Proving the Stupid Point

“With the merciful you show yourself merciful; with the blameless man you show yourself blameless; with the purified you deal purely, and with the crooked you make yourself seem tortuous. You save a humble people, but your eyes are on the haughty to bring them down. (2 Samuel 22:26–28, ESV)

I love verses likes these. God doesn’t even have to really do anything to make people look stupid. They do it all by themselves. We have many idiots writing books and posting online about “bizarre stuff in the Bible” or “Ten Things That Turned Me Off About the Bible” or “Confusing Facts About The Bible” and other similar subjects. They might as well be putting up neon signs that say “I’m Crooked.” They are not straight, so God appears not straight.

Lots of people look at God through their experience or the Bible and can’t figure Him out. But it’s not Him that is the problem. If your brain is screwy, if it is darkened by hate and bitterness or if your top desire is to call the shots yourself without interference from some God who is going to tell you when you’re wrong, then you will naturally suspect others of the same twisted motives.

God is not twisted or dark. He is not wrong in any sense, nor does He have trouble informing creation of His purposes or intent. We just want to ignore Him, so many of us come up with excuses to make it seem like we don’t understand. Then we can do what we want.

If we make the switch to humility, however, then the picture starts to clear up right away. Knowing that God is always right and true and holy is a guiding light for understanding. People can be screwed up; never God. You might not like what He does, or doesn’t do, but that doesn’t mean He’s wrong.



Stephen Hawking is Dead. Big Deal.

So Stephen Hawking, that icon of atheism and evolution, has finally stopped working. He explained once that death just means that the brain failed like a broken down computer. There is no afterlife, according to him, and no heaven.

Well, he’s right. For him there is no heaven or afterlife. More like after-the-computer-stops-working he’ll be deposited in the permanent recycling facility in the lake of fire.

Lots of public figures are expressing their condolences. Why? The guy’s computer just stopped working. I have a business fixing computers, and when one stops working permanently I don’t write articles. I don’t go around in sackcloth and ashes. I don’t mourn. I just build a new one for my client and they move on. No big deal.

Jesse Carey of the (supposedly Christian) Relevant Magazine thinks that making comments like this is “unhelpful” and “disparaging.” He cites Ray Comfort, who posted links on his Facebook page to a secular announcement of the death and to Ray’s movie Evolution vs God, as “mean spirited.” Really? It is mean spirited to comment on an atheist whose whole life was a disparaging comment on my God and my belief system? Stephen was a walking, I’m sorry, rolling, destructive testimony to bigoted and ignorant anti-God teachings. No telling how many people’s faiths he damaged or destroyed in his life by acting like a mean-spirited expert on a God he never knew.

Ray Comfort has a vibrant ministry bringing God’s Word to as many as will listen. Stephen Hawking was nothing but unhelpful in guiding people to life. Relevant Magazine is a wishy-washy self-serving rag floating with the winds of popular culture, rarely taking a stand on the Word of God. Of the three, I think I prefer the guy who is trying to deliver the Word as best he knows how. The others are just so much wind.

Bye bye Mr. Hawking. You were useless in life but now you can at least be useful as worm food.



Bible Contradictions

Many, many times I hear about contradictions in the Bible. Supposedly there are hundreds of them. This contradiction argument has become a common standard attack by people who don’t believe in God and don’t want to believe in God. The statement is made as if the list of contradictions by itself is reason not to trust the Bible or believe in God. And I have one thing to say about it: There are no contradictions in the Bible.

If you look up the word “contradiction” in the dictionary, you’ll get something like the following from the online Merriam Webster.

  1. Act or an instance of contradicting.
  2. A proposition, statement, or phrase that asserts or implies both the truth and falsity of something.
  3. A statement or phrase whose parts contradict each other; a contradiction in terms.
  4. A logical incongruity.
  5. A situation in which inherent factors, actions, or propositions are inconsistent or contrary to one another.

As you can see, a contradiction is a statement that has both a truth and a falsehood. This would be something like “the sun rises in the east and rises in the west.” One is true, the other is false. They can’t both be true. There are three main categories of Bible contradictions claimed by unbelievers. One can be classified as text or copyist errors. A second is due to perception, and a third is in simple refusal to accept.

A large portion of the contradictions that are alleged to occur in most Bible denier’s lists are not contradictions at all. They are, at most, copying mistakes or grammar differences or other minor variations in the text. After all, the Bible was written down over a period of about 2,000 years by dozens of authors in many different styles. There’s bound to be a few blips here and there.

