Category Archives: God

No Alternative

21 Saturday Jul 2018

Posted by in America, Bulletin Article, God, history, Leadership

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

The First Amendment to the Constitution reads this way: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

2 Timothy 3:12 reads, Yea, and all that would live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution (ASV).

It appears to me we live in a time when the First Amendment is less about freedom to worship and more about taking the freedom, such as the freedom of speech. There are some in our country who do not like certain words, phrases and ideas to be expressed. Rather than the community shaming vulgar speech, some make laws (such as “hate” speech) to prevent others from speaking words with which some might disagree. This is called political correctness, otherwise known as PC. The amendment speaks against the government endorsing a religion, that is a religion of the state, this is what is prohibited, nothing more. Courts, however, afraid of many things and people expanded this phrase to mean much more than that. Now, there is the notion of “separation of church and state”, something not found in the Constitution, but in a personal letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Connecticut Baptists in 1802 (www.allabouthistory.org). Because of such a perverted interpretation of the phrase, the moral foundation of our country, exhibit in our government, is all but gone. John Adams wrote to a Mr. Warren that our government can only be “supported by pure Religion or Austere Morals. Private, and Public Virtue is the only Foundation of Republics” (America’s God and Country, p.12). A moral standard comes from one of two sources: God, not God. There is no third option available. Since many in our community reject God, the only alternative is not God. Look where this has led us. Since we, as a country, are confused morally, the internal moral decay that destroyed Rome has already begun its destructive force against ours. It’s only in the Lord’s mind concerning how long He will allow us to stand as a Nation on this earth. We are we to do?

The only thing godly people (Christians) can do is live the life of Jesus Christ. For hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow his steps: who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: (1 Peter 2:21-23). For the Christian, there really is no other alternative. As the opportunity is ours, let us redeem (make the best use of) time (Col. 4:5). In the end, while our country is being destroyed, those who live in accordance with the Lord Jesus will be saved. RT

The Day of Liberty

17 Tuesday Jul 2018

Posted by in America, Bulletin Article, God, Holidays

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

It is this week that many reflect upon the up-coming holiday known as “The Fourth (4th) of July.” The day (evening) in which fireworks are shot into the night’s sky celebrating our country’s independence from Great Britain with our Declaration of Independence. The day of independence was actually July 2nd with the Continental Congress voting and declaring themselves free from the British Empire; after some additional debates and revisions to the Declaration, the final vote and declaration was on July 4th.

In my mind, since I like history a good bit, this is a great day of the year. It has lost its luster (shine), however, because now many in our society have failed to understand our country’s history, the tortuous fighting and laboring to keep it strong. Even by those who still know our history the luster is lost because we take it for granted we will be existing in the entirety of our individual lifetimes. Unfortunately, just this week, I saw a headline that 44% of those asked believe we are headed toward another civil war! As a people we have certainly failed to understand our history and the guiding force undergirding our existence. George Washington did not, however.

George Washington is known by nearly all in our congregation (except our youngest), and it is perhaps not as well known that he strongly believed in God and His Providence. On one occasion (July 20, 1775), he gave this order: “The General orders this day to be religiously observed by the forces under his Command, exactly in the manner directed by the Continental Congress. It is therefore strictly enjoined on all officers and soldiers to attend Divine service. And it is expected that all those who go to worship do take their arms, ammunition and accoutrements [other military necessities], and are prepared for immediate action, if called upon” (America’s God and Country, p. 638).

Maybe our country has forgotten those things that are important, such as God and all things related to His guidance, but what about those who call themselves Christians, Have they?

One would think not, but when attendance with the saints is spotty, when the Lord’s Scripture is not read, when financial support for the righteous cause of the Lord is lacking and when there is a general lack of application in Christian principles in the life of each who identify as Christian, then one has indeed forgotten. Jeremiah long ago spoke (and wrote) some hard-hitting words to those who identified themselves as belonging to God. “For my people are foolish; they know me not; they are stupid children; they have no understanding. They are ‘wise’—in doing evil! But how to do good they know not” (4:22, ESV).

The people of the Lord were foolish because they did not know God, that is, they took no time to learn and apply His will in a faithful and steady way.  As the English Standard Version reads, the Lord called them stupid!

The day of liberty, the day in which your sins were forgiven is to be the most significant day of your life; better than any other day in your life that is associated with some great event (graduation, wedding, retirement, etc). It is the greatest day because on that day, as Paul said, “Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 5:1, emphasis RT).

