blogforjesus

For such a small and obscure group they have made a large impact on secular society by which the news media has catered to their controversial position as if they had something significant to add to the world of academia by their skeptical views of biblical orthodoxy.

The media in turn is not as concerned with truth as much as they are interested in the sensationalism that comes with these conspiracy theories. The general audience prefers novelty and concepts of the mysterious and therefore they find these issues intriguing due to the marketing nature of the entertainment industry.

Anyway not only does the seminar muddy the waters of the gospels by questioning the biblical Jesus but they do so in such a way where it casts a shadow of doubt on most everything that the bible gives us about the person and work of Christ and therefore through reductionism the gospels can no longer be taken seriously based on their analysis.

To begin with their platform is primarily one of anti-supernaturalism and everything is filtered through this medium of belief or should I say unbelief. After all we live in a modern scientific age of enlightenment and these kinds of ideas aren’t conducive to evolutionary man. Yet in spite of this propaganda there remains a God concept by which intelligent and educated people have been counted among the ranks of the religious.

This isn’t a matter of some backwoodsy ignorant people or just some transient cultural experience but rather these are people that have made sincere and intelligent decisions about God.

That’s do in part  because such questions as morality, ultimate purpose and meaning, origins, and mortality come from the deepest level of our psyche and though science would attempt to answer these relevant questions or eradicate them they have miserably fallen short of giving us anything concretely significant.

There is a real sense of “otherness” in our universe which shouts so loudly that we have to deaden our ear follicles to the noise of belief and this has been accomplished as we have been subjected to the constant bombardment of anti-religious rhetoric through the brainwashing of naturalism.

Actually the more we are able to see the complexities of scientific knowledge the more convinced we should be in visualizing life as the handiwork of God as based on the elements of design versus a mindless randomness of chance. I actually find that it takes a blind leap of faith to believe on an order without  intelligence. An orchestra without a conductor.  A painting without an artist. A building without a builder.

How can life be mobilized by chance when chance is nothing nor does it have any power or   substance but it is only useful when contemplating mathematical probabilities. It amazes me that the human mind is the most complex component of the universe and is able to figure out great things and yet it overlooks the very simple matters of general revelation through an awe inspiring landscape. The problem isn’t a lack of insight but rather a suppression of knowledge of which mankind is guilty of.

There has always been an continue to be theistic scientists who hold to a biblical view of creationism apart from macroevolutionary theory and so we can’t just relocate God to the pre scientific age and yet society would  prefer to keep these witnesses silent by assigning them to the fringes of their cultural milieu in preference to elevating scientific theory to the level of a god. Anyway I have written more about evolution in this post:

jesusandjews.com/wordpress/2010/06/07/the-evolution-of-man/

Ok, I am going to stop here as my concern is not to present philosophical arguments for God but rather to give a general propositional framework for discussing personal filters which shape our worldview.

When speaking of the bible and more specifically the miraculous this is where many of the objections come in when deciphering the works of Jesus.

Yet if we can build a bridge towards a God concept then it no longer becomes so difficult to establish the possibilities of the metaphysical and super-nature phenomena. Signs and wonders can become plausible instead of merely mythical or superstitious.

So whether it is the God dilemma or the supernatural, mankind cannot adequately refute these concepts but rather is reduced to taking a middle position of agnosticism.

Until man can exhaust all knowledge and resources then these possibilities cannot be ruled out and if a person is open to looking at the evidence there is a plausibility that supersedes it negation.

If God is real then the story line of Jesus doesn’t necessarily become so far-fetched either. Therefore Jesus does not have to be categorized as one who was portrayed as a mythical figure much like the ancient gods and goddesses of pagan cultures who were not even real persons.

Though we might all agree that miracles as recorded in the bible aren’t a part of our day to day experience this however does not demand that we must identify them as impossible as we are not able to fully discern these matters due to our limitation of experiential knowledge in exhausting the cosmos. After all to make such a statement it would take a omniscient and omnipotent being who could only know the answer to that matter.

Science has only scratched the surface of knowledge and therefore by no means have they scoured the entire universe. So whether it be the secrets that are reserved in the depths of the oceans or the outer limits of space mankind’s portal of knowledge has a very limited view to reality.

Science is based largely in theories and it remains in a constant state of flux. Yet what I find fascinating is how dogmatic scientists can be on their findings in opposition to such concepts by having a matter of fact attitude against anything that smacks of God or the supernatural. Though these matters may sometimes elude the physical properties of normal sense perception how is this any different than what we knew prior to the advent of modern instrumentation?

Also to state that the scientific community at large takes an unbiased approach to scientific inquiry is not even conceivable and is oxymoronic to its field by formulating the cart of deduction before the horse of induction. So that whatever is coming through the lens of the microscope or telescope is perceived and interpreted as based on the filtering of preconditioned presuppositions.

So which way do you think the scientific community is slanted towards on these matters?  Would they be predisposed towards wanting to prove these conceptual ideas as right or wrong? They know from a job security position that they would be laughed and ridiculed right out of their professional careers and jeopardize their livelihood if they would even consider for a moment the possibilities of such ideas to begin with.

Bottom line the natural scientists has just as much to do with philosophical views  against God as does the theologian who favorably answers towards the reality of God.

In moving on about the miracles of Jesus we aren’t talking about the manifestation of fable like stories which portray imaginary figures like unicorns but rather we are looking at real life imagery. Like the miracle of changing the water into wine in which we can identify with the water, wine, wedding banquet, people in attendance, vessels to hold the wine, etc as well as it occurring in a setting which can be identified as a real historical time along with its location or space. This isn’t the problem in dealing with real things or objects  but rather it has to do with the transformation of one natural substance into another natural substance even though wine is already around 80% water.

Anyway this wasn’t some magicians trick either as such sophistication to this story would be nonsensical.

Even outside sources like the Talmud which are not sympathetic to Jesus give some credit to Him as first of all being a real person and then secondly stating that He was able to perform signs and wonders even though His actions were wrongly credited to the inspiration of the demonic.

Also I think when contemplating all this that there are psychological reasons why people would want to reject all these possibilities and it would come down to the responsibility and repercussions of such knowledge.

Take for instance all these reality shows on television that deal with the paranormal by making it an alleged science and though we can or want to believe in the spiritual entities of evil we don’t want to grapple with the antithetical aspect of this same concept because on one hand we find it entertaining while on the other it becomes convicting to our conscious.