An example of this is the difference between 1 Kings 4:26 (Solomon had 40,000 stalls for horses) and 2 Chronicles 9:25 (4,000 stalls for horses). To a thinking person, this is obviously a minor discrepancy due to a copyist error. Or there might be another explanation. But there is no teaching affected by this error. It is not a contradiction, it is a text mistake. There might be a contradiction if you expect the text to be completely letter perfect. In this case though, the contradiction is in the expectation of perfection. Most of the items on unbeliever checklists consist of these types of contradictions that are not really contradictions. I can say without qualification that there is not a single teaching or meaningful statement anywhere in the remarkable document from God that is a true contradiction.

The second category of so-called contradictions is in the difference between what the Bible says and what people perceive or think it says. For instance, a favorite contradiction is manufactured between a God of Love and the facts that He destroyed people in the flood or used Israel to wipe out a tribe or people group. The perception is that a loving God would not destroy people. The perception is wrong on several levels.

For the flood example, God didn’t destroy man for about 1,600 years. He gave them time to change their ways. Not only did they not change their ways but got to where “every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” The antediluvians were just rotten to the core and made themselves unredeemable. They willingly turned into trash; so God cleansed the corruption from the earth. A similar principle was in effect when Israel was commanded to “take out the trash.” The tribes or nations that were removed had gotten so bad they even burned their kids in fires to appease their gods. Plus they wouldn’t repent though God in His grace gave them ample opportunity. People descended into abhorrent behavior and God took care of the problem. Unbelievers who claim a better sense of love or justice than is shown in the Bible are sitting in judgment on God’s actions and His Word with a perception of prejudice and deliberate misunderstanding.

The third category of contradictions is from simply rejecting what God says and who He is. This attitude is really the driving force behind alleging some contradictions. First they reject God and then they hunt around looking for confirmation of their rejection. They magnify tiny manuscript differences either real or perceived into huge roadblocks to belief. They mock and criticize because they decided to hate God before they ever start looking for a contradiction. Unbelievers reject God as master and Lord, so naturally contradictions proceed from their rejection. Make no mistake: so-called contradictions in the Bible are only contradictions in the heads of the deniers and unbelievers.

Some unbelievers gleefully point out the contradictions between the behavior or teachings of people/organizations and the Bible. They are correct. There are a lot of contradictions between people who say they follow the Bible and the Bible. However, this does not disprove the Bible, or give me any problems with the Bible text. There have always been pretenders throughout history. Behavior shows what is believed in the heart.

Now let’s take a look at what I think are the real contradictions in the rejection of the Bible and God. At the top of my list is the contradiction between atheists who say they have love greater than God’s and yet reject the God who is the source of love. They claim to love (when it suits them) but then turn around and hate God. This is a classic example of a contradiction that should go under the dictionary definition. Look up atheist in the dictionary and it should say, “See contradiction.”

Second on my list of unbeliever contradictions is between their rejection of God and the miracle of creation. I look at any part of creation and see a complex system that could not have sprung up out of nothing. There had to be a Creator, and not only a creator but a wise and all-knowing one to boot. Everything, though marred by entropy resulting from sin, is marvelously intricate and interdependent. There is no way a thinking person could miss it. Yet the unbelievers and atheists come up with all sorts of contradictory theories to explain.

Speaking of contradictory theories, the third contradiction on the God-hating hit parade is evolution. There is not a single bit of evidence for it anywhere. Unbelievers claim to be rational, thinking people, but evolution is the epitome of the opposite. Circular reasoning, science denying and flat-out lies are the order of the day for this contradiction. Built on hoaxes and sustained by government spending and regulation, evolution destroys morality and vilifies the life and hope that only God offers. It mocks God, pedals death as a good thing, and steals credit that belongs only to the Author of Life.

A fourth contradiction is the claim that the unbeliever has morality without needing to embrace God. Yet all of their alleged morality comes from God. He is the one who establishes morality. There is not a single instance of an unbeliever morality code that doesn’t steal from God. His Law was first; all others are weak copies at best. His ultimate example of morality was in the giving of His only begotten Son to save us from our sinful condition.

