FORWARD: REGARDING HOW TO ANSWER MAJOR SINCERE QUESTIONS ABOUT GOD AND THE BIBLE To be fair, some who say they are atheists or agnostics are in fact more kind and Christ-like than many who say they are Christians.  When people have valid doubts they deserve thoughtful kindly-given answers which is the effort made here.  While we may not agree about God's existence or Bible events, still we can continue to be courteous and kind.  In the past I have been attacked by various atheists, some who called themselves "militant atheists," some courteous, some trying to show off with big words, others using the most obscene words they could muster after they found their assumed strong and "logical" points blown out of the water, some sadly making hateful remarks and trying to be personal and bitterly cutting about it.  The notes etc on this page have been drawn together so that other Christians who don't have the time for all the research and writing that have been done here can dip into it and be better helped to defend the Christian faith and fellowship in general as well as belief in a loving God Almighty, Christ and the Bible.  Sincerely, Joe

SCIENTISTS CREATE LIGHT FROM NOTHING, MAY NEXT CREATE NEUTRONS AND PROTONS FROM NOTHING! Scientists at Chalmer University, Gothenburg, Sweden, have created light from nothingness. Assoc Prof Goran Johansson said besides the team capturing photons appearing and vanishing within a vacuum, electrons and protons could be next.  This Casimir Effect was predicted in 1970 by the physicist Moore.  Prof Per Delsing explains that the accomplishment was achieved via a quantum "mirror." Atheists have commonly mocked the idea that either light (Genesis 1:3) or matter such as electrons and protons (i.e. matter, Ge 1:1) could come from nothing.  The less informed atheists probably will continue to do so until the discoveries at Chalmer Universtiy become more widely known. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111118133050.htm

ANSWERING SINCERE QUESTIONS ABOUT  GOD AND THE BIBLE "If God exists why does God permit evils, and even if God does exist and is good then He must be too weak to punish wrongdoers and help the good people!" is a common charge counterbalanced by "Although God is all-powerful and good, if He forced all humans to only be good and caused only good things to always happen, that would make Him a dictator not allowing free-will, causing humans to be no more than robots.   His plan is that after allowing things to mostly freely happen, He will then bring the wrongdoers to justice, reward those who are good, bring back to life the innocents who suffered to heal them and more than fairly reward them so that all will see His perfect justice, love and fairness."  "Why can't we see God if He exists?" is a another common question by many sincere and curious people.  One answer as to why we can't see the energy source for this universe is because to see the source of all the fiery, radiation-filled stars would blind us, could give us radiation poisoning and cause us to die.    So not being able to directly see God is kind and merciful.  We can however see God's existence through the things He has created, like the stars, vast oceans, lovely flowers.  We also can't see the wind or gravity, but we can see what those invisible things do.  Likewise, although, we can't see God directly, we can see what God has done and is doing. Too, the source of all space, energy and matter has provided us with our planet, Earth, tasty food, water, life, and intelligence.  Since a good father is a good provider it really is not illogical to call such a Source our Father. The word God can be used as an abbreviation for "the source of this universe that provides for us in a fatherly manner." Early Earth may have had an atmosphere screening out much of the radiation which now ages humans, and there may have been plants, even a Tree of Life providing antioxidant richer fruits etc for prolonging life. The creative Days could have been billions of years as Hebrew yohm (day) like in English can mean a long time as in "in Rome's day."  Eve made from a rib is no stranger than cloning creatures from individual cells.  We now "resurrect" movie stars via TV, so why is it an impossible idea that the Source of all the universe and living creatures in it can cause resurrection?  Why call it impossible that God could float an axe on water, since even we humans can float  million ton sea-going vessels in water and space vessels in the nothingness of space.  Why make fun of the idea that Christ could walk on water when insects can do so and via devices modern humans may do so, too? Some say the sun could not have "stood still" for Joshua, yet clouds with ice have sometimes reflected light from vast miles over the horizon.  Some say that if Bible censuses of the same tribe differ that proves the whole Bible is false, but they don't note that verses can vary due to children or elderly people being listed in one census but not listed in other censuses that are just for able-bodied men.  A verse may say a certain city was destroyed in one chapter but in another chapter say it was still existing, yet there could have easily been two cities with the same name. One verse says Christ baptized while another says disciples did.  Does this mean the Bible contradicts itself and so is telling lies?  Actually, even today we may say a man built a skyscraper when not himself directly but workers acting on his behalf did the building.  Is God cruel because humans die?  Does God make us die?  In fact, God wanted humans to live forever and warned the very first humans how to avoid death, but they themselves ignored the warning, causing themselves and all humans since to die.  True, God has permitted slaves but He gave laws that they were to not be mistreated but regarded as servants with legal rights and protections.   Slave overseers and owners didn't want slaves to read the Bible.  For example Deuteronomy 23:15 says "Don't return a runaway slave to his master; he's come to you for refuge.  Let him live wherever he wishes within the protective gates of your city. Don't take advantage of him." Some see the idea of a snake talking in the Garden of Eden as impossible although readily admit the earth is filled with amazing creatures including extremophiles that live in water 7,000 degrees Fahrenheit.  No can say for sure what creatures lived on earth in the past, perhaps even intelligent serpents or serpent-like creatures.  Also, if God exists as the Good Spirit, then a Bad Spirit called Satan can also exist and be powerful enough to at least make a snake seem to talk. Skeptics ask why would a loving God punish Adam and Eve so severely with death, but they forget that God didn't want them to die, told them which tree to not eat, and they themselves chose to sentence themselves and their descendants to death.  Skeptics can just as easily blame the actual sources of death such as accidents, wars of nationalism etc. Christ pointed out that God permitted men to divorce women not because God wanted divorces for He doesn't and opposes divorces.  However, God also knew that if He did not allow divorces, it would lead to far more cruelty.  Those who believe in a source for all that exists do believe in God although that is not in the sense of a personally caring God.  Possibly by reading this thoughtfully, some of those will now understand why so many do believe in God in not only a personal way but also in a more objective, logical way.  Understanding the views of others helps us all.