When contemplating God and all the possibilities related to such a being mankind responds with hostility as he wants to be the king or master of his own universe and destiny. Humanity strives for dominance and autonomy and therefore the idea of a sovereign God intrudes on our individualism which in turn contradicts a personal agenda therefore making God a threatening obstacle by which to overcome.

As a Christian I have noticed that its ok to generalize with agnostics about God until you mention the name of Jesus which now puts a face on God as someone who is identifiable and knowable and therefore real. A transcendent God appears to be less threatening due to a default position of ignorance but when thinking about a tangible person then these matters become frightening.

Well anyway now to get to my subject. As a professor once said to me I said all that to say this and hopefully my intro just wasn’t a rabbit chase but rather a prelude to the reality behind this cultish group.

To begin with much of the group’s scholarship is unknowable and a percentage of them have not done any significant work regarding the New Testament and yet how can we trust their expert opinions on their critique of orthodox Christianity when they don’t have the academic prowess to be seriously considered under the pretense of critical scholarship.

In their pseudo research they like to conveniently  include the apocryphal book of the gospel of Thomas which downplays Jesus miraculous side and yet they avoid the other  Nag Hammadi documents of which was found alongside this same text. Perhaps the reason is because these other works contain even more mystical or magical elements than those of the gospel accounts.

These Gnostic authors made such extraordinary claims as denying the human element of Jesus by portraying Him as an illusion or phantom without a material body and not even the New Testament makes such claims and compared to these texts the gospels have been demythologized.

So in order to be consistent then why aren’t these other apocryphal works to be equally considered rather than just using a selective script to form the criteria for their claims?

Additionally the dating of these Nag Hammadi documents, if they were the originals, is long after these supposed authors had lived therefore the falsification of these forged works should not even be considered as credible or authoritative resources in comparison to the biblical data due to their lack of accreditation. You may also counter that this is the same dilemma that faces the gospels and I deal with this issue in one of my other posts

jesusandjews.com/wordpress/2010/02/03/is-the-bible-reliable/

Also one of the groups main proponents is Marcus Borg  who was considered an agnostic upon entering his seminary studies even though he initially retained a favorable view of Jesus. Yet I am not sure how you can disassociate Jesus with God unless he was already predisposed to seeing Jesus as only a mere man to begin with. Additionally, how ironic and contradictory to first accept the biblical claims of Jesus but have doubts about the God of the same source document which is the bible. Perhaps it is this inconsistency which led him towards his revisionist view of the text?

This same kind of logic goes into the Jesus Seminar way of thinking in which they pick through and disseminate or discriminate in reorganizing the gospels by accepting small  portions of the literature while rejecting its overall testimony. This duplicity is largely a result of liberal theology which also influenced Borg to eventually reject the biblical portrait of Jesus.

In addition to this  much of this group is against anything that speaks of super-naturalism and yet Borg claims to latter of had a mystical experience himself which has experientially conditioned his philosophy and understanding independent of scholastics by which he has formed a  mystical new age outlook on the God concept.

Based on this criteria God is preferentially relative and is basically a conglomeration of whatever you want to define as God. This kind of research is not centered on scholarship but upon the whims of a persons emotional state. Hardly the hard proof that is needed to adequately refute or counter the biblical record.

It may be liberating to generalize God because then a person can subjectively reduce God to whatever is meaningful to the individual therefore making a God after their own image and likeness rather than seeking out the source for objective truth.

Borg’s emotional state would be a major player as the willy nilly which has led him through the evolutionary process of formulating a progressive belief from that of the agnostic view to now a more advanced mystical experience which seems inconsistent with the position of the seminar. I am not just trying to pick on Borg but just to emphasize that this isn’t about education but rather it is about preferences against a formidable belief system.

His predisposition is to reject much of the new testament literature allowing him to reconstruct and redefine his own narrative to the person he wants to portray as a historical figure. Jesus is to be reinvented and reinterpreted to whatever makes him significant to the Seminar’s own personal values and beliefs.

By doing so the life of Jesus becomes reduced to being no more then just another religious guru who was influential over a religious body of believers and therefore can be routinely catalogued and categorized as one of the many who has left a legacy or a religious imprint on the heart and minds of mankind but is nonetheless neutralized in His claims of exclusivity as being the only way.

To make a Jesus after ones own image as based on a contemporary mindset in bowing to the god of cultural  correctness is to make a more manageable humanity which is just plain idolatry.

This isn’t  scholarship but rather dishonesty as it purports a bias to influence others to gravitate towards their scandalous agenda to downplay Jesus.

I wonder if the real issue is about hushing the words of the gospels  in order to avoid the difficulties of such intolerant language and views as the exploits of  hell and eternal judgment?

Are they trying to make a more tolerable and universal Jesus to fit their our own self image? A messiah that is more compatible to their own lifestyle and worldview? Kind of like the song of me and Jesus got our own thing going.

In order to accommodate for this kind of ideology the inscripturated pages of the text need to be literally ripped out or whited out when the red lettering seems to conflict with ones own criteria.

Ask yourself what is it that you find offensive about the gospel narrative and then look at your own life and see how they differ and perhaps that may be the truer measure of the matter rather than throwing out Jesus with the baptismal water?

When looking upon the favorability of the gospels it is presented in a historical context rather than it being classified in the mysterious language of poetic or wisdom literature.  There is a coherency which doesn’t intend to deceive or distort  truth by intermingling fact with fiction. Luke intends to give an accurate recording as he states at the onset of his letter and to think that honesty, which is one of the most virtuous aspects of Christianity, would be given over to falsehood would be unthinkable due to its repercussions for all liars to be cast into the fiery inferno of hell therefore making it even more unlikely that they would purposely tamper or alter the contents of the text due to their fear of God. Again you may argue that this is because of a late authorship in which people ignorantly embellished the scriptural data but yet there was such a relatively short period between the autograph and the events that anyone who was to hear an inaccurate or falsified rendering would of easily refuted and rejected such claims.

Another inherently and interesting trait about the gospels is the embarrassment factor which I believes gives some credence to its content.

This can be readily seen in which the heroes of the faith, namely the Apostles, are shown in a less than favorable light while elevating those of lesser stature. Also this literature would have been culturally challenging for a religious system that was intended to have a universal impact of world wide acceptance.

Additionally, why would you purposely leave in numerous scriptural paradoxes without trying to reconcile any perceived differences?