Is this something you believe? I know I do.  RT

Empty

08 Friday Jun 2018

Posted by in God, Morality, Uncategorized, Wisdom

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

The evil philosophy of secular progressivism generates in society life as meaningless. What inherent value does the political philosophy of progressivism contribute to society? Because of it, the life of a child in the womb has no value; a natural progress from this is the life of man has no value. If one asserts to the contrary, what is the value of life when progressivism uses evolutionary philosophy has it core foundation from which to move? The advancement of science has many looking at life as completely absurd and meaningless. Technology is the religion of the day, and that religious ideology is completely a matter of self-absorption. How is the human condition in life improved by science and technology when science is nothing but organized knowledge to help explain (a value in and of itself), but scientists interpret the data with a completely meaningless philosophy of life (such as life coming from non-life)? And what can a person say about technology?

God is completely eliminated, or almost so, and many live life saying there is no point or accountability. It is progressivism (life has no accountable eventuality) that generates massive murders in society, even if the deranged person is a conservative in his own personal philosophy.

“What’s the point? Let me do much harm and run away with self-extinguishing practices, for there is no one to whom I am accountable!”

On the other hand, Godly wisdom FAR out paces benefits to and for the community, more so than liberal philosophy ever can. It is this way, because liberal philosophy seeks to liberate constraints in many areas of life, one of which is moral guidance. It is self-interest in the immediate that is the focus, not the interests of others toward the end of life. This is empty.

My son, beware of anything beyond these. Of making many books there is no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh. The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.

Making sense of it

21 Wednesday Mar 2018

Posted by in God, history, Wisdom

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

There is no meaning to life without there being meaning in life; but meaning in life is generated from one of two sources. It is either something generated from within, or it is something generated from without. Solomon sought to determine meaning to life from the source within (“under the sun”), but he could make no sense of it. He determined that meaning in life can only be understood when there is recognition that life comes from God, and only this way can one make sense of the perplexities of life that man has contributed to and corrupted so badly, and even then he can hardly make sense of it. Nevertheless, the recognition that life came from God is important, but it is only the foundation from which one builds his/her life; the follow-up is to obey the “giver-of-life,” or God.

Many people (most people) assign meaning to life, but they are not sure if the meaning individually assigned is correct, and British philosopher John Powys saw this clearly in his reply to Will Durant’s inquiry; in the meantime, a person does the best one can. In the end, however, one perhaps wonders why he/she even existed in the first place! What is my place in the world? Why was I born at this time and in this place? What did I do to make the world better? Why did I use this standard of right/wrong rather than that standard of right/wrong? Will anyone remember me? What is my legacy? And on and on the questions are asked. Without clarity of knowledge and understanding, the last remaining bit of hope is taken away when life is over because the individually assigned meaning is vanity.

By Faith

02 Friday Feb 2018

Posted by in Atheism, Doctrine, God, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Well known atheist, Paul Davies, made a comment in 2007 that warrants repetition here. In an extended remark to the NY Times that scientists have to live by faith, he said: “Clearly, then, both religion and science are founded on faith – namely, on belief in the existence of something outside the universe, like an unexplained God or an unexplained set of physical laws.”

This is a significant remark, in my view. More than once, he said this. The evolutionary dogma of many in the world is a a matter of doctrinal faith; thus, those scientist who challenge this faith are on the verge of being “change agents” and, consequently, apostatizing from the faith of atheistic evolutionary origins.

It seems to e this a great opportunity to see (debate) which one’s faith system is more credible. RT

Source of quote is from Jeff Miller in “Does God Exist?” Apologetics Press, Montgomery, AL, pp. 64-65 (2018)

A LIFE TO LIVE

29 Monday Jan 2018

Posted by in Atheism, Bulletin Article, God, Prayer

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , ,

For those not religious, to whom do they pray?

Seems like a good question to me. According to a new survey, one in four non-believers pray when faced with a crisis.

What?

A non-believer prays? Prays to whom? The very notion of being a non-believer is, presumably, not believing in a higher power, that is, not believing in a higher power to even exist!

“For atheists and agnostics, personal crisis or tragedy is the most common reason for them to resort to prayer, with a quarter admitting they pray for comfort or to feel less lonely.”

Okay, I get it, they pray to themselves to make themselves feel better?