IN DEFENSE OF THE BIBLE AND GOD 1. AN ATHEIST WROTE: How about when God told Eve that he was going to increase her birth pains. Increase them? She never had a baby before!   1. BIBLE DEFENDED: Logically Eve observed other creatures giving birth and noted that in doing so there was pain.  So she was able to understand what God meant -- that as a result of her own misdoing her own birth pains would increase when she began to have children.   2. AN ATHEIST WROTE: How about the rainbow?  2. BIBLE DEFENDED:  The apparent assumption is that it is not logical to think there was no rainbow until after Noah’s Flood but in fact prior to the Flood there may not have been light shining through a watery prism to create a rainbow effect due to a then denser mass of moist clouds being overhead.   3. AN ATHEIST WROTE: god also created plants before he created the sun. he also created day and night before the sun.  3. BIBLE DEFENDED: One assumption is that the Genesis creation was chronological, an unwarrented assumption.  Further Genesis 1:1 says God created “the heavens” and the earth, so indeed notes that the creation of the Sun as part of the heavens (Ge 1:1) which included the sun and stars before creation of the plants (Ge 1:11).  Also creation of the sun (Ge 1:1) goes before days and nights noted at Genesis 1:5.   4. AN ATHEIST WROTE: in chapter one he first creates plants, then animals, then humans. in chapter two he creates first humans, then plants, then animals.  4. BIBLE DEFENDED ON JWD FORUM: False for Genesis 2:7 says God created man; Genesis 2:8 says God HAD created a garden in Eden not saying "when" He had made it, and Genesis 2:19 says God HAD formed animals from the ground also not saying "when" He had made them.  The word HAD means “at some time previously in the past” without saying exactly when.   5. AN ATHEIST WROTE: First contradiction: 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.'  So where did our heavenly father reside before he created the heavens?  5. BIBLE DEFENDED: The Bible identifies 3 heavens: 1. the very presence of God, 2. the starry heavens including our sun, 3. the sky or atmosphere of our earth.  II Corinthians 12:2-4 where Paul says he knew someone who went to the “third heaven” and traditional Jewish teaching teach 3.  God is of infinite existence as time itself is and where He existed before the starry heavens with material atoms is therefore not a physical place but a non-material, energy-like or spiritual place, the third heaven.   6. AN ATHEIST WROTE: I don't know if anybody has brought up that God created the animals as pairs, and he so happens to create Adam by himself.  I smell BS!  6. BIBLE DEFENDED: Genesis doesn’t say if the animals were created in pairs, only that they were created.  For example a male cat may have been created then later a female cat or vice versa.   7. AN ATHEIST WROTE: Anyone else think it a bit odd that the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the entire universe was terrible at hide-and-seek?  Also the fact that he wasn't aware they'd eaten from the tree until the whole "nakedness" thing came up?  (Genesis 3:8-11)  7. BIBLE DEFENDED: Look again for those scriptures don’t say God didn’t know where Adam and Eve were hiding.  He knew where to go and call out to them “Where are you?”  You can know where someone is, such as your child, and yet call that out to them.  The same is true about asking if they had eaten from the tree with dangerous fruit.   8. AN ATHEIST WROTE:  the bible says if all of jesus deeds/utterances had been catalogued, the entire world would not be able to contain them. (ok sure it's poetic fine)...but hey could we at least maybe get ONE BOOk called the book of jesus?  jesus himself the son of GOD, who should of been able to write 30,000 words per second...could not of written just one damn book for us?  8. BIBLE DEFENDED:   Most non-writers busy doing great things do not write books, but when they do it is usually  when old and retiring as with some of the U.S. Presidents.  For example Washington, Lincoln and Buddha wrote no books.  Other people wrote for them.   9. AN ATHEIST WROTE: we have a collection of the same 5 sentences he (Jesus) spoke, repeated over and over again in the various greek books of the bible...that's it?  and one time he was a kid and mary was like omg where is jesus?  he's in the temple.  RIVETTING!!!!  9. This implies something False for Christ said far more than 5 sentences.  True, the Bible doesn’t say a lot about Christ’s youth but it definitely says far more than that Mary once went to look for him in the temple.  We are told about his birth, his going to Egypt, about his mother, step-dad, siblings, home town etc.   10. AN ATHEIST WROTE: tell me, what is in the bible that is literal?  the book of revelation?  sounds like a bad acid trip. 10: BIBLE DEFENDED:  Whether viewed as symbolic or literal, Revelation’s forewarnings have for some 2000 years helped Christians stay alert and thus saved lives, its speaking of powerful beasts providing  vivid imagery easier to remember and benefit from.   11. AN ATHEIST WROTE: First contradiction ?  Gen 1:26  And God said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness: ...  how many God are there ?  One doesn't learn TRUTH and LOVE in the bible ... it is an experience in the spiritual realm 11. BIBLE DEFENDED: Besides God Almighty there are many other spirit beings such as the angels.  At Christ says “I am the way, THE TRUTH, and life.”  John 3:16 says he gave his life up so that ALL might live including the commenter.   12. AN ATHEIST WROTE: Resurrections don't happen in the natural world and until they do, there is no reason to believe that Christ was resurrected. BIBLE DEFENDED: Not in the “natural” world insofar as we know of but in man’s world everyday TV and movies resurrect long-dead stars such as Marilyn Monroe and Elvis, and logically the Creator of the human creators of such movies with resurrected stars was able to resurrect Christ and can do so for us too.