Why would all the disciples live and die for a lie if the resurrection was just another myth? It’s one thing when those who are removed from the event in time and space to have such a devotion but what can you say about the contemporaneous followers that remained devoted to Jesus after his death if the resurrection didn’t really happen? After all it wasn’t believed at this point in history that the Messiah would die and rise but rather it was thought  that once he appeared on the world scene that He would then restore all things. So to preach such a message would be mere foolishness to these people.

The Jesus seminar sets its own criteria in critiquing the biblical Jesus not with the view to prove the text right but to disprove its content. Is this skepticism altruistic or has it resulted from a biased agenda which permeates with unbelief?

Is their approach to this subject a responsible attitude towards biblical scholarship or is it just a hunch?

Since the bible has proven itself as a reliable piece of literature couldn’t they at least give it the benefit of the doubt or the same consideration as any other ancient historical document until proven otherwise rather than prematurely passing a verdict of guilt?

Yet it has been the approach of this movement to censor and silence the biblical Jesus by giving the press a hodgepodge of loose sayings which in the final analysis leaves nothing coherently significant to communicate about Jesus by rendering His character as impotent thus neutering His cause.

In conclusion if there is a God who created us it is conceivable that He is relational towards us as based upon the intrinsic and universal values which we all hold to as being definably human in fulfilling the basic needs of our social and emotional requirements. Are these desires to be experienced only horizontally or could it hold to another dimension along a vertical plane as being our ultimate fulfillment and destiny? Jesus incarnation is coherently compatible with this view as He serves an intercessory role for mankind in fleshing out the intimate needs between God and man.

In regards to purpose and meaning are we an assembly line of a fabricated parts or just another brick in the wall? Are we insignifical atoms competing in a environment of indifference? This kind of logic leads a person to embrace irrational thoughts of nihilism and its no wonder Nietzsche saw suicide as a way of dealing with the outcome of ultimate meaninglessness when he assigned a grave to God.

Don’t get me wrong its not a matter of whether or not a person wants God to exist as our hopes and desires doesn’t create reality except only in the land of make believe. Me hoping there is a God or you hoping there is not does nothing to extend the reality of what is.

The folly of Kant’s philosophy is that we should live as if there is a God in regards to making sense of morality which again doesn’t forcibly answer this ultimate question but rather it just leaves the door cracked open a little just in case someone is there.

If God exists and he desires to be in relationship with us by sending us the divine Logos or Word  in the person of Jesus then is it too much to ask then to capture the content of His inspirational teachings by recording them in the  gospel accounts? Additionally, if we can conceive of His words and teachings being put on a parchment would it be too difficult then for an Almighty God to oversee the procedure for preservation? After all what a waste if  He only temporarily entered into time and space to influence a handful of people just to leave us a few morsels of truth as based on the outcome of the Jesus Seminar folks.

God is speaking to us through the revelation of Jesus, the scriptures, a created order, and by the morality of conscious. He bears witness continually if we are able to use the sensory perception which he has divinely enabled us with. Jesus speaks of ears to hear and eyes to see so that we may know what the Spirit of God is revealing to us.

Finally, perhaps you have at one point felt the need to fill the void of your soul. Maybe the world was not able to satiate your deepest longings and desire and has left you with the feelings of disillusionment  and emptiness in which you have asked yourself “is this all there is to life?”

I realize a few thousand words may not be enough to convince you but perhaps it can get you to at least consider such ideas. After all if there is a God it would behoove you to seek Him out in knowing how to relate to Him.

Also I am not asking that you now pacify your emotions on finding spirituality in counterfeit religions but rather to seek out a relationship with the one who is definably your Creator.

Lastly my simplistic plea is that you would be open and considerate to the possibilities of Jesus and to pray to Him that He would reveal Himself to you in such a way whereby you can entrust your life to Him as Lord and Saviour.

 
How to know God

Atheist and Agnostic Resources

English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism

Other related links

www.bethinking.org/bible/the-jesus-seminar

www.rfmedia.org/RF_audio_video/RF_podcast/Debate-with-The-Jesus-Seminar.mp3

playpopup.asp

jesusandjews.com/wordpress/2010/10/24/da-vinci-code-fact-or-myth/

“Jesus Under Fire”  Copyright 1995 by Michael J. Wilkins, J.P. Moreland, Craig Blomberg, Darrell Bock, William Lane Craig, Craig A. Evans, Douglas Geivett, Gary Habermas, Scot McKnight, and Edwin Yamauchi

Used by Permission from Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530

The Da Vinci Code is supposedly marketed as a semi-factual historical novel which has just enough truth to make the fictional aspect of it believable for the unsuspecting audience. Those that have enough faith to be converted in believing this scandalous mystery have been brainwashed to follow in the steps of yet another cultish movement. The only real conspiracy here is the marketing strategy to sell just another fictional novel by capitalizing on a religious theme.

One of the main actors that did not show up on the big screen is Pierre Plantard whose criminal background along with Dan Brown’s imaginative writing has contributed to making this a best seller.

Pierre Plantard’s name is appropriate as he and his accomplice were responsible for planting these documents that were found in 1975 which contained this privileged and secretive information. Pierre admitted latter in a French court that these documents were fraudulent and forgeries and that it was all a hoax. The BBC did a documentary of this back in 1996 that supposedly Mr. Brown was unaware of.

The DaVinci Code seems to me like a spin off between the “Last Temptation of Christ” and “National Treasure” but more precisely there is another publication that more closely resembles this work which is the 1982 book “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” which is very close to certain aspects of the Da Vinci Code.

This scheme reminds me of many of the shows that air on the History and Discovery channels which have the appeal of expertise when left unchallenged. They may be convincing to the unaware jurors until the defense has had their turn. Unfortunately, the defense is rarely ever given any air time. So it makes me wonder if truth is the real objective to these shows or is it just a matter of sensationalism which adds to the funding and sponsorship of marketing these programs. To hear something novel is a money making opportunity in motivating the action behind the scenes as just another Hollywood production which is selling an illusion as fact resulting in intellectual dishonesty.

This book is as phony as were the superficial props that Ron Howard used to mimic Westminister Abbey. At the outset of the book it states that much of the information contained therein is factual and truthful yet upon closer observation much of it is just lies.

For instance the details of Rosslyn Chapel which was supposedly built by the Knights Templar who were not even around at the time that the Chapel was constructed in 1446. Also the Magen David that was supposedly located on the floor of the Chapel is no where to be found when you look under the carpets.