No, that is not actually so. They pray hoping there is something higher than themselves, though they admit the “higher-than-themselves” being may not even hear them, much less answer them.

Why pray then? There just must be something greater than the individual person struggling, and even greater than collective man (community) to give answers to a chaotic world.

Katherine Tait (atheistic philosopher Bertrand Russell’s daughter) often said she found what her father was looking for, but never admitted that he was – a higher power than the wisdom of man (p. 189).

To receive comfort and to feel less lonely in a very individualistic western society is a tall order, for try as he might, in the midst of all his friends, a man sits in a corner crying because no one understands him and his failings…wondering why life is even worth living.

“A thief does not come for any purpose but to steal and kill and destroy; I have come for people to have life and have it till it overflows” (John 10:10, Williams New Testament Translation). RT

Moral Lark – An Atheist’s Argument for God’s Non-Existence: Morality (3)

11 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by in Atheism, God

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

“Atheism stresses moral responsibility and the need to make moral decisions appropriate to the here and now, rather than just acting in accordance with religious scriptures and always with a view to a reward or punishment in some unproven after-life. Some of these ideas are addressed in more detail in the sections on the Moral Argument and the Argument from Justice.”

REPLY: What a lark! This is the weakest of all the arguments atheists put forth for the non-existence of God. Take note of the empty remark by Madalyn O’Hair: “An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that deeds must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death.” This is nothing but a straw-man attempt to make fun of Christians. In truth, there is no argument in what she said, and neither is there any substance in her words, otherwise.

Since an atheist cannot not identify that which is intrinsically good or bad, I find this remark interesting: “Religion tends to give people bad reasons to behave well…because a god wants you to do it, or will reward you for doing it, or will punish you for not doing it…” Really? A bad reason? Then there is this: “when good reasons are actually available…out of concern for the suffering of others or for the need to tread lightly on the earth, because it is the ‘right thing to do’.” What makes what he said “good”? Remember, in an earlier piece he said, “In the atheist hypothesis, on the other hand, there is no expectation that the world should be a good place, or that evil should not exist.” If there is no expectation the world is a good place, or should be a good place, then how can “good” exist?

Yes, I know, there is a difference between the quality “good” existing and whether the world is a good place or not. But, in the case of the atheistic argument, there is no standard available to determine whether anything can be ascribed as “good” or not. Remember, it’s nothing but a human construct, thus, it does not really exist. “There is no fixed and unchanging Platonic form or essence of evil. Like good, evil is merely a human construct, and to call something “evil” does not lead us to a greater understanding of evil behaviour.”

Jesus made this same point when He asked of a young man, “Why do you call me good?” He followed up with the clear observation from heaven, “No one is good but One, that is, God.” (Matthew 19:17, NKJV). “Good” as a human construct? If so, then there is no such quality existing in life. The sheer number of people living on earth at one time, allows for the word to be defined however one wants. “Good” as a construct from heaven, allows one to understand the word “good” in relation to God’s holiness. There is no “good” outside the will of a being. Man’s only two options.

One’s ethical behavior is motivated by something. It may be motivated by affection, judgment, love, pressure or something else. It is fool-hardy to say it is not motivated by some response one gains from another. Should a person not steal only because there is fear is getting caught? “No, you should not steal because you take for yourself what belongs to another, and that is wrong.” An atheist can’t tell you why this is the wrong course of action to take (stealing from others), except to say, “This is what I think about the matter.” “So!” another might reply, “What does it matter to me why you think this? Your opinion is of no more value than my own; I think differently!”

This is illustrated well by Bertrand Russell’s daughter, in her book, My Father Bertrand Russell (Katherine Russell Tait, Harcourt, NY, 1975). “In the last volume of his Autobiography, written toward the end of his life, my father wrote: ‘We feel that the man who brings widespread happiness at the expense of misery to himself is a better man than the man who brings unhappiness to others and happiness to himself. I do not know of any rational ground for this view, or, perhaps, for the somewhat more rational view that whatever the majority desires is preferable to what the minority desires” (p. 182).

Thus, the so-called argument put forth by atheists is based on the foundation of moral responsibility (for which there is not rational ground (foundation) is nothing but “mid-air-hanging.” To the atheistic way, a non-prudent person is just as moral as a prudent person. There is no real, substantive distinction between either. If moral values do not derive their existence from “divine edict”, then their existence is derived from the fluidity of man’s thinking. Is adultery wrong? Why? Because society says so? What difference does it make if society says it’s wrong? Society can just as easily say it is right some time in the future! Real substance in that!