DOES CHRIST'S SAYING "THE EYE IS THE LAMP OF THE BODY" HAVE SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT? Actually, yes, there is scientific backing for Christ’s saying at Matthew 6:22 "The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light.” Such scientific backing came in 2011 as noted at this link: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/article/visible-light-induced-ocular-delayed-bioluminescence-possible-origin-negative-afterimage  Abstract: The delayed luminescence of biological tissues is an ultraweak reemission of absorbed photons after exposure to external monochromatic or white light illumination. Recently, Wang, Bókkon, Dai and Antal (2011) [10] presented the first experimental proof of the existence of spontaneous ultraweak biophoton emission and visible light induced delayed ultraweak photon emission from in vitro freshly isolated rat's whole eye, lens, vitreous humor and retina. Here, we suggest that the photobiophysical source of negative afterimage can also occur within the eye by delayed bioluminescent photons. In other words, when we stare at a colored (or white) image for few seconds, external photons can induce excited electronic states within different parts of the eye that is followed by adelayed reemission of absorbed photons for several seconds. Finally, these reemitted photons can be absorbed by non-bleached photoreceptors that produce a negative afterimage. Although this suggests the photobiophysical source of negative afterimages is related retinal mechanisms, cortical neurons have also essential contribution in the interpretation and modulation of negative afterimages. (Pubmed Data : J Photochem Photobiol B. 2011 May 3; 103(2):192-9. Epub 2011 Mar 23. PMID: 21463953) Skeptics will say, well, Christ just made a lucky guess; but if so how then did that happen?  He could have just as easily have called any other part of the body a source of light, and there are numerous other parts.  Instead he zeroed in on the eye.  If there were only ten body parts then multiplying 1*2*3*4*5*6*7*8*9**10 = odds well surpassing 3 million against his making such a luck guess.  That's mathematical fact.  Somebody else will respond, well, he knew the human eye has to do with light as it sees light, so that's why he like anybody else made the statement.  Actually, most all people would know the eye takes in light but extremely few would ever guess that it also can emit light. Christ was also a "lucky guesser" about other things that science has now confirmed.   For example he said that when we give something that helps others we get back a blessing for it.  Science has confirmed that indeed if you give to others then you are rewarded with positive feedback, an enhanced feeling of joy.  True, he commonly used parables, which are illustrations based on real-life events, but what he said in those is also fully worth analysis.  For another example he said mustard seed is the smallest of seeds though from a big plant.  Mustard plants grow very high in the Middle East and although there are seeds of other plants that are smaller, the smallest seeds of any plant that can be seen by the human eye without a magnifying glass or microscope are..... mustard seed.

TOWARD AN EXPLANATION OF NOAH'S FLOOD Local, Global, Or Both?  The Bible itself says the Flood covered the entire "earth" or, in Hebrew "erets," and the word erets can mean either the whole planet or a very large land area.  But in any case it was not just another large yearly flood.   A possible explanation is that it was both a large local Flood that however also raised the level of the oceans to at least some extent around the entire globe.  Genesis 7:19-20 says "Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered," and 15 cubits works out to about 20 feet.  (See also Genesis 7:18-24, 8:1-5). Geologists William Ryan and Walter Pitman have had a theory that about 7,500 years ago when the Ice Age ended and glaciers melted.  They have envisioned a wall of salty seawater suddenly thundered through what is now the Bosphorus Strait at 200 times the force of Niagara Falls from the Mediterranean into what is now the Black Sea but was then a freshwater lake.  Daily it lifted the water about six inches (15 centimeters) and flooded coastal farms.  Possibly this event also helped form the basis for the story of Noah's Flood.  If the Black Sea flood was Noah's Flood and it lasted forty days, going up 6 more inches daily, then the flooding would have amounted to 240 inches, that is twenty feet or 15 cubits in the local area, surely enough to have also caused an uplifting of all the oceans as well.  Even if that uplift was only a fraction of an inch as some claim, still the effect was also global. In 1999 and 2000, Robert Ballard who had previous discovered the ship Titanic found clear evidence that the Black Sea had been a freshwater lake.  They also found the remains at its bottom of a home site and a ship, supportive of the geologists' theory. Now this is not to say one way or another that the catastrophic Black Sea flood was or wasn't Noah's Flood.   A major doubt as to why the Black Sea Flood may have been Noah's Flood is because of the timing for it.   The Black Sea Flood is estimated as at about 7500 years ago or 5500 B.C.  Some Bible chronologists think Noah's Flood was at or about 2340 B.C. We are still too close to 1999 and 2000 when Robert Ballard made his Black Sea discoveries.  As more time goes by, it is likely that the datings that we now see batted about for the Black Sea and Noah flood events and other floods of great magnitude will become better known.    With time good science and the what is in the Bible tend to meld.    Genesis (7:21, 9:1) says that all the people besides Noah and his family in the "earth/erets" area died.  Therefore, if the 2340 B.C. reckoning is correct, then the Flood was predominantly local for many historical records exist showing that human civilizations such as at Egypt, Sumeria, Mohenjo-daro and on around the globe existed without being drowned.  CLICK TO LEARN MORE

WAS ALBERT EINSTEIN AN ATHEIST OR A PANTHEIST? Einstein believed in the universe having a Source and was fascinated to learn more about the Source although he does not appear to have thought of God as being personal or anthropomorphic.  That makes him close to having been a Pantheist which is a person who believes the Universe is both the Creation and its own Creator, and atheists have often called him a Pantheist.  However, being a Pantheist is not the same as what Einstein was, and even if it were, at that a Pantheist is not an atheist but rather a believer in all the universe being God and or God being the universe. Albert Einstein letter April 26, 1947 to Murray W. Gross: “It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropomorphic concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near to those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order and harmony which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem—the most important of all human problems.” Albert Einstein, January 1, 1951 in letter to his friend Maurice Solovine: “I have found no better expression than ‘religious’ for confidence in the rational nature of reality as it is accessible to human reason. Wherever this feeling is absent, science degenerates into uninspired empiricism. ... I cannot accept your opinion concerning science and ethics or the determination of aims. What we call science has the sole purpose of determining what is. The determining of what ought to be is unrelated to it and cannot be accomplished methodically. Science can only arrange ethical propositions logically and furnish the means for the realization of ethical aims, but the determination of aims is beyond its scope. At least that is the way I see it.”