Another discrepancy is Leonardo’s “Last Supper” which is supposed to contain Mary Magdalene as being at the right hand of Jesus and yet based on Leonardo’s preliminary sketches regarding the painting it shows the names of each disciple as it should appear which identifies the figure as the Apostle John. Not only this but if there is twelve apostles according to the biblical record and there are twelve represented in the painting then it doesn’t take a math expert to realize the correlation. Also if the church was the conspirator in hiding the facts of Mary Magdalene then why did Leonardo put it in a public place on behalf of the church knowing full well that they would have not allowed for such as erroneous depiction of the Last Supper?

These special messages which are supposedly hidden in Leonardo’s works reminds me of those who are dissecting the bible numerically by using computers to find special Bible Codes.

Some people are like the Gnostics who desire to hold to a special knowledge or insight by finding an identity by being “in the know” in acting as if the bible doesn’t plainly say what it means and therefore they are looking for mysterious clues from numerological and artistic data. So whether people are looking within or outside of the bible this research is given over to controversy and speculation not science.

Another error is the date assigned to the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls which He claims were found in the 50’s when actually it was in 1947. Also he claims that this is one of the suppressed gospels when the Dead Sea scrolls had nothing to do with Christianity as much of this work predates Christianity.

Also there is the misinformation regarding early church history which has Constantine deciding upon which gospels to keep and which to eliminate when in reality He was never involved in confirming or denying the canon which was already established 200 years prior to this by the early church fathers and it wasn’t until the council of Carthage which was over 50 years after his death that the canon was made official in order to protect against heretical groups.

It was also said of Constantine that He decided the divinity of Jesus when the New Testament documentation, which is pre-constantinian, depicts both the humanity and the deity of Christ and this doctrine was confirmed as the early church fathers were depicted as being worshipers of Christ

Also what was discussed at the council of Nicea was primarily over the co-eternality of Jesus with the Father in which Brown indicates was a close vote when in actuality it was quite the opposite with an outcome of 300 to 2 in favor of this doctrine.

Anyway I wrote a couple of previous blogs about the divinity of Jesus and the reliability of the scriptures which may be of interest to you in regards to these subjects.

jesusandjews.com/wordpress/2009/10/16/the-divinity-of-jesus/

jesusandjews.com/wordpress/2010/02/03/is-the-bible-reliable/

Additionally the notion that the ancient church was anti- feminine is contrary to the belief and practice of some Catholics today who portray to a fault Mary, the mother of Jesus, as Co- Redemptrix.

The bible does differentiate between the roles and responsibilities of women but is does not devalue human life or diminish womanhood as stated in Galatians 6 otherwise we would have women leaving the church in droves.

Another discrepancy is the legitimacy of the Gnostic gospels which are quite old yet they were not produced until the 2^nd, 3^rd, and 4^th centuries which was long after these people were already gone unlike the dating of the New Testament canon which is first century.

In addition to this there is no evidence to the idea that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and this is not supported by either the canonical gospels or these pseudo gospels of which Brown added his own inspirational idea of Jesus kissing Mary on the mouth and then interprets the word companion as a reference to marriage by citing it as an Aramaic word when these documents were written in the Coptic language, nevertheless the meaning in either language can also refer to friendship.

If these Gnostic manuscripts are gospel then they cannot just be manipulated or used partially to prove some points and therefore the notion of the Gnostics was that they believed Jesus to be only divine and that his physical appearance was merely an aberration or phantom like therefore denying Him any identity as being human contrary to the position of the Da Vinci Code.

I find these Gnostic documents no different then the contemporaneous cults of our times like Mormonism which has added their complementing view of the bible by an extended version of revelation.

So whether it is 2^nd century or the 19^th century timeframe there are those who will try to discredit or deface the biblical Jesus by making a religion after their own image.

The Muslim sees Jesus as no more than a glorified human prophet; for others He was just a good man or perhaps even an angel and yet to some He has been demoted to some sort of demented madman or liar who deluded a group of followers.

If Jesus were asking you today, as He did to His disciples, what His identity was what would your response be and what motives would be behind your premises.

Also would you have a tendency to believe the Da Vinci Code over against the biblical account? If so, is it because of fear or just selfishness in wanting God to somehow be reduced to a fairytale or a myth as well as Jesus being portrayed as a mere man?  Is it because you equate or project the scandals in the church towards the sacred text of the church? Were you perhaps hurt or offended by someone who called themselves a Christian? Is it because you don’t understand the nature of Jesus and in order to make Him manageable you opt to believe in something coherently tangible to your own experience? Maybe it’s because you have a pluralistic world view of complete tolerance and when you hear Jesus say that He is the way, truth, and life it seems arrogant, bigoted, dogmatic, and narrow-minded to you. What is your story and in which way if any do you find this fallacious plot to be attractive in contrast to the gospel narrative?

Also maybe you take a position of passivity on the matter or perhaps you are agnostic in your viewpoints which may really just prove to be a decision for willful ignorance in seeing ignorance as bliss. It’s difficult to ignore Jesus as if He will just disappear. You can not hide from His presence which is felt and seen in much of the world.  To dismiss or trivialize the most influential person to ever live and not take seriously His person would be an oversight of great importance. To diminish Jesus and not recognize His mission is to neglect the benefit of His greatness as the one who removes sin and guilt. The world would have you strenuously exercise your religious muscles of self effort or follow the beliefs of the self help gurus while others would have you deny the reality of guilt altogether yet Jesus deals straight on with this problem in resolving the human dilemma of sin and its consequences through forgiveness and reconciliation resulting in a new nature.

^{Jesus said in Matthew 11:28-30:}

²⁸ “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. ²⁹ Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. ³⁰ For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

In conclusion if you want to call Mr. Brown a marketing genius that is one thing but to refer to him as a historical genius is a misnomer. He did a good job in playing upon the ignorance of those who have just enough religious knowledge to make them dangerously unaware of all the facts.

So my final question is will you base your eternity on the ideas of a fiction novelist? Will you entrust your soul to someone who made “bank” by exploiting others into believing a falsehood? Can you ultimately trust someone who benefited from this transaction or would you rather look towards someone whose benefits are transferred to you?

Jesus laid down His life in service to you in giving His life as a ransom for many. You are the benefactor and primary beneficiary here as the one who profits in this spiritual transaction.