Katherine Tait saw the emptiness of atheism, and knew it was not for her – at all. She left the empty philosophy and moved to a moral philosophy that is not of this world.

 

“Imagine” – An Atheist’s Argument Against God: Evidence (2)

05 Friday Jan 2018

Posted by in Atheism, God

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Sub-titled: John Lennon’s “Imagine” thinking

“The Argument from Lack of Empirical Evidence argues that there has not been any reliable, testable evidence to support the hypothesis that God exists despite many attempts, and it is therefore not rational to believe that there is a God. If God interacts with our universe in any meaningful way, then the effects of his interaction must be detectable and measurable, but no such interactions have been reliably demonstrated.”

REPLY: Empirical evidence is an interesting word. Notice this remark: “If God interacts with our universe in any meaningful way, then the effects of his interaction must be detectable and measurable, but no such interactions have been reliably demonstrated.” Detectable and measurable are interesting terms; consider the following.

Let us reword this remark to make a parallel statement. “The Argument from Lack of Empirical Evidence argues that there has not been any reliable, testable evidence to support the hypothesis that evolution from spontaneous generation ever occurred despite many attempts, and it is therefore not rational to believe that the general theory of evolution is true.”

Since there are no known exception to the so-called “laws of science” (Miller 9, 2017), “…the laws of thermodynamics prove the spontaneous generation and the eternality of matter are logically and scientifically impossible” (Miller 36, 2017).

Yet, here we are, existing in a material Universe.

The material world/universe exists. There are only two options to account for its existence; 1) it always existed, 2) it came into existence. The first option is false. “The lingering decline predicted by astronomers for the end of the world differs from the explosive conditions they have calculated for its birth, but the impact is the same: modern science denies an eternal existence of the Universe, either in the past or in the future” (Robert Jastrow, cited by Dr. Jeff Miller in Science vs. Evolution, 2013, Apologetics Press, p. 30, emp. added in book). This leaves the second option of the two available.

The second option of the material universe having come into existence, then, presents us with two additional or “sub” options: 1) it came into existence without a cause, 2) it came into existence by a cause. On the first of the two options, “Until the First Law of Thermodynamics ceases to be a fundamental law explaining this Universe, the spontaneous generation of this Universe from nothing is impossible” (Miller, p. 27). Thus, the first option is false. Miller cites the words of Lord Kelvin, the Father of Thermodynamics: “I do not say that, with regard to the origin of life, science neither affirms nor denies Creative Power. Science positively affirms Creative Power…It is not in dead matter that we live and move and have our being, but in the creating and directive Power which science compels us to accept as an article of belief…” (p. 33).

That leaves the second “sub” option, and from this comes two more options from which the material universe came into existence: 1) God, 2) not God. There is no third option.

John Lennon’s words to his song “Imagine” is wishful thinking, not based in reality. One can imagine there is no heaven, no hell, but that is only because the heart is deceitful above all things (Jeremiah 17:9). The secular world in which we live does not want to give attention to these matters because, if as a society we do, or even on an individual basis, then the questions with the corresponding answers becomes clearer. 1) Where did we (I) come from? 2) Why are we (am I) here? 3) Where are we (am I) going? To a hedonistic society, these profound (and answerable) questions bring meaning and purpose to life, and hedonists (atheists, agnostics, secularists, progressives, liberals, some theists) don’t want that, lest they be deadly wrong in their moral philosophy. In the end, John Lennon’s inquiry/message in the song is meaningless.

The scientific method atheists and agnostics are fond of (especially), leaves them hanging in mid-air, with no foundation upon which they can stand. The material universe has not always existed, but came into existence. The material universe that came into existence did not come into existence by spontaneous generation, but came into existence by a cause. That cause, however, from the perspective of the atheist is not God (a priori)! Who or what then? There is absolutely, positively no evidence that is on their side in this debate. “The creation of the universe remains unexplained by any force, field, power, potency, influence or instrumentality known to physics – or to man. The whole vast imposing structure organizes itself from absolutely nothing. This is not simply difficult to grasp. It is incomprehensible.” (Berlinski, 1998, quoted in Investigating Christian Evidence, 2003, p. 18).