HOW TO ANSWER CHARGES SOME ATHEISTS MAKE THAT GOD IS A MASS KILLER, BABY-MURDER, EVIL ETC Hosea 13:16 says women and children in Samaria would be killed by "an invading army," their little ones dashed to death," "pregnant women ripped open by swords," BUT it doesn't say God wanted that to happen. He said it would happen but didn't order it done. Sometimes people try to make God look evil by noting when “small boys” made fun of Elisha being bald, God had bears come and eat them. (2 Kings 2:23-24) They don’t note that some translations say they were not “small” boys but boys, youths or young men.  God knew their hearts, minds and intentions which, if the bears had not come may have included their murdering Elisha. Unless you go back to Ezekial 8 which explains it was a vision not reality, Ezekiel 9:5-7 seems to say God ordered the murder of even children in Jerusalem.  Those opposed to God often cite the chapter 9 passage while leaving out the Ezekial 8 explanation. Sometimes people try to make God look evil by noting when “small boys” made fun of Elisha being bald, God had bears come and eat them. (2 Kings 2:23-24) They don’t note that some translations say they were not “small” boys but boys, youths or young men. God knew their hearts, minds and intentions which, if the bears had not come may have included their murdering Elisha. At 1 Samuel 15:3 God does say “put to death men and women, children and infants” and livestock of the Amalekites.  Why?  Verse 2 does not elaborate but states the Amalekites had done something to the Israelites when they came out of Egypt.  True, we don’t know exactly what terrible deed(s) had been done; and this also means that we are not in a position to judge against our Creator who gives us all (both good and bad) many gifts including that of life itself. Those attacking God note that Exodus 23:23 says God will have Israelites destroy the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites, and Jebusites.” They do not note the those peoples for example burnt their own babies alive in order to please their false gods.  Nor does it note that good people among those groups had options of repenting, converting, and doing God’s will, which when viewed in an overall objective manner, shows love. John 3:16 says God sent Christ to the world so that all might be saved thanks to the resurrection based on Christ's ransom sacrifice. In Numbers 31 God told Moses to have the Israelites fight against the Midianites (verse 2) but did not say kill all the women or children.  However Moses told them when they came back from victory to kill even the captured boys and women although not the girls.  Scriptures do not say God was pleased and note that at verse 2 God had told Moses that he was to soon die (“be gathered to your people.”)  That Moses’ anger was all too great is clear also in Numbers 32.  Although zealous for God and allowed to see the Promised Land from atop Mount Nebo, God had him die there without getting to enter the land due to also having been hot-headed in the past, heatedly crediting himself instead of God for water that came from a rock which he had struck.

WHERE DID ADAM AND EVE'S CHILDREN GET THEIR MARRIAGE MATES FROM? Question: Adam and Eve's children had to marry one another and later their own children had to marry one another as first cousins.  Wasn't this incest and wouldn't it have caused gross physical problems?  Answer: Their genes were still close to perfection thus diminishing the odds for their children to inherit gross physical problems.  No law then existed about close genetic marriages, that is incest, so that was also not a problem at that time.

WHAT ALBERT EINSTEIN SAID AND THOUGHT OF CHRIST Albert Einstein said of Jesus Christ of Nazareth: 1. “As a child, I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.”  2. “Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot.”  3. No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.” ["What Life Means to Einstein: An Interview by George Sylvester Viereck" in The Saturday Evening Post (26 October 1929) p. 17.] We know that this is an accurate quoting of Einstein for in A Life (1996) by Denis Brian, when asked about a clipping from a magazine article reporting his comments on Christianity as taken down by Viereck, Einstein carefully read the clipping and replied, "That is what I believe." In George Sylvester Viereck's interview of 1929 he also asked Albert Einstein, "You accept the historical existence of Jesus?" Einstein replied: "Unquestionably. No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life. How different, for instance, is the impression which we receive from an account of legendary heroes of antiquity like Theseus. Theseus and other heroes of his type lack the authentic vitality of Jesus." Viereck then said, "Ludwig Lewisohn, in one of his recent books, claims that many of the sayings of Jesus paraphrase the sayings of other prophets."  Einstein answered, "No man can deny the fact that Jesus existed, nor that his sayings are beautiful. Even if some them have been said before, no one has expressed them so divinely as he."