I guess in the final analysis this blog really wasn’t entirely about Dan Brown or the Da Vinci Code but rather I was more concerned about representing and defending the “Real Jesus” against the mythological Jesus of the Gnostics or the demythologizing agenda or anti-supernatural sentiments of the Jesus Seminar and the conclusive findings of this book

You know I thought there ought to be a sequel to this book and movie showing the conspiracy of this material yet I don’t think it would sell as well because some people really don’t want to know the truth but they would rather be entertained instead.

It reminds me when we are temporarily caught up in the moment of a fictional movie and like a dream we trick ourselves into believing the drama and subconsciously we forget that is just the acting out of a storyline and then when we are awakened to that fact we find ourselves being disappointed at that very moment of realization by remembering that it is just a movie or perhaps a book.

In closing, I hope that after awakening you through the content of this blog that it hasn’t disappointed you but rather I hope it has made you realize that this was not a real portrayal of Jesus and in turn unlike the actors of this movie I hope it causes you to be motivated to do real research without a bias and agenda in hopefully discovering the Jesus which is within plain sight.

 
How to know God

Atheist and Agnostic Resources

English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism

Copyright permission granted by Grizzly Adams Productions, Inc. on “Breaking the DaVinci Code”

At a first glance there appears to be some admirable qualities to this philosophical worldview and movement as supporting a sense of equality in the economic and political realms of society.

Based on my research of this dogmatic belief and practice there are genuine people out there who are heralding and supporting this cause out of a sense of sincerity.

Yet you can be sincere and still be sincerely wrong and based upon the present reality  that seems to be the matter.

The blame for this false indoctrination falls upon these dictatorial regimes which uses its tactics of propaganda in the educational system to breed this hyped state of idealism by giving them a pie in the sky mentality. In actuality it legitimizes the need for further control through repressive leadership that is based on fear and persecution as a necessary means to the end of which there is none except for the destructive powers regarding the abuse of  human government where might makes right. These dictators are supposedly transitory or a transitional means to  their supposed utopian state of heaven on earth when in reality their bourgeoisie role as dictators has led to the oppressive efforts of subjugating the entire population as their proletarian surfs and slaves which serve in their interim regime.

Paradoxically if religion was considered to be a means to promote a sense of happiness and hope then Communism has become a religion and a opium for the people who are under this mind altering delusion. These totalitarian governments are not prepared to give up there rule and reign for the common good of mankind and therefore lies are offered in order to control the people by brainwashing them to believe that one day all this will manifestly change to bring about a new world order of peace and prosperity.

The dilemma to this reality has to due with the nature of mankind which is engrossed in  selfishness and that is why human government, laws and morality are an essential means of jurisdiction throughout the world and without this it would not be utopian but rather anarchy and chaotic. A society without law and order will bring about lawlessness and life without moral restraints would mean the demise of mankind. These communist governments realize this and they abuse their powers to the point of limiting and neglecting human freedoms often times resulting in a closed or a restricted society.

No matter how great the strides are to obtain some form of universal humanism it seems as if there is no cure for society because of its design and nature which is intrinsically faltered due to the sickness of the human soul that can not be medicated through the Marxist branded pharmaceuticals of egalitarianism nor can there be healings through the shamans and gurus of socialism. Pure communism is not the antidote to the epidemic of a  diseased world as people will always find creative ways to obtain a fix to satisfy the addiction of selfishness.

The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over with the same results and to be believe in a revolution of evolution has not now nor in the past ever achieved this grandiose view of a human nirvana of enlightenment. As a matter of fact the twentieth century has been the bloodiest of all through it mass murders of society and now by means of our technological advances we are even closer to destroying the whole world through our nuclear arms race of which many of these communistic countries possess.

Where in the world does the communistic philosophy really work and instead of promoting the proletariat it has only supported its agenda by murdering many millions of people in China and Russia under these evil regimes in order to obtain some speculative goal for the betterment of mankind which according to their unfounded interpretation of value has resulted in targeting and killing through the process of classing people for  genocide. This is made all the more palatable when you reduce the sanctity of human life by means of darwinian evolution where mankind is simply reduced to a mere animal and therefore can be exterminated like a diseased rat on the basis of the survival of the fittest.

This movement hasn’t brought  heaven down to earth but rather it has elevated a hellish realm by eradicating precious lives under the pretense of social progress.

If we were to look at the founding fathers of this revolutionary movement as based upon  this quasi-socialistic idealism there seem to be several prophetic voices which has greatly  influenced our world through their vision of inspiration by the foundational efforts of people like Hess, Engels, Lenin, Stalin with the chief cornerstone being Marx himself. In reality this enormous  super structure has been proven to be a weak and fractured society which has white washed walls that seem to have a welcoming appeal of promoting beauty and protection but through a closer inspection there are cracks in its foundation which has created an instability and crumbling of the infrastructure that is not able to weather the political and economic storms which in time will topple this human institution of architecture.

This structure has been heralded as the new tower of Babel but its end result will be like the first one in that it will leave the populace in a state of confusion and separation as its end result.

Anyway Marx and his henchmen would devise a plan that was not altruistic and at its very root they determined to establish a Godless society based on their self interest of establishing an atheistic world order or rather should I say a anti-God movement which was the initial or the main thrust of their campaign in serving a death sentence to God while using the pretext of socialism. These men in their fiery rhetorical sermons were preaching from their communistic pulpits a message of materialism by means of  saving themselves or societies apart from any personage that would be identified as a God figure.

Ironically Marx, Engels, and Stalin were all originally involved in the Christian movement and  whether they were nominal or authentic in there position is still shows the duplicity of these characters who turned from their beliefs by embracing demonic inspiration as evidenced by their associates as well as their family members.

The progression of this movement would gain momentum in a revolution against the very God that they swore allegiance to and yet at a time of crisis in their life they would recant there position. It was said by Marx’s housemaid that when Marx fell sick that he was given over to lighting candles and praying as well as donning what would of been phylacteries which was the Jewish costume for worship. Don’t know what he was praying to but it would have to be something of the metaphysical realm that was beyond the limitations of his humanity. It is also said that before the demise of Engels that he  repented of his position and Lenin even though he maintained a sense of atheism he pronounced upon his deathbed that he was wrong.

In getting back to the life of Marx he didn’t begin as a  socialist and originally he was opposed to this concept by attacking Hess in a unpublished book and also by writing in the German magazine “rheinische zeitung” which demonstrated through his writings his anti-sentiments or oppositional views on the matter of communism by regarding it as being dangerous. However, in due time Marx was eventually converted by Hess as one of his disciples.