Jesus mirrors everything about God, especially in His cooperation with the Father in the sacrifice He made. Along with the sovereignty of God this is what the unbelievers are rejecting. It boggles the mind that anyone would refuse the gift of grace, love and mercy wrapped up in the torturous death of the Son of God, the effects of which are freely offered to hate-filled people. But reject it they do.

Talk about contradictions. Atheists and other unbelievers are selling nothing; everything came from nothing and will return to nothing. There is no hope in their religion, and it is a religion despite their denials. Their god or idol is themselves. They have no means of changing what they are and they stay lost in hate. Hate is not a feeling but the refusal to do what is good and right and truly loving. You cannot love and reject the God of love.

Hedonism or narcissism is what the unbelievers are really selling. Then, in the contradiction of all contradictions, they expect us to buy what they are selling. Believers are supposed to ditch the cleansing of God’s Word and the life and hope for a better future for one of nothingness where you are your own inadequate god. Get real.



Atheism: The Seinfeld of Religions

New video just got uploaded to our youtube channel which is already raising the ire of atheists (shown by their clicking of the dislike button and the comments they make). I couldn’t be happier. Like I told one of them who made a disparaging comment that my dad used to say, “Throw a rock into a pack of dogs and the one that barks the loudest is the one that got hit the hardest.”

Boy are atheists going to bark now.


Atheism – The Seinfeld of Religions

Atheists deny that atheism is a religion, because they narrowly and falsely define religion (as they do so many other things). Their definition is limited to including ‘gods’ or supernatural beings, ceremonies and rituals. Dictionaries typically use similar definitions. One online dictionary I consulted defined religion as:
1. A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agree upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. The body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

But these definitions fail to take into account religious beliefs that feature no supernatural beings, such as Taoism or UFO’s. A better definition by Ninian Smart (a recognized authority on the secular study of religion) includes what he called seven “dimensions” to religion. These seven points or dimensions are that a religion has 1) narrative (such as stories of where the universe came from and humanity’s part in it); 2) experiential events (an experience such as dread, guilt, awe, mystery, devotion, liberation, ecstasy, inner peace, or bliss that leads to conversion and later reinforce conversion); 3) a social aspect (a hierarchy of people at the top who promote their beliefs to gain and teach new believers (laity), or a shared belief system and attitudes practiced by group); 4) ethics (morality or a code of behavior); 5) doctrine (teachings or philosophy in an intellectually coherent form); 6) rituals (such as holidays and celebrations); and 7) material parts (objects or places symbolizing the, or treated as, sacred or supernatural). All religions do not have all of these in equal measure or attach the same importance to them, but in general they share these characteristics.

In an article by Daniel Smartt at he looks at this seven-point definition of religion and does a good job showing how atheism fits right in. The stories or narrative of atheism include Darwin’s trip on the HMS Beagle, the big bang (nothing exploded and became everything), and evolution (from simple to complex). Their experiences include such things as “freedom” from religion or “liberation” after converting, while “faith” is needed to embrace the belief (contrary to the science they say they worship) that life arose from non-life. Atheist social hierarchy has people at the top like Darwin or Stephen Hawking who are revered and preach the shared belief system aiming to gain converts. Atheist ethics are that there are no ethics except perhaps self-preservation or survival of the fittest; and that humans are basically good. But borrowing from other ethical systems is encouraged due to the moral bankruptcy of their doctrine.

That doctrine is of course that there is no God; evolution as fact contrary to sound science, and such things as the Humanist Manifesto. Their rituals include Darwin’s birthday and Earth Day (Lenin’s birthday). The material dimension of the atheist religion includes a worship of nature along with exploiting nature because “survival of the fittest” means that humans are the fittest.

Atheism is by definition self-contradictory. They espouse “open mindedness” yet start off with a repudiation of God. If they were truly “open minded” they would consider at least the possibility of a God. They say they have no gods yet obviously worship the twin gods of science and rationality, when they aren’t worshiping themselves as gods. There is no rational way possible they can declare there is no God unless they are gods by the conventional definition. They would have to be everywhere present, all-powerful, and all-knowing, because God could be residing somewhere they can’t get to, or know about, or have the power to travel to. They say Christians cannot prove God exists (although we can) yet cannot prove that God does not exist.