EXODUS GOD IN THE BURNING BUSH: Scientists such as Colin Humphreys and epidemiologists John Marr have suggested logical, natural theories for the amazing events in the Bible book of Exodus.  From what they say, in the land of Midian, the man Moses came before where natural volcanic gas rose from the ground and set an acacia bush on fire.  When set on fire most plants burn up but the Bible says the acacia did not, and testing shows that when an acacia that grows in that area is torched it burns but does burn up or not quickly so as do most plants.  Also theoretically, the gas fumes could have caused him to hallucinate that he had heard God speaking to him.  Even if correct, though, the timing for these events and the other events is incredible in that they led to Moses returning to Egypt and in the face of death telling Pharaoh that he must let the Israelite slaves go free, the ten plagues, the parting of the Red Sea etc. THE TEN PLAGUES: As to the plagues, the Nile River seemed to become blood because dinoflagellates or toxic red algae had rapidly multiplied in the river.  The red algae then killed fish including those which normally ate frogs.  This caused frogs to multiply and come onto the land.  Also, gnats and flies came ashore because of the dead fish.  The tainted water eventually killed the frogs, causing gnats or lice and flies to multiple.  This caused animal diseases such as African horse sickness and boils. There was also hail, locusts (Schistocerca gregaria) and sandstorms.  The frogs and insects also transmitted poisonous molds or a virus that grew within the top layer of grain in all regions of Egypt except Goshen where the Israelites lived.  The Egyptians by custom gave double food amounts to their eldest sons and livestock so those got double amounts of the poison, killing the newborns throughout Egypt but leaving the Israelites unscathed.  The trigger event for the plagues may have been an erupting volcanic.  For example in modern times Lake Nyos in Cameroon, Africa, erupted in 1986 and this led to a similar chain of disasters. CANES THAT BECAME SNAKES: Colin has noted that a book by Zimniok (Van der Voort, 1992) describes how India’s snake-charmers handle cobras that still have fangs.  They have helpers distract a snake's attention while one approaches it from behind, grabs it, strokes it a few times then presses a spot on its neck. The snake then stiffens like a cane, staff or rod in the snake-charmer’s hand. The catalepsis continue a while, then the charmer throws the snake, causing it to revive and resume its threatening appearance.  A larger snake, of course can devour smaller snakes.  Exodus 7:12 says "For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents: but Aaron's rod swallowed up their rods PARTING OF THE RED SEA: When the Israelites arrived at the Red Sea with Pharaoh’s army in pursuit, the water was pushed back by a very strong wind effect called wind setdown.  Exodus 14:21 says the powerful wind, by conjecture possibly up to 100 mph, blew from the “east,” in other words against the Israelites’ direction of march.  This would have made their walking across the dried sea ridge tedious and slower although not impossible. However, Exodus 12:38 says the Israelites and those with them exited Egypt with “large droves of livestock, both flocks and herds.”  Since the livestock, flocks and herds were likely driven in front, the livestock blocked most of wind’s direct force, enabling the Israelites to go even more easily across the wind-dried sea bed. Further, oxen, sheep, goats etc walk on all fours instead of with two feet, which gave them greater ability to walk in a much more stable fashion and thus also move more rapidly against the strong wind. MOUNT SINAI: The real “Mount Sinai” of Exodus was more likely Mount Bedr which in modern Saudi Arabia not in the Sinai Desert.  Since the mountain in the Bible shook, emitted fire and smoke (Exodus 19:18) that describes the active volcano of Mount Bedr which appears to be in the area the Bible has called Midian. Mount Horeb, which is what most people have assumed was the right mountain, is in the Sinai Peninsula and it is not active.   TABLETS WITH THE TEN COMMANDMENTS: Benny Shanon, a Hebrew University psychology professor has suggested Moses may have been taking some kind of hallucinogenic substance similar to ayahuasca at the time that he went up and later came down the mountain with the tablets that had the ten commandments.  The thunder, lightning and sound of or like a blaring trumpet may have been from the mountain having volcanic rumblings or it too may have been caused by a hallucinogenic.

THE OMEGA POINT AND BRANE COSMOLOGY,  NEW SCIENCE THEORIES SUPPORTIVE OF SPRITUALITY Frank Jennings Tipler III (b. 1947; BS at MIT, PhD at U of Maryland) is a Tulane University mathematics and physics professor who argues that the known laws of physics will enable events that are “controversial” to atheists and skeptics within and outside the scientific community because they seem to parallel religious concepts.  His book The Physics Of Immortality argues that intelligent species will enable scientific progress to grow exponentially so that it will become all powerful and control the entire universe.  The resulting computing speed, information storage and power will enable the thwarting of any danger to the universe and the resulting infinite "experiential time" (immortality) will be used to run computer simulations of all intelligent life that has ever lived in the universe, an affect called "the resurrection of the dead." Computers of infinite resources able to use the entire universe for computations are termed The Omega Point, which religionists would term “God.” Beyond what Jennings writes, it is worth noting that many star systems have existed for billions of years beyond the life of our own.  Further, any intelligent species could already have long since developed computers like or similar to what he has written about. Most cosmologists now believe that whatever happens to our universe will depend on its overall shape, its amount of dark energy, and the equation of state which determines how the dark energy density responds to expansion of the universe. According to recent observations the expansion rate of the universe has been increasing ever since 7.5 billion years after the universe’s beginning called the Big Bang.  This would mean we live in an “open” universe which may expand forever, but there are other theories that predict a closed, steady state or oscillating universe. Albert Einstein in 1930 briefly theorized an Oscillating universe.  This would mean that our universe follows an eternal series of oscillations, each starting with an explosive big bang causing expansion until slowed by gravity followed by the universe’s matter eventually collapsing inwards and thus ending with a big crunch, this resulting in yet another big bang, the entire process repeating forever.  Until recently revived, Einstein’s Oscillation theory was discarded because work by Richard C. Tolman in 1934 said Einstein’s theory was faulty since according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, entropy can only increase, meaning successive cycles grow increasingly larger, so that, when viewed back through time, the cycles of expansion and collapse before the present become shorter and smaller thus again leading to a Big Bang and so not replacing it.  However, a possible solution came in the early 21st century when dark energy was found. In 2001 Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University and Neil Turok of Cambridge University proposed a "brane" cosmology model of the creation of the universe. The new theory describes a universe exploding into existence not just one time, but continously over time. It has the potential to explain why the mysterious repulsive form of energy called the "cosmological constant" which is accelerating expansion of the universe, is several orders of magnitude smaller than what the Big Bang model predicts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Tipler  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscillating_universe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Steinhardt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Turok http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology http://www.amazon.com/Endless-Universe-Beyond-Big-Bang/dp/0385509642 http://books.google.com/books?id=Jp6gJCuvj-kC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%2B%22Endless+Universe%22+%2BTurok&source=bl&ots=2WnZj1d7W8&sig=D8cnOgJBdZOcluEfyyIkrKzT2kw&hl=en&ei=zoBqTaSgNoe-sAOJobnJAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

SCIENTISTS EDGING TOWARD GOD? Theory Of A Designer Universe http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/7972538/Are-we-living-in-a-designer-universe.html Article by John Gribbin

WHAT ALBERT EINSTEIN THOUGHT OF BOTH ATHEIST AND NON-ATHEIST BIGOTS Einstein chided and berated all bigotry whether from atheists or non-atheists, stating: “The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer.”  Further, after the Union of Orthodox Rabbis expelled a fellow rabbi for disbelief in God as a personal entity he noted “To take those fools in clerical garb seriously is to show them too much honor.” From this and related quotes we know that he was not opposed to the good exercise of religion but to the bad exercise of it.  All bigotry is an impediment to the advancement of the human mind and positive social development.