In the matter of Marx’s life he was often characterized as one of instability and contradiction to the very theories to which he was credited to as supporting.

Concerning the correspondence between Marx and his father there was a concern regarding Karl squandering great sums of money on pleasures and his possible connection with the occult. Later these suspicions of occult activity would be inferred in his writings and confirmed through his close associates who were known Satanists.

Satanism was also the inspiration of Nazism and Hitler who likewise dabbled in occultic practices which is the only sane conclusion or explanation to this mindless and mass hysteria of ethnic purging.

Anyway one of the claims of Communism is that there is no basis for morals and this was the very pattern of madness which Marx would uphold in regards to the social order of his own life. His life was the epitomy of this amoral philosophy which resulted in self inflicted tragedy that left him both morally and economically bankrupt in the end.

Marx had three children that died of starvation when he had the very means to support his family. He also had an illegitimate child through his maidservant, Helen Demiuth and he played it off by lying about the matter in attributing the child to Engels. Also Marx was often a drunkard and would gamble his money on the stock market. He also was given over to the lust of an inheritance whereby he showed disdain towards his uncle in a letter that he had written while maintaining a selfish interest of being the beneficiary of  his uncle’s  will. Also Marx even forsook the mother who gave him birth by not even attending her funeral.

If Marx was to be seen as a messianic figure who was to bring forth  a new society then how can you take such a man seriously whose life was full of  anti socialistic behavior?  Also if he was to be proclaimed at the great economist then why did he squander his money on speculative stocks and die a poor man?

Marx in turn was a racist and he even regarded the class of proletariats as stupid boys, rogues, and asses. He identified black people as idiots and used the offensive word “nigger” in private correspondence. He even supported the concept of the slavery movement in the United States.

Ironically, he even had antisemitic sentiments towards others who shared in his common  Jewish heritage. He also regarded those of Chinese and German descent in a derogatory way and identified the Russians by means of  their dietary status. In addition to this he referred to the Slavic people as basically being the dregs of society and even Engels chimes in on this note by the paraphrastical statement that the concept of world wide love for humanity is ridiculous.

Also one of his associates saw the real Marx for who he really was and remarked that he was an egotist or a narcissist who tolerated you if you feared him and liked you only if you worshipped Him.

What kind of genius should be attributed to this man who would turn the world upside down with this philosophical advancement but yet in turn was upside down in controversy and hypocrisy to the very ideals by which he is said to have supported.

Lastly Stalin was also influenced by Christianity and even attended seminary but the demonic twist to his bizarre nature was that he foresaw himself as some type of antichrist figure as portrayed in the biblical book of  Revelation. His words were in part fulfilled through the very nature of his prophetic actions which He signified through mass murders and a open hostility towards God .

One example of the cruelty of  Stalin was his agenda  to win the persons trust and then thrust a knife in their back.

When you look at the beginning of these movements they are surrounded by shady individuals who are questionable as based on their conduct which was in conflict with their message and therefore they did not practice what they preached. Yet these men and the leaders of these communistic countries are often deified as gods. To regard these individuals as the standard of being kind and humanitarian is to mythologize their character by making them demigods when in reality they are merely just fallen human mortals.

This kind of sophistry has been the platform for communistic societies as a means to gain and keep control of the power within these unchallenged totalitarian regimes. Please don’t be deceived into ever thinking that murder and death is the best way for political and social advancement as this is contrary to the sanctity of human life and who knows maybe you will be the next to be sacrificed on the alter of this communistic platform.

The bible says that God has come to give us life and life more abundantly and then there is the pseudo god of this age namely Satan who is the arch enemy of God  whose desire is to steal, kill, and destroy. You may not believe or take Satan seriously but your predecessors did and they modeled there lives on his personage. The deception to this whole scheme is that communism portrays itself to be like an angel of light but in reality it is full of darkness.

In closing I have written some blogs on the reality of God which may be of interest to you. Of course they are not exhaustive in scope and they only scratch the surface regarding the issues and questions in which skeptical minds are asking but I do cover some topics as related to the teleological and cosmological arguments regarding origins in relationship to intelligent design.

Atheist /Agnostic/ Non-Theist

It has been my experience that unbelief in God is not so much an intellectual question as it is a moral dilemma. Can you honestly ask yourself if you would be willing to believe in God or is there a deep seated objection in the moral fabric of your soul that wants to assert its own prejudice in the matter? Can you say to yourself in all honesty that if there really was a God that you would readily entrust and submit your life to Him? If you can’t answer with an emphatic yes to the last question then perhaps you have other motives besides some unresolved evidence issues that are floating around in that mind of yours.

In conclusion there are many things recorded in the bible that have a socialistic message of equality and peace that can be readily appropriated now through the new birth that comes by knowing Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and will one day be fully realized when Jesus returns to set up His rule and reign on earth thus putting aside the failings of all human governments in establishing a theocratic society which will not be built on the frailty of human philosophy but through the power of God that is reaching out towards his creatures with love.

Also Christianity is not just a religion but it is an organism that has been commissioned to act and we see this as evidenced through the advancement of society by means of  helping the rights of women, the abolition of slavery, feeding the hungry, by training people to help in social projects as well as establishing hospitals and orphanages. This is something that we are not just doing for the welfare of Christianity but rather we are serving our world community as directed by  the scriptural guidance of the golden rule to do to others what you would have them do to you.

I don’t believe that Communism is the final solution towards fixing broken humanity as we have seen a regress of this movement as indicated by the backsliding of the Soviet Union. Likewise, China under its banner of Communism has failed to eradicate all forms of religion and in turn  they have resolved  to tolerating a certain degree of religious expression as long as it is under the surveillance of their rule.

In spite of Chinas attempt to somehow repress the fullness of religious expression Christianity continues to grow and thrive versus being in a state of remission due to people converting to the Communistic message and therefore Communism has not prevailed as the uncontested champion by knocking out the opponent of all religious ideologies. Today they are about 90 million christians in China and not all of them are registered with the three self patriotic church but they often meet in house churches where they are not under the watchful eye of big brother. Just think how large this movement would be if it was encouraged to grow?

I hope I haven’t overstated my case or been disrespectful towards you but I would just ask that you would seriously reconsider your position and if there is a reasonable doubt then research it and prove it to yourself without the bias of your society which often defines our identity without giving it much thought. Many of our statements are emotional reactions and reflex’s of common responses that are often spoken or believed within our communities.