Since atheists/agnostics demand evidentiary based knowledge, and the premises I submitted are evidence, then which of the options, God or not God, will they choose? Will “not-God” be chosen, then by faith (a leap in the dark) the evidence they demand must be forthcoming. We will wait.

 

An Atheist’s Argument Against God

29 Friday Dec 2017

Posted by in Atheism, evil, God, Morality

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

,

“The Problem of Evil (or the Argument from Evil) argues that an almighty creator-god, capable of creating or destroying anything and even capable of suspending or re-writing the laws of nature, such as is envisaged by most of the major world religions, should easily be powerful enough to alleviate all needless suffering in the world, to provide adequate resources for everyone, to prevent the occurrence of fatal or debilitating diseases or birth defects and to prevent all manner of destructive natural disasters. Indeed, an infinitely benevolent and loving god, of the kind envisioned by Christianity, Judaism and Islam, should make such actions his first priority. And yet what we see in the world is very different from that picture – proof positive that there is no such god in existence.”

REPLY: In reply to this argument, the website offers what they call ad hoc replies by some theists, which, of course, is not any kind of counter argument or reply at all. The closest they come to giving a substantive theist reply is in relation to (1) man’s free will (though this is summarily dismissed by speaking of natural evils, or disasters), and (2) since evil can’t be precisely identified, it is nevertheless the case that God (if there is one) should act in such a way to eliminate evil. Atheism can’t account for man’s free will; in fact, an atheist is a materialist, and a mechanical (man is a machine) one at that. Also, since atheist can’t identify evil, their argument structure is made up of hot air, upon which nothing is able to rest.

Note this remark: “There is no fixed and unchanging Platonic form or essence of evil. Like good, evil is merely a human construct, and to call something ‘evil’ does not lead us to a greater understanding of evil behaviour.”

If “good” or “evil” is a human construct, then there is no such thing as an actual good or evil, except as a human being so identifies (constructs) it. Thus, to identify an “evil” from the atheistic vantage point is clearly arbitrary (as is the word “good”)! Consequently, the counter argument against God’s existence goes nowhere because “evil,” as defined/identified by an atheist is “begging the question”!

A second reply is related to moral obligation. “…if God is ‘good’ in the same way that [he] expects us to be ‘good’, then he should act to prevent such calamities…”. Moral obligation does not and cannot prevail in atheism. Moral obligation within atheism is inherently a choice based on one’s desires (related to hedonism); there is no objective or transcendent obligation placed on humanity, not even a little bit! Choices, then, are between options, and no option is necessarily good or bad, right or wrong. Atheists, however, want us to accept the premise of their argument along this line, and it is not to be granted. As soon as they attribute to God a moral obligation, they need to give the basis for that moral obligation. They can’t.

According to atheistic philosophy, the following remark is the foundation: “In the atheist hypothesis, on the other hand, there is no expectation that the world should be a good place, or that evil should not exist.” Judges 17:6 reads, “There was no king in Israel at that time; everyone did whatever they wanted” (GNB). An atheist would simply re-word the passage to read this way: “There is no god in this world; so everyone can do what they want – since there is no real wrong or evil in this world, neither is there a real right or good in this world.”

Atheism is Alive and Well in Congress

04 Wednesday Oct 2017

Posted by in Atheism, evil, God, Morality

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Some atheistic remarks in relation to an abortion law proposed by the House GOP in Congress: “Women across the country deserve better. This law is a continuation of the Republican Party’s assault on women’s reproductive health” (Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Niles). “This bill is a cruel and ruthless attempt to undermine women and attack our rights to govern our bodies” (Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wisconsin).

The Dispatch (A-15, 10.4.2017) speaks of the law having no chance to pass in the Senate, and this may well be the case. If so, then why try? Because the life of children is on the line! “It’s not that bad!” someone might say. The Dispatch cites a 2013 Center for Disease Control stat: “…of the more than 664,000 reported abortions in 2013, 1.3 percent occurred at least 21 weeks into development.” Is there some sort of virtue in this low percentage? That is still over 6,000 murders!

Part of the justification to oppose the legislative effort is in relation to pain suffered. Evidently, according to some, pain in the womb by a child is not felt until “at least 24 weeks of development” occurred.

Thus, the moral standard is “suffering” and “pain,” not the nature of life as given by God. Atheism is strong in the Democrat Party!