PARALLEL UNIVERSES OR MULTIVERSE "STRING THEORY" AND GOD According to the physicist Brian Greene our universe may either 1. be extremely big but finite, or 2. else it may be infinitely big.  If it is infinitely big then matter can arrange itself in only so many ways which then means that our infinitely big universe has infinite parallel universes.  Greene says recent findings in physics and astronomy indicate our universe may be only one of many universes within a larger multiverse.  Greene has spent 25 years in studying string theory which is a way to resolve mathematical conflict between the Theory of Quantuum Mechanics and Einstein's Theory of Relativity.  He is excited that it may be possible to test string theory by using the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research.  Researchers would crash particles against each other then see if some of the energy has vanished, not measurable from inside our own universe.  String theory says the universe consists of very small "strings" that vibrate in 10 or 11 dimensions which we cannot see.  If they exist, they can explain everything from subatomic particles to gravity and speed.  String theory also allows the existence of large objects comparable to huge two-dimensional flying carpet or membranes.  The possibility of having this tested is very exciting to Greene and others.  Source for the preceding: http://www.npr.org/2011/11/04/141931728/exploring-the-hidden-reality-of-parallel-worlds So, how does Greene's interest as a physicist tie in with God?  Well, if the universe is infinite in terms of different dimensions such as length, width and breadth, still other dimensions that the human eye cannot see and our minds not easily grasp, then the source for all such existence is all the more awesome, deserving of our fullest attention and contemplation.  As scientists bear down toward better understanding of our own universe and or multiverse, what they are doing is also shining a greater light upon its Source, thus worthy of attention from Christians too.

GENTLY REASONING WITH THOSE WHO WERE SEVERELY BURNT When an atheist says "all" religion is bad, gently ask him/her how many atheist hospitals, atheist food banks, atheist other charities there are around the entire planet?  Even how many there have ever been?  On the other hand, the number of Christian charities are innumerable and span some two thousand years.  The 10% or so of ExJWs (in the U.S.; about 17% or so in Europe) that are atheists tend to think all religion is bad because they got burnt severely by a cult.  Kindly point out that Christianity has good, average and bad branches.  Burnt ExJW atheists were in a bad branch, but there are also the average and good branches of the bigger tree.

REBUTTAL TO A LETTER FROM AN ATHEIST First is the atheist's letter written to Dr. Laura Schlesinger in 2000.  Farther below appear first what the scripture actually said and then a comment refuting the atheist. Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination .... End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them. 1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? 3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. 4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? 5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? 6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination? 7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here? 8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? 9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? 10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. Your adoring fan, James M Kauffman Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia (It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian) Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination .... End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them. 1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? Leviticus 25:44 says for the Israelites to not conduct buying and selling of slaves within Israel although it acknowledges that those wanting slaves would buy them from other surrounding nations.  So God did not approve there being slaves but recognized that slavery existed and other scriptures show that He gave Israel laws to see that the people who were held as slaves would be treated with greater respect and compassion.  The writer doesn't point this out, showing here and elsewhere that his effort is to smear God with the false accusation that God is pro-slavery and vicious. 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? Exodus 21:7 A young woman who was sold by her father doesn't gain her freedom in the same way that a man does.   Tthe writer relies heavily on readers not looking up the scripture and assuming from his own vocal claims that indeed God is pro-slavery instead of acknowledging that God was not promoting slavery but rather that since humans used slaves He was giving laws ordering that they be treated more humanely, with greater dignity and compassion, more like an indentured servant with rights. 3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. In fact Leviticus 15:19 says "When a woman has her monthly period, she remains unclean for seven days, and if you touch her, you must take a bath, but you remain unclean until evening. 20-23Anything that she rests on or sits on is also unclean, and if you touch either of these, you must wash your clothes and take a bath, but you still remain unclean until evening. 24 Any man who has sex with her during this time becomes unclean for seven days, and anything he rests on is also unclean." Again the writer tries to be funny while making fun of God's ordinances for helping the people of Israel including the women.  Women do feel unclean at such times and for health reasons including apart from any religious considerations bathing and washing do provide benefits such as better protection of health. 4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?   Leviticus 1:8-9 Wash the bull's insides and hind legs, so the priests can lay them on the altar with the head, the fat, and the rest of the animal. A priest will then send all of it up in smoke with a smell that pleases me. The writer is mocking God for saying that the scent of a smoked, cooked bull pleases God.  Perhaps it is because he does not think God exists and created the sense of smell.  It is also possible that not the literal odor pleased God so much as knowing that the Israelites were obeying His ordinances or laws that would benefit them via improved health etc. 5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? Exodus 35:2 says "You have six days in which to do your work. But the seventh day must be dedicated to me, your LORD, as a day of rest. Whoever works on the Sabbath will be put to death." The writer makes fun and assumes God is way too unduly harsh in saying someone working on the day that God wanted to be kept for rest was to be executed.  In fact the day of rest was for many Israelites and their servants the one and only day that they had for rest and recooperating from daily work and so once the observation of it broke down, then for those who were physically weak, it was a source for death.  The writer simply shows he is not thoughtful but quick to make fun and smear. 6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?   Leviticus 11:10-12 You may eat anything that lives in water and has fins and scales. But it would be disgusting for you to eat anything else that lives in water, and you must not even touch their dead bodies. The writer is mocking the idea that water creatures without fins and scales, that is animals such as eels, mud puppies and water mocassin snakes, are disgusting or abominable for eating.  They are interesting creatures but some of the things they consume are indeed not fit for healthy human consumption.  7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?   Leviticus 21:16The LORD told Moses 17-18 to say to Aaron: No descendant of yours can ever serve as my priest if he is blind or lame, if his face is disfigured, if one leg is shorter than the other, 19 if either a foot or a hand is crippled, 20 if he is a hunchback or a dwarf, if an eye or his skin is diseased, or if his testicles have been damaged. The writer is ignoring and likely ignorant of the point behind the ordinance, namely, that the priests were symbolic of the coming Son of God whose body was to be unblemished and his service to God and humankind faultless.   It is ironic that the writer's intent appears to be to try to depict God as an uproarious prejudiced buffoon even while his comments show his prejudice against God and how ignorant that he himself looks. 8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?   Leviticus 19:27-28 I forbid you to shave any part of your head or beard or to cut and tattoo yourself as a way of worshiping the dead. The writer does not note that the scripture, if and when it is actually looked up (which many readers probably would never do), is not condemning hair styles or tattooing but the purpose for those which was "worshiping the dead."  So his criticism is mocking, dismissive, and once analyzed shows that he is not so "smart" after all. 9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? Leviticus 11:6-8 But you must not eat animals such as camels, rock badgers, and rabbits that chew the cud but don't have divided hoofs. And you must not eat pigs--they have divided hoofs, but don't chew the cud. All of these animals are unclean, and you are forbidden even to touch their dead bodies. The writer is making fun of the idea that it's a big deal to eat pig meat.  In fact pigs eat almost anything and a lot of those things are disgusting; plus which pork is full of fat which clogs arteries and the heart.  So obeying what God says improved the health of the Israelite people. 10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend).   Leviticus:19:19 Breed your livestock animals only with animals of the same kind, and don't plant two kinds of seed in the same field or wear clothes made of different kinds of material.   The writer thinks it is stupid of God to say it is wrong to wear garments made of different threads.  Once we read the actual scripture and apply some thinking to it, it becomes more understandable.  God says breeding for example a horse with a cow is wrong, for example doing so would not only not produce offspring but be physically damaging and cruel; planting  wheat with oats would stress the plants as both take in and produce different soil nutrients thus causing them to work against each other and result in diminished crop productivity.  If you tried to wear pants made of a "cotton and a polyester blend" the fabrics would be more prone to more rapid wearing and tearing.  So, who is stupid, God or the writer making fun of God? He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot.  Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16.   Leviticus 10-11 Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri from the tribe of Dan, had married an Egyptian, and they had a son. One day their son got into a fight with an Israelite man in camp and cursed the name of the LORD.  So the young man was dragged off to Moses, 12 who had him guarded while everyone waited for the LORD to tell them what to do. 13 Finally, the LORD said to Moses: 14 This man has cursed me! Take him outside the camp and have the witnesses lay their hands on his head. Then command the whole community of Israel to stone him to death. 15-16 And warn the others that everyone else who curses me will die in the same way, whether they are Israelites by birth or foreigners living among you. The writer hopes to make God look evil for executing a man who cursed God.  If the matter is viewed as just a man in a fight cussing, then the writer would seem right.  But the writer ignores or deliberately does not state that it was not just a matter for one man but the entire community of Israel including even non-Israelites.  Getting by with verbally abusing God would also lead to physically abusing people who loved and sought to uphold the goodness of God. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)  Leviticus 20:14 It isn't natural for a man to marry both a mother and her daughter, and so all three of them will be burned to death.   The burning was not done until after the execution.   This is pointed out in the Amplified Bible translation.   The English Standard Version, Holman Christian Standard Bible, New American Standard Bible and Young's Literal Translation say they are to be burned with fire but not burnt alive.  The writer of the make-fun-of-God letter does not tell the reader this as he clearly wants God Amighty's character to be smeared.  Instead God is filled with loving-kindness and wants no one to die; those who have died will be fairly disciplined, all resurrected and if they treat other right from then on can stay alive with many wonderful blessings. (Act 24:15, Jn 3:16, Mt 6:10) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.   Your adoring fan,   James M Kauffman   Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia (It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian)