Anyway I hope I have challenged you to go beyond the limitations of your societal norms to pursue truth wherever it may take you.

Lastly Jesus gave mankind a supreme example of unselfishness in that he laid down his life for us as a supreme sacrifice for our benefit

Matthew 20:28

just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Matthew 11; 28-30

²⁸ “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. ²⁹ Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. ³⁰ For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

 
How to know God

Atheist and Agnostic Resources

English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism

Marx and Satan, used by permission from the Voice of the Martyr’s, P.O. Box 443, Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74005, Tel#918-337-8015, www.persecution.com,  thevoice@vom-usa.org

When contemplating this theory I believe the inquirer must first of all ask themselves what is their motivation in seeking an answer for this question.

Do you have a vested interest in wanting just the facts or is their a bias or prejudice when peering backwards through the ages of time? Perhaps you might ask your self what am I really hoping to find at the end of my quest for truth.

If you honestly and sincerely make a fair approach to this solution then you will be shocked to find out that scientific inquiry has very little to do with the basis of this theory as this ideology has only a thin shell like veneer that has the appearance of substance but in reality only contains hollow assertions to the realm of science and in essence it is projected to be more like a sci-fi program.

What you may not understand is that these so called scientists have an agenda based on their presuppositions which have them searching for selective answers in employing  any type of scientific method towards the gathering and explanation of the data. Their goal can be summarized as supporting an atheistic worldview that is devoid of God and they are committed to manipulate and control the evidence to support their truth claims which makes it more of a philosophy and a religion than a bona fide science.

They can publish something in a journal or a textbook or put it on the television as being factual and they can embellish the content with the aid of professional artists who through imagination and creation can exhibit an impressive display of magical awe. The proponents of this philosophy  can present their case professionally through the credentials of parading Phd’s behinds the scenes of these archaeological discoveries and present themselves with elaborate commentary and impressive footage so convincing that it captivates the audience to have enough faith in their scientific community in which to believe. Yet this is no more than a propaganda scheme which has been preached from the pulpits of academia in order to gain converts.

You might be thinking that you are not qualified to differentiate between truth or fiction on these matters and yet we make all kinds of distinctions and personal decisions without the assistance of others? If anything lets hold these scientists accountable for their information as we do our politicians and other sectors of society. Perhaps you have thought well these are intelligent and educated people who are passionate about their beliefs and committed to their fields of studies and yet that can describe any group of people that is dedicated to a cause whether right or wrong and yet we forget to realize that there have been people that have been so easily deceived over the course of world history by the experts of their times.

Also sometimes we are gullible because it supports something that we want to believe or that we find attractive such as a naturalistic position versus a theistic world view. This is because we want to be alone in the universe as being our own god in charge of our own destiny without considering a hierarchal being that may threaten our state of existence.

This may be one of the reasons why we are so easily indoctrinated by these gurus of science.

Perhaps the determining factor really comes down in this debate as being a matter of a moral choice versus an intellectual endeavor when dealing with the aspects of how one weighs the evidence or should I say lack of evidence in question.

When you actually look at the scientific data and the hoaxes that have been presented in this field it should make the individual skeptical of anything they want to link as being evolutionary.

To begin with we have had more technological advances in this era of the scientific age and yet we have failed to produce all of the intermediary life forms that were said to of existed in order to account for life. This also applies to the anthropologists who have been negligent in providing sustainable evidence to support its theoretical claims that we have evolved from a molecule to a man. Evolutionists can’t even prove the evolution of man within the so called family of beings let alone trace our ancestry back to the primordial ooze of some single cell amoeba.

For instance the jawbone of Ramapithecus has been debated extensively among scientists who are not conclusive over this specimen.

Then there is the Piltdown man which turned out be a hoax in 1953 as they obtained filed teeth and bone that was stained in order to make it appear ancient.

The Nebraska man was fabricated by a single tooth that was found in 1922. A few years later they found the skull that matched the empty socket for the tooth only to find out that it had originated from a pig.

Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man are believed by some evolutionists to be normal European “Homo sapiens”

Yet another example is the Peking man whose bones can no longer be located which is pretty remarkable for such an important find but suspiciously one of the men who helped to find Peking Man was one of the individuals that was also involved in the Piltdown man hoax.

Then there is Java Man who was found by Dr. Eugene Dubois who claimed him to be that of  homo erectus and yet at the end of his life he recanted his statement in which he differentiated the pieces by ascribing the leg bone to homo sapiens while the skullcap to be that of a giant ape or gibbon and therefore he discredited his own claim as being one of our ancient family members.

The Heidelberg man is a single fossil which consists of a lower jaw with teeth and the finding on these skeletal remains still remains elusive.

Another find is the composite skeleton of Lucy which had been assembled from various finds in the vicinity but not in the same immediate location and likewise it has not been conclusively identified either.

Actually there has not been enough pieces of so called fossilized man to fill a shallow grave. In the final summary these skeletal remains are either identified as primate or human not in between.

These evolutionists may have purported to have found a workable model to perpetrate a science of  philosophy which is really centered on disproving the ideology of intelligent design in lieu of their religion of Atheism.

Also when looking at the differences between primates and man there are 31 major differences that are irreconcilable. For instance,the ape has a great toe in which it uses like a thumb for grasping and it is vastly different from the great toe of mankind. Yet without this feature it would have been impossible for their to have been an evolutionary step due to its inability to be able to survive without this essential function of the great toe and  due to the process of the survival of the fittest it would not have proliferated itself to future generations. In addition to this there has never been any tangible evidence found to substantiate this claim concerning the mutation of a migrating toe.

Another example would be the head placement between a man and primate which are different. Our heads are balanced on top of the spinal column for the sake of walking or running in the upright position and their heads are hinged in front of the spinal column for ease of movement upon all fours.  Again no evidence has ever been found to support this transitional phase and yet in just one evolutionary move this would not allow for the survival of the species.

One more point is that the babies of primates are different from humans as the primates after they are born are able to be somewhat independent as they are able to run and climb onto their mothers back while the human child is completely helpless. This one would really take a leap of faith in believing that this devolutionary process would contribute somehow to its survival but rather the concept of natural selection would lead to the extinction of such inferior earthly accidents.

Also what are the chances for a set of ape parents to produce dizygotic twins (male and female) which could survive as the first non-ape human babies and then reproduce offspring of their own in continuing the reproduction cycle.