C. S. Lewis earlier in his life was an atheist. But he later said “atheism turns out to be too simple.”

Nothing good comes from atheism. What little good there is gets borrowed from other religions, mostly Christianity. Out of the first 108 universities founded in America, 106 of them were for training pastors. Whatever you want to say about the training of pastors, it was still thought that pastors had to be educated. The first free clinic in England was started by Christians (1746, John Wesley). Christians during the reformation and after were the vocal advocates of education, because they wanted to encourage people to read the Bible. The abolition of slavery in the UK and U.S. was pushed by, you guessed it, Christians.

Atheists claim to be compassionate, yet give very little of their precious money to charity, even non-religious charities. One study from Barna Research found that in 2006 the typical no-faith American donated just $200.00 while the average active-faith adult (defined as having gone to church, read the Bible and prayed during the week preceding the survey) gave $1,500.00. Even when church-based giving is subtracted, the active-faith adults gave double the dollars. Three times as many atheists as Christians gave nothing at all.

“We find the most terrible form of atheism, not in the militant and passionate struggle against the idea of God himself, but in the practical atheism of everyday living, in indifference and torpor. We often encounter these forms of atheism among those who are formally Christians.”
Nicolai A. Berdyaev
We_find_the_most_terrible_form_of_atheism. Columbia World of Quotations. Columbia University Press, 1996. (accessed: March 04, 2013).

Atheists love to speak of war and death in the name of Christianity, yet lie when confronted with the many-times-greater war and death caused by atheism. They do this by saying that the atheist versions were not “in the name of atheism.” Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Lenin, Pol Pot, Castro, etc. have caused more deaths than all the so-called religious wars combined, and more in “peacetime” than in war. These men were all atheists, either by direct statement or by action. Totalitarians have all been atheists. Hitler, it is claimed, was a Christian, but was not. He used Darwin’s theories to justify his death camps, and used the national church (church is not the same thing as Christian) as a rubber stamp to further his policies of war, eugenics and terror.

Atheists also ignore the millions of deaths by abortion perpetrated by atheist Margaret Sanger and others of similar thought. She was the founder of Planned Parenthood and a dedicated eugenicist (improving the quality of the human race by selective breeding and elimination of self-determined “undesirables”).

And when, by the way, has a book been published by an atheist that is so popular it has been in print for thousands of years selling billions of copies and translated into most known languages?

Stan, the 40 year atheist at points out in his First Principle of Atheism blog post ( that “Atheism is a VOID, intellectually and morally. This seems hardly arguable given that many Atheists declare the relief of total freedom that Atheism has given them – freedom from onerous absolutes, rules and authority (1). This VOID or hole is created solely by rejection, commonly of the nature of rebellion, and commonly is adopted in juvenile years of poor intellectual and cortex development coupled with raging hormones and personal emotional turmoil. After the VOID is adopted, Atheists find themselves totally free to create their own truths to backfill the hole. In essence, the Atheist is enabled to fill the hole totally with himself, and his own personal desires. So Atheism is completely self-focused and narcissistic. This is not to say that all narcissists are Atheist, nor that all Atheists meet the clinical definitions of narcissism. But the first principle of Atheism opens the pathway to narcissism and many take that path.”

Seinfeld was a sitcom very popular in the ‘90’s. To quote its creators and critics, it is “a show all about nothing.” Adherents to atheism claim that nothing exploded and produced everything, that nothing evolved and produced humanity, that there exists nothing but what we see hear touch taste and feel, that there is no God, and nothing awaits us after we die. There is no basis for morality, no guiding principles except that of “dog eat dog,” and no hope for the future. Truly atheism is also a show about nothing. It is the Seinfeld of religions.

Christians on the contrary possess quite a bit of substance. We have a God who is the source of all things of love, good, right, light, justice and life. We have comfort that there is a purpose to our being here, and a hope that all will not continue in pain, suffering and misery indefinitely. Our hope is that the perfectly loving, just and righteous Father will cleanse creation and put it back to right with His Son. We will be a part of His kingdom and family forever.

Atheists want us to trade all of what we have for…wait for it…nothing. They’ve got literally nothing to offer. Believers have everything, and lose nothing if we are wrong. Atheists have nothing, yet have everything to lose if they are wrong (an application of Pascal’s wager). The hook for atheism is that a person can be his own god with no accountability for decisions good or bad. This pitch has been made before. In the Garden of Eden. By a liar and the father of lies. So atheism is just another dressed up version of “you will be like God.” Atheism has got to be about the dumbest religion ever created by man. At least most of the other religions admit what they are doing. So the Seinfeld of religions wants us poor, idiot Christians to trade all we have for all they don’t?