POSSIBLY UP TO 12% OF AMERICANS ARE ATHEISTS, MEANING 88% AREN'T   The highly respected Harris poll online states this of adult Americans whom it surveyed: "A plurality (42%) of all adults (but only 37% of men) thinks God is male, but only 1% thinks God is female. Almost half of all adults believe that God is neither male nor female (38%) or that God is both (11%). http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=694 A Barna survey of 2004 said of Americans whom it questioned that: "Atheists and agnostics comprise 12% of adults nationwide. (2004)" So about 12% atheists is the overall number for adult American atheists in general.  True, when applied to Ex-Jehovah's Witnesses who come from a religious background, it may be a little more or a little less. Some Ex-JWs believe the percentage is much higher or even dominant because atheist Ex-JWs tend to be very vocal, especially the 1% or so who are most opposed.  The same sort of small percentage also applies to smaller sub-cultures or groups such as pagans, luciferians, Satanists. Then what are most Ex-JWs?  Anecdotally only, most who converted to being JWs appear to asssociate with either no group but read the Bible and believe as independent Christians, many of the others who converted have returned to being Baptists, Catholics etc.  The vast majority of those who grew up JWs appear to have become general independent or non-denominational Christians, or to simply believe independently, sometimes keeping a certain set group of JW beliefs.   That core of JW-like beliefs are paradise earth for some and heaven for others, no literal fiery punishment in afterlife.   They tend to be more open on matters in general.  For example many still believe it is best to not normally eat or take blood as transfusions but see emergency whole blood transfusions to prevent loss of life as reasonable and supported by scriptures. Almost all ExJWs believe that Watchtower is too legalistic, cold, rigid, harsh, but will speak against anyone who speaks against "JWs" in general because they themselves were once JWs and they themselves likely still have at least some JW family and friends whom they see as good but misled. http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/12/02/how-many-atheists-in-america.htm

EUROPE HAS THE LARGEST PERCENT OF NON-BELIEVERS IN GOD (ABOUT 18%), MEANING EVEN THERE SOME 82% DO BELIEVE IN GOD For the European Union a "Eurobarometer 2005" survey has shown that up to 18% say they don't believe in any God as compared to about 10% in the United States.  As the map shows, the greatest percent of atheists is in France although even there some 32% are agnosics, meaning unsure if God exists or not, while only some 32% say they are absolutely non-believers in any manner of God.   Overall, then, the percent of those who do believe in God in the U.S. is about 90% and for in the European Union it's about 80%.  Of course among those the 90% in the U.S. and 80% in the E.U. who are believers, there are those who see God as a loving heavenly Father, those who see God as an impersonal life force, those who believe in various spirits (non-material or energy beings), etc. Why do such statistics matter?  Because some atheists want you to think most other people are also atheists, or that only stupid people believe in an intelligent God.  With statistics showing 70 to 90 percent belief by people in general, you can be sure that many who are very intelligent scientists, etc, do indeed also believe in God.