Some other things to consider in what has been proposed as a apart of debunking the evolutionary myth is that according to the evolutionists mankind has somehow existed on earth for a million years. This of course would create an over population of the human race by theoretically putting the population at 10 to the 5000th power by 1970 which is a number that this world could not even sustain.

Even if you add in wars, plagues, and famines this would still not be enough to account for lower numbers of humans as even in our modern times of globalization and industrialization we continue to be more destructive in regards to the human race in finding more sophisticated means of dealing a death blow to whole populations with the spread of disease and the continuity of warfare which has led this last century to be one of the bloodiest and epidemic of all times.

Sure we have made giant leaps in technological advances in preserving life but this is countered in limiting life likewise by birth control, abortion, infanticide and euthanasia.

Also if population control has been managed by these mass extinctions over the course of human history then where is the fossil evidence concerning these massive graves of people that have died out.

The reality is that the fossil evidence isn’t there because the mankind hasn’t been a resident on the planet for that long and based on some statistical models the present world population supports more of a biblical model of creation of  thousands of years versus the hypothetical evolutionist model of a million.

Lastly the sign of a master designer tends to emerge  in creating and sustaining the gene pool of man as we depend upon external forces that are beyond our ability to control such as what is expressed in the the Anthropic Principle where it takes exactly the right amount of oxygen, carbon dioxide, sunlight, magnetic field, speed of rotation and revolution of the earth, distance from the moon, distance from the sun, ozone, water, gravity, etc. which have to be in the correct amount at the right times and places  and in exact relationships in order to sustain human life.

I think in the final analysis that the evolutionists would like to find another model to hide behind because of the nakedness of their bare bones of evolutionary  theory which has failed to cover up the frailty of their shame.

 
How to know God

Atheist and Agnostic Resources

English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism

Copyright Permission by “The Evolution of a Creationist” by Dr. Jobe Martin

Henry M. Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science (Nutley, New Jersey: Craig Press, 1970), p.75

Shattering the Myths of Darwinism by Richard Milton, Park Street Press,

© 1992, 1997 Inner Traditions / Bear & Co.

There has been no evidence of macro evolution where we have creatures evolving into other creatures.

Even Darwin in his book on the origin of species by means of natural selection affirms this by stating that there was no proof that one species has changed  into another nor could he affirm that if these changes did take place that it would even be beneficial which according to him was the groundwork for his own theory.

This could not even be verified by leading evolutionary thinkers who had come from various scientific backgrounds in order to discuss the mechanism of speciation in Rome of 1981.

Dr. Ernst Mayr, professor emeritus of Harvard, who attended this convention explained that they had no idea what happens genetically during speciation and concluded by saying that this was a damning statement but nevertheless it’s the truth.

Some people have a creative gift to produce colorful animation through the imaginative arts of their faith which depicts how things may have randomly come together from our past. There are also the prophets of  paleontology who are specialized in studying the remains of fossilized bones and are characterized by the scientific community as the gurus of piecing together the past accidents of chance.

When these charismatic individuals present their Hollywood production to their  world wide congregations then there evolves just another religious order which has joined  together the theoretical philosopher  and the faith artist on the basis of their supposed truth and then preached from the pulpit of the textbook as an exact or a precise science. Yet at the heart of this religious movement of naturalistic philosophy is an atheistic agenda which tries to convert unsuspecting souls into trusting them with their PhD of expertise and at best what they have to offer their laity is a doctrine of speculation but in reality they are attempting to brainwash others into their cult of academic dishonesty.

To take the skeletal remains of an extinct animal and piece them together is one thing but to project a whole line of thought on how they fit in the picture of one species replacing another is preposterous. What science can prove is that animals have achieved slight variations within species and that through entropy that older forms of life died and became extinct. What they can’t prove is that newer forms of life evolved from the means of natural selection by achieving some form of superior being as a different or improved species.

Also just because there are similarities between species doesn’t necessitate evolution either but all it ascertains is the common element that animals are designed for a common atmosphere on earth with a common food chain of certain basic chemicals.

This theory of evolution has certain large gaps in the synapses of its thoughts which has led a society into a mindless revolution of evolution in which man has attempted to replace God with science fiction.

How to know God

Atheist and Agnostic Resources

English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism

Frances Darwin (ed.), The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin (N.Y. : Appleton & Co., 1898), Vol.11, pg.210 (Darwin’s letter to G. Benham, May 22, 1863).

Dr. Ernst Mayr, Omni Magazine, February 1983, p.78

Leon E. Long, Geology (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1974) pg.172

The simple cell isn’t so simple after all and if a person was to consider just one of the components of the cell such as the membrane and its function to control and monitor the influx and outflow of critical concentrations of chemicals its enough to see that only a master traffic controller could of coordinated or set in order such a smooth flow of solutions without creating a massive chemical pileup.

This regulating is such an astronomically difficult feat considering that the cell has to tightly control these chemical concentrations within 1/100% otherwise the cell will die.

So how was it possible for all the right chemicals to come together at the same time and place in the proper proportions and then reproduce itself without dieing? Again this looks like a good case for the God case of teleological design.

 
How to know God

Atheist and Agnostic Resources

English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism

It is commonly believed that life began on earth as simplified life forms of algae’s and bacteria’s and yet this bacteria is not so simple as it has to synthesize 3,000 to 6,000 compounds at a rate of about 1million reactions per second according to Dr. Leon of the Geological Sciences at the University of Texas in Austin.

So in conclusion this analysis looks more like a case for the teleological argument for design rather than the haphazard effects of evolutionary theory which is based on the elements of randomness.

 
How to know God

Atheist and Agnostic Resources

English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism

Leon E. Long, Geology (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1974) pg.172

This is what the evolutionists speculate yet this is something that can not be repeated or verified in a laboratory even by using the human element of intelligent design such as what was attempted by Dr. Stanley Miller who tried to synthesize life only to produce amino acids and was unable to achieve a life giving potion through a chemical process.

This experiment was more like a Frankenstein movie where the test tube of the primordial chemical soup is mixed and then given an electrical charge in the hopes of exclaiming “It’s alive”. The outcome of this controlled experiment was no different than this Hollywood stunt and in reality non living chemicals do not have the potential to create or form life. The Law of Biogenesis states that life comes from life. Thus if something is alive it is because it was produced by something else that was already living.

Colossians 1:16,17 states ¹⁶ For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. ¹⁷ He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

 
How to know God

Atheist and Agnostic Resources

English Articles on Atheism and Agnosticism