write the letter.  Gaius, a man whom Paul had been staying with, may have been the one who provided Paul with Tertius (Bruce 14).  When Paul wrote this letter to the Romans it is clear from his word usage the church in Rome had not been started in the recent past.  It had in part a somewhat lengthy history (Bruce 15).  There is some conflict concerning the intended audience of Paul’s letter.  At times during the letter it seems that it was written for Jewish Christians (Moo 9).  At other times it seems that Paul’s intended audience was Gentile Christians (Moo 10).

Before diving into some of the complicated arguments let us take a look at the purpose of Romans from a basic point of view.  Once Paul had finished his work in the East he wanted to spread the gospel to Spain (Coffman xiv).  For some time Paul had desired to visit Rome.  He had even made promises to make a trip to the city.  At this time Rome was a very important city since it was the capital of the Roman Empire.  It only made sense for Paul to visit Rome since it was on his way to Spain.  There was also another reason Paul may have wanted to visit the city.  If he was to be successful in Spain, he was going to need enough capital to finance the trip.  He undoubtedly felt that the Christians in Rome would lend him the aid and support he needed.  In his letter to the Romans he wanted to show them his understanding of the gospel.  This letter would also help the Roman Christians come to entrust him (Coffman xv) so that when he did arrive they would not be suspicious of his presence.  Most of the Christians in Rome had never actually met Paul.  They had only heard his name.  To improve his standing with the Roman Christians he knew he needed to lay out his beliefs for them to see in writing.  Ultimately, Paul was saying this is the person that I am and these are my beliefs (Barton, Veerman, Wilson xix).

A second reasons Paul may have written this letter to the Romans is because of the lack of leadership at the church in Rome.  There were no teachers or apostolic leaders.  Based on this awareness he may have seen it fit to help solidify the faith of the Christians in Rome.  It has already been mentioned that Rome was one of the most important cities of this time period.  Paul knew that Christians living in this area would undoubtedly face unavoidable conflicts in such a city.  If this was not enough to cause him to write a letter to the Romans, his friends in Rome, such as Priscilla and Aquila, had communicated with Paul about the many struggles that Roman Christians were facing.  To make matters worse the church in Rome did not even have a whole Bible.  They only had the Old Testament in its Hebrew script.  The Gospels were written at a later time period and the Epistles that had been written prior to this time had not been sent to the church in Rome.  When Christians in Rome read Paul’s letter it would have been the first time that the majority of them had read a section of Christian literature (Barton, Veerman, Wilson xix).  These are all very valid arguments as to why Paul wrote this epistle to the Romans.

One cannot be completely sure about the social makeup of the church in Rome.  The book of Acts makes it sound like the Roman church had many Jewish believers.  In Acts one reads the account where Paul is in Rome under house arrest.  While under this house arrest, he was constantly preaching to the Jewish leaders in Rome.  Even Paul’s letter to the Romans implies that some of those who read Paul’s letter were Jewish.  In the second chapter of Romans he deals with a person “who calls himself a Jew (Johnson 4).  On the other side of the argument, Romans ultimately makes it seems that Paul’s readers were mainly Gentile in origin.  He portrays his mission in a way that he wants to bring about “the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations [or: Gentiles], including yourselves” (Romans 1:5-6).  In 1:13 Paul declared that he wanted to “reap some harvest among you as among the rest of the Gentiles.”  Finally in 11:13 Paul says, “Now I am speaking to you Gentiles.”  This does not necessarily contradict the previous assumption that the majority of Paul’s readers were Gentile but it does give the impression he dealt with Christians of assorted backgrounds.  This raises two question: Did Gentiles and Jews live together in certain neighborhoods?  If they did live together in the same community did they attend different house-churches based on their ethnicity?  These two questions cannot be answered due to a lack of information in the letter concerning the two questions (Johnson 5).