STEPHEN HAWKING ON GOD AND THE UNIVERSE British theoretical physicist and cosmologist, Stephen Hawkings, was born January 8, 1942.  He is considered today’s version of Albert Einstein and Sir Albert Newton.  So, what are Hawking’s views of God and religion?  Previously he wrote the universe may have been made by either an intelligent Entity, that is “God,” or possibly without a God.  It has been said that in 2010 his statements switched to showing him as leaning toward either atheism or belief in an impersonal God or law of science.   However, as far back as 1989, Germany’s Der Spiegel quoted him as saying, “What I have done is to show that it is possible for the way the universe began to be determined by the laws of science. In that case, it would not be necessary to appeal to God to decide how the universe began. This doesn't prove that there is no God, only that God is not necessary.”   In essence, then, in 1989 as in 2010 he is saying there might or might not be a God.  That would define him as neither Christian nor atheists but in the category of someone who is undecided, that is, an agnostic. Looking now at Hawking’s 2010 book, The Grand Design, he says in it "Spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist,"  “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist,” and “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.”  Again, this is actually nothing new but repeats what he said in 1989.   He does note that in terms of a law of nature: “M-theory is the most general supersymmetric theory of gravity. For these reasons, M-theory is the only candidate for a complete theory of the universe. If it is finite – and this is yet to be proved – it will be a model of the universe that creates itself. We must be part of this universe, because there is no other consistent model.”  However, Hawking does not note that there is no proof that M-theory itself exists.   In June 2010 he underscored in a Channel 4 series in the U.K. that he didn't believe in a "personal" God.  He told Genius of Britain, "The question is: is the way the universe began chosen by God for reasons we can't understand, or was it determined by a law of science? I believe the second. If you like, you can call the laws of science 'God', but it wouldn't be a personal God that you could meet, and ask questions."   So Stephen Hawking does not totally reject God but we may say that he now appears to more clearly define or redefine God as possibly impersonal, a “mute law of science” to do with the M-theory of gravity.  At the same time, in the past however he has also said all the following, for example beginning in his book A Brief History of Time: "One can imagine that God created the universe at literally any time in the past.  On the other hand, if the universe is expanding, there may be physical reasons why there had to be a beginning. One could still believe that God created the universe at the instant of the big bang.  He could even have created it at a later time in just such a way as to make it look as though there had been a big bang.  But it would be meaningless to suppose that it was created before the big bang. An expanding universe does not preclude a creator, but it does place limits on when He might have carried out his job." (p. 11) Later on page 72 Hawking said "If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have re-collapsed before it ever reached its present size." (p. 72) He adds, "The initial state of the universe must have been very carefully chosen indeed if the hot big bang model was correct right back to the beginning of time.  It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings just like us." The margin says, "The idea that space and time may form a closed surface without boundary also has profound implications for the role of God in the affairs of the universe."  In the body he adds "With the success of scientific theories in describing events, most people have come to believe that God allows the universe to evolve according to a set of laws.  He does not seem to intervene in the universe to break these laws.  However, the laws do not tell us what the universe should have looked like when it started.  It would still be up to God to wind up the clockwork and choose how to start it off. So long as the universe had a beginning that was a singularity, one could suppose that it was created by an outside agency." (p. 87) Hawking’s summary paragraph at the end of another book, which is called The Illustrated Theory of Everything, starts with: "Up until now, most scientists have been too occupied with the development of new theories that describe what the universe is to ask the question why.  On the other hand, the people whose business it is to ask why--the philosophers--have not been able to keep up with the advancement of scientific theories." He ends saying "if we do discover a complete theory, it should in time be understandable in broad principle, not just [to] a few scientists.  Then we can all be able to take part in the discussion of why the universe exists. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason.  For then we would know the mind of God."  Also telling is "The quantum theory of gravity has opened up a new possibility, in which there would be no boundary to space-time and so there would be no need to specify the behavior at the boundary. There would be no singularities at which the laws of science broke down and no edge of space-time at which one would have to appeal to God or some new law to set the boundary conditions for space-time. One could say: 'The boundary condition of the universe is that it has no boundary.' The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. It would neither be created nor destroyed. It would just BE. [Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), p. 136.]" Interestingly the word for God Himself is often rendered as Yahweh.  This is from a Hebrew verb which means To Be or To Exist.  The idea that space and time may form a closed surface without boundary also has profound implications for the role of God in the affairs of the universe. With the success of scientific theories in describing events, most people have come to believe that God allows the universe to evolve according to a set of laws and does not intervene in the universe to break these laws. However, the laws do not tell us what the universe should have looked like when it started -- it would still be up to God to wind up the clockwork and choose how to start it off. So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator? [Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), p. 140-41.] Christians and non-Christians alike also find of much interest what he has said and written of possible extraterrestrial life (ET).  He has said he believes that "primitive life is very common and intelligent life is fairly rare.”  Also, based on mathematics, he believes it is almost certain that alien life exists in other parts of the universe: "To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational. The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like." In fact he believes alien life may not only exist on other planets or moons but inside stars or floating in outer space.  He warns that some may be intelligent and dangerous to Earth”  "If aliens visit us, the outcome would be much as when Columbus landed in America, which didn't turn out well for the Native Americans." So he says that instead of trying to contact them, humans need to avoid contacting alien life forms. Do Hawking’s statements about ETs conflict with Christianity?  Since for example the Bible also speaks of non-material energy beings called angels as well as dangerous non