Some scholars believe that one of the main reasons Romans may have been written is because of the various backgrounds, Jews and Gentiles, which may have been represented at the church in Rome.  These same scholars like to compare Paul’s letter to the Romans to his other letters to the Corinthians and Thessalonians.  Paul wrote these former letters because of difficulties that had arisen in these communities.  He wrote these letters in an effort to correct these problems.  The aforementioned scholars believe that Romans was written in a similar fashion to these letters based on the problems that the church at Rome was experiencing.  In Romans 14 Paul talks about food and festivals and the disagreements that had occurred concerning these two areas.  It seems that both of these matters main have been one of the main causes of conflict between the Jews and Gentiles.  Obviously, Paul felt the need to write the church in order to help them solve these problems.  In Romans 15:7 Paul is urging the Gentiles and Jews to get along when he says “Welcome one another, therefore, as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God.”  Those who argue for this perception believe that Paul wrote Romans he wanted the Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome to understand that they were working as team to further Gods kingdom (Johnson 5).

Other intellectuals believe that Paul wrote Romans based on what he was presently going through while also considering his future plans.  Those who argue for this notion believe that Romans was not written to address problems that had arisen in the church at Rome.  They base this argument on the fact that Paul never seems to implement a tone of rebuke anywhere in the letter.  Furthermore, they argue that Paul does not even seem to give direct instruction to the audience who will read his letter.  Right after he declares in Romans 1:11 that he hoped to “impart some spiritual gift to strengthen you” he goes on to note that any authority he may have over these people is simply so “that we may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith, both yours and mine” (1:12).  They also argue that the moral exhortations provided by Paul in Romans 12-13 are not directed to Jew and Gentile relations.  They proclaim that these exhortations are too general in character to be identified with Jew and Gentile associations (Johnson 5).

Furthermore, these scholars believe that when Paul’s says “I myself am satisfied about you, my brethren, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with knowledge, and able to instruct one another (15:14)” he is ultimately saying that he did not write these letter to deal with internal problems at the church in Rome (Johnson 5-6).  In 15:15 Paul does says that he has “written on some points very boldly by way of reminder” but these words do not necessarily imply that the Christian community in Rome was in dire trouble.  In Romans 16:17-18 Paul talks about people who cause “dissensions and difficulties.”  This passage does seem to indicate that Paul may have written Romans because of the trials and tribulations among the Jews and Gentiles but one must consider that the people Paul is describing in this verse are portrayed as “in opposition to the doctrine you have been taught.”  This passage shows that when Paul talks about people causing problems in the church he is not talking about people taking sides within the church concerning the matters at hand but rather people who are all together opposed to the Christian teaching.  Paul goes on to say in the passage “your obedience is known to all” in reference to the Romans.  It is easy to see how the scholars who argue for this viewpoint believe that Paul did not write Romans in order to improve Jew and Gentile relations within the church (Johnson 6).

Just because the data in the aforementioned paragraph seems to indicate that Romans was not written because of internal problems, this does not mean that there were no such problems in the church at Rome.  Those who believe that the purpose of Romans was to improve relations within the church have a very valid argument that should not be discredited.  With that being said Paul seems to have written Romans for purely practical reasons.  This means he simply wanted the Roman church to help him out with financial matters for his planned trip to Spain (Johnson 6).

Near the very beginning of his letter he talks about how he “desired some harvest (1:13)” from the Romans just as other Gentile churches had done.  Prior to and during the writing of this letter Paul had been collecting money for the church in Jerusalem.  In Romans 15:19-22 we are told that Paul had not been able to include the church at Rome in this collection because he had been so busy in the East.  The former passage seems to imply that Paul wanted to provide the Christians in Rome with another chance to take part in this collection.  If Paul was going to be successful in Spain he was going to need a new base of operations in the West.  It was actually one of Paul’s techniques to set up his base of operations in major urban cities.  It was perfect for this base of operations to be located in Rome so Paul is ultimately offering these people the opportunity to provide with him his new base of operations in the West (Johnson 6).

In 15:24 he tells the Romans that he wants to “be sped on” his journey to Spain once he had gotten to fellowship with them for a time.  In the Greek, “speed on a journey” means getting supplies and resources that a person may need for a mission.  Just a few verses later in 15:32 Paul says he looks forward to being “refreshed” by the Roman Christians.  This is a word that also hints at monetary support (Johnson 6).

If Paul’s purpose for writing Romans was to raise funds to support his journey to Spain this assertion helps explain why chapter 16 was included in the letter.  At first glance this chapter seems somewhat out of place.  Some academics have even questioned whether it originally belonged in Romans or not.  These same scholars believe this chapter may have actually been an entirely different letter that was written by Paul in recommendation of Phoebe.  This is an interesting proposition but when one views the textual history of Romans they will find that from the beginning chapter 16 has been included in the letter (Johnson 7).

If Paul’s purpose in writing Romans was based on financial motives chapter 16 serves his purpose perfectly.  In the first two verses of the chapter he gives Phoebe praise and he also mentions that she was a deacon at the church located in the port city of Cenchreae which was part of Corinth.  In 16:2 he claims that Phoebe “has been a helper of many and of myself as well.”  The Revised Standard Version used the word “helper” in this verse but the term from which it was translated can also mean patron.  Under these circumstances this word usage would indicate someone who had given Paul monetary assistance.  A little while later Paul asks the Christians in Rome to “assist her in whatever she may require of you.”  From a Greek standpoint this verse seems to be dealing with financial associations.  To further this belief Paul says this write after 15:32 when he had urged the Romans to provide him with refreshment.  From all of these verses one can finally gather what Phoebe’s mission was in Rome.  She had helped out with Paul’s labors in the East and now she was going to Rome on behalf of Paul.  Her main job in Rome was too prepare for Paul’s voyage to Spain.  Paul uses this chapter to promote Phoebe as his business partner to the Roman church (Johnson 7).

The purpose of Romans will most likely be a debate until the end of time.  The two main arguments that have been put forth in this paper are very legitimate and convincing.  One can make strong arguments for both of these propositions.  To this writer it seems that Paul wrote this letter in an effort to prepare the way for missionary journey to Spain.  Throughout the letter he saw fit to address some of the problems that the church in Rome was dealing with.  While a debate over the purpose of Romans is not a bad thing it is important that the conflict does not get in the way of all the Godly insights the book has too offer.

WORKS CITED

Barton, Bruce B., David R. Veerman, Neil Wilson. Life Application Bible Commentary:

Romans. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.,1992.

Boa, Kenneth, William Kruidenier. Holman New Testament Commentary: Romans. Nashville,

TN: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 2000.

Bruce, F. F. The Letter of Paul to the Romans: An Introduction and Commentary. Grand Rapids,

MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1985.

Coffman, James Burton. Commentary on Romans. Austin, TX: Firm Foundation Publishing

House, 1973.

Hodge, Charles. Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids, MI: WM. B.

Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1968.

Johnson, Luke Timothy.  Reading Romans: A Literary and Theological Commentary. New York,             NY: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1997.

Moo, Douglas J. The Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing

Company, 1996.

Posted in Religion | Tagged , , , , , | 5 Comments

Science and Religion Don’t Have to Disagree

Posted on December 11, 2009 by admin

Galileo 255x300 Science and Religion Dont Have to DisagreeSince the dawn of our species, we have searched for ways of understanding the universe around us.  There have always been two major ways of doing this ”“ one, through cultural traditions and myths, and the other through observation and testing.  Both religion and science have been vital parts of the human experience for far longer than we have had words for them.  Religion was an important part of uniting humans into societies and giving structure and comfort to those societies, and science has always been an important tool for finding out what helps and what hurts us.  Now, more than ever before, these two ways of knowing are thought to be in conflict.  Radicals from both traditions seek to undermine and question the legitimacy of the other, but does this necessarily have to happen?  Can they co-exist?

The simple answer is yes, and for the vast majority of both scientists and believers, they do co-exist quite peacefully.  In general, church attendees across the world are not enemies of science ”“ they enjoy the benefits of medicine and technology as much as anyone else.  At the same time, the overwhelming majority of scientists are themselves believers in some form of higher being.  The conflict comes from leaders, both in the scientific and religious communities, who are not satisfied with their tradition’s turf.  There are scientists who want to take over parts of the human experience we usually think of as religious, and religious leaders who want to do the same thing to science.  In order to understand and resist this conflict, we have to see where the boundary between these areas of interest lie.

In the present day, the biggest source of conflict between science and religion is over the theory of evolution.  Most religions are based on some sort of creation story, which their followers see as being in opposition to the theory.  Again, if the issue is looked at with a cool head and without seeking out conflict, it can be avoided.  Evolution says that the living things we see today changed over time from different forms that were present in the past.  It says nothing, and this bears repeating, nothing, about the origins of life.  As a working biologist, I have no idea where life came from, because we have no compelling theory about that question.  If we admit this failing in current scientific knowledge, we allow a much more fruitful conversation between science and religion, because religions offer a theory on the origin of life.

Just as in the day of Galileo and Copernicus, mainstream science and mainstream religion disagree on a few key points.  Back then, religious scholars insisted the Earth was the center of the Universe, and scientists proved otherwise.  What we should remember is that religions have adapted to this knowledge, and it has in no way diminished their faith.  Now, we disagree about the way that life developed on this planet.  Religions may need to once again rethink the details of their knowledge, but they can survive this as well.  Scientists, in turn, must be respectful of religious beliefs and take the time to explain their theories and findings in terms that do not look down on or insult those with faith.

Once scientists and theologians are brought to the table to talk respectfully, we realize that we have much more in common than we thought.  Both religious and scientific minds are interested in protecting our environment, for example, and there have been some great cooperative efforts between churches and scientific organizations toward that goal.  The most important point is that we do not have conflict for conflict’s sake.  Some leaders in both schools of thought seek conflict for their own fame or monetary gain, at the cost of the real goal of both ”“ the search for knowledge.  When we realize that both ways of knowing are legitimate, and can co-exist without opposing each other, we can create a society which embraces both, and recognizes that both are important to the human experience.

By Ian Rose

Posted in Religion | Tagged , | 5 Comments

Debunking Zeitgeist

Posted on December 11, 2009 by admin

christ art 300x200 Debunking ZeitgeistZeitgeist is a film that is currently creating something of a stir across the internet in the same vein as Loose Change, a documentary that appears to be loosely thrown together with the stated intent of shaking up “the institution”. Boasting that it has been viewed by over 70,000 people in live, theatrical settings, the maker of the film also ardently defends every point he’s made in his website’s Q&A section, arguing that none of his points can be debunked, and almost goes so far as to discourage attempts at debunking the film, even though the movie’s goal has been to encourage people to go “find out for themselves”.

Unfortunately in the case of Zeitgeist, you have to, because the information in the film is so badly in err and so consistently simply contradictory to fact that the only way to get an accurate portrayal of human history is to ignore it completely. In many ways, Zeitgeist can be an educational tool because it points out potentially subtle points in history, while in turn getting them tragically wrong, therefore pointing a would-be student or scholar in the right direction.

It is no understatement to say that the entire first portion of the film – an attempt to thoroughly debunk Christianity – is simply wrong. There is no simpler, or even more complex, way to state this than the documentary’s entire first portion is a simple fabrication. Even the most ardent anti-Christian should do their best to distance themselves from the film, as what it teaches will only discredit that side’s arguments – and should it go mainstream as an “atheist” thought, then Douglas Adams would be rolling in his grave.

The basic premise of Part I, called sardonically “The Greatest Story Ever Told”, is that Christianity is in fact an astrological allegory that has been misinterpreted by Christians, and that the entire story is a rewrite of common solar mythologies. If this documentary is to be believed, the entire Nativity story is one big misunderstanding, because we mixed up the word “son” with the word “sun”, and that’s who is really being referenced.

Before leaping into what the film maker calls astrological “coincidences”, he begins by trying to draw correlations between the Jesus story and previous religious icons. His first choice, which is later revealed to be part of an overarching belief that all of Christian beliefs are lifted from ancient Egyptian mythology, is that of Horus. According to him, the two are almost identical: Horus was born on December 25th, he was born of a virgin, a star in the East told of his birth, he was adored by three kings, at 12 he became a prodigal teacher, he was baptized at 30, he had 12 disciples, he performed miracles such as walking on water, he was called titles such as “the way, the truth, and the light”, “the lamb of God”, he was betrayed by one of his disciples and was resurrected three days later.

This does sound frighteningly like Christ – the only problem of course, is that none of these things are said to have happened to Horus. In an amusing turn of events, the similarities are simply made up to suit the film maker: Horus wasn’t born of a virgin mother, his mother was a goddess that impregnated herself with Osiris’s castrated penis. He wasn’t born on December 25th (but then, neither was Jesus), due in no small part to the fact that December wouldn’t exist for at least 2500 or so more years.

The ancient Egyptian calendar was a little different and a little more complex – and in truth, December 25th would’ve really been in a month, depending on which kingdom you were in, called Fourth of Shemu, Wep-renpet, Msw-r, Mesore, Mesori, or Mesra.

There are other problems with this Horus story of course, such as the fact that crucifixion wasn’t practiced in ancient Egypt circa 3000 B.C. as the film maker claims: the closest thing archaeologists can find are hangings, which, for anyone with the slightest modicum of understanding ancient forms of execution knows is certainly not the same thing as crucifixion. Crucifixion’s earliest known occurrences were in Sumeria, Babylon, and Persia of 7th century B.C. While this was certainly very far back in time, it falls far short of the 3,000 B.C. claim.

Many who stand by Zeitgeist argue that the Old Testament actually refers to the Egyptians crucifying someone in the story of Joseph, when the Pharaoh’s baker is convicted of theft and hanged, his body then left on display. Unfortunately, hanging and putting a body on display is not exactly hard boiled evidence of a crucifixion – as always, it was more than likely a simple hanging.

The complexity and high detail of Egyptian mythology makes it virtually impossible to make a correlation between Jesus and Horus in any more than a passing glance. When you attempt to make comparisons between two religions, you fundamentally have to look at the entirety of belief for both sides – and unfortunately in this case, even if you completely omit the simple fabrications made up by the film maker, you are left with two lives that are in no way similar.

For example, Jesus was supposed to be the son of a very human woman, Horus was said to be the son of a goddess and her lover’s severed phallus. Jesus was considered to be the living embodiment of a monotheistic God, whereas Horus is not only marred in ambiguity about just what god in a pantheon he represents, he even separates himself into two different Horuses (the Greater and the Lesser).

To further justify the Horus-Jesus connection, the film maker turns to a story told entirely in hieroglyphs on the wall of the Temple of Luxor. According to this story, Horus is foretold by a priest, is born a virgin, baptized, and fundamentally lives like Jesus. This again runs into issues when you account for the fact that whether willfully ignorant of the facts, or simply lying, the wall on the Temple of Luxor isn’t talking about Horus, it is talking about Ra, who later merges with Horus to make a whole new super deity.

The “disciple” connection he attempts to make in the Temple of Luxor has actually been interpreted as meaning the other deities worshiping Ra – and in essence, once more, the film maker is simply wrong about the conclusions he draws.

As if the Horus debacles weren’t enough, the film tries to show that Moses was not a historical figure either, and was in fact stolen from the legendary Akkadian king Sargon. According to Zeitgeist, Sargon was born in secret, hidden in a basket to avoid mass infanticide, pushed down a river, found by a midwife, and raised into royalty. Sound like Moses? Of course – because once more the film is changing details.

Sargon of Akkad’s mother wasn’t a low-born slave like Mose’s mother was, she was a high priestess, and Sargon himself was a bastard – presumably this is why she was hiding him. He was not found by a midwife, he was found by a water drawer that the film correctly identifies as Akki. However Akki was not a midwife, he was a man, and he raised Sargon as a gardener. Only later as a servant to the king did Sargon come into his own royalty.

The facts get further jumbled when he tries to argue that all of Christianity is largely a solar worship – to the point that he calls Jesus “the newest Solar Messiah”. To justify this, he argues that on Jesus’s declared birth date, December 24th, the “star in the East” is Sirius, which lies beneath Orion’s belt, which at the time was called the Three Kings. If you follow the Three Kings down Sirius, it points to the sunrise on December 25th. He also argues that the virgin Mary is actually the constellation Virgo – there was no town of Bethlehem, that was a misinterpretation of the word “bread basket”, which is a reference likewise to Virgo.

Therefore, it is argued, Jesus was a solar phenomenon, not a physical one. To believe this, we only need to overlook the rest of the New Testament, the Roman census, and the family tree constructed by Matthew and Luke.

The film continues to rail that the disciples represent the twelve zodiacs, and Jesus represents the “age of Pisces”, while Moses represented the coming of this age, the Ten Commandment story whereby he destroyed them in a fit of rage over the gold bull worship was actually an allegory for the changing of the ages from Taurus to Pisces. Confusing and disjointed so far? I wouldn’t really be surprised if this was the film maker’s actual aim.

The film maker continues on that the disciples, representing the twelve zodiacs, are a recurring theme throughout the Old Testament: there were twelve tribes of Israel, twelve sons of Jacob, twelve Judges of Israel, twelve great patriarchs, twelve Old Testament Prophets, twelve kings of Israel, and twelve princes of Israel.

Are we seeing a common, almost Jim Careyish “23″ style theme? That’s what you’re meant to see – unfortunately, once more, the facts are simply made up.

Firstly, the attempt to rail on the bizarre coincidence between “twelve tribes, twelve sons, and twelve patriarchs” is intellectually dishonest, because they’re derived from the same base number, which is the twelve sons of Jacob. The twelve sons became the twelve patriarchs of twelve tribes (with a few change ups such as Reuben losing his claim to land, and Joseph aiding in the rule of Egypt) of twelve tribes, therefore the “multiple coincidences” are really resigned to one, if it can be called that. As for everything else?

Simple mistruths at their finest:

There were not twelve kings of Israel. Saul, David, and Solomon were the three kings of a united Israel. Following Solomon’s death, many tribes revolted, and the kingdom was split. Maybe they were talking about a subsequent twelve kings? No that can’t be, because there were 19 kings of Israel, and 20 kings of Judah for a total of 39 total kings.

There were not twelve Old Testament Prophets – there were 48 male, and 7 female. Perhaps he was talking about the books in reference to prophets? N, there were 14 of those.

Unfortunately, for a film titled as a documentary, these simple kinds of falsities or possibly downright lies are consistent throughout Zeitgeist – making it possibly the internet’s least factual video, as for the nearly hour long duration of the anti-Christian section, nearly every claim is either misplaced, or simply wrong. When Zeitgeist is not making erroneous claims, it is using “John F. Kennedy – Abraham Lincoln coincidence” style sheets to demonstrate how Joseph was actually the Old Testament “prototype” for the Jesus story.

Ultimately, if terrible research and flawed logic based on a single piece of work by Thomas Paine interests you, then by all means this is a film worth watching, if only to figure out what all the excitement is about. However, not from minute one to minute end can essentially any word of the film maker be trusted – as proven above.

Or, in the words of a college art student familiar with Christian Art History, “Let’s go watch Sailor Moon, it’s more realistic.”

Posted in Religion | Tagged , , , , , , | 16 Comments

Is It Cruel to Convince a Christian That God Doesn’t Exist?

Posted on December 11, 2009 by admin

christ 200x300 Is It Cruel to Convince a Christian That God Doesnt Exist?Here in the United States and in western Europe there is quite a lot of fierce debate between Christians and Atheists, with the former consistently trying to convince the latter of the existence of God, and vice versa. If you are an Atheist then perhaps it is wrong to even attempt to convince a Christian or a person of any other faith that there is no God. Though Atheists may think that faith in a higher power is erroneous or even ridiculous, it can definitely help people to prevail during the most difficult of times.

Atheists generally have some strong arguments to hold up their lack of faith in a higher power. They talk about the lack of empirical evidence to support the existence of God or the supernatural. They wax lyrical about the logic of Darwin’s theory of evolution and the ‘big bang.’ Some even describe all religion as a wicked deception used by the rich to control and subjugate the populace. Let us suppose, just for the sake of argument, that Atheists are one hundred percent right when they dismiss God and everything religious or supernatural. What does an Atheist really get out of successfully convincing a Christian or a Jew that there is no God, besides a sense of validation and possibly the feeling that they have helped someone to see what they perceive to be the truth?

Faith in God or a higher power may seem absurd to a man or woman of science, but religion is not always used simply to further the selfish agendas of greedy old men. Faith can help people get through the worst ordeals of their life. For instance, a drug addict who decides to stop using heroin may only be able to do so by putting his trust in a power higher than himself. Take a way his faith and you could also remove his chief motivation for staying clean. Similarly a mother may be finding it extremely difficult to get over the death of her child. If convinced by an argument against the existence of God, perhaps that mother’s heart would break entirely because she would lose all hope of seeing her child again in the afterlife.

If you are an Atheist then of course you have every right to believe that there is no God and that supernatural entities do not exist. You also have good reason to be irritated by those who preach religious dogma in sanctimonious way. There is definitely some strong evidence to support your argument. However, you should think very carefully about whether or not you also have the right to force your opinion on those people who do believe in the existence of a higher power or powers. Faith may well be the one thing that is keeping an individual from complete despair. Trying to remove that faith with a convincing argument is tantamount to taking the crutches away from a person who has difficulty walking. Be an Atheist if you want, but leave those with faith in peace believe whatever helps them to get through the day.

Posted in Religion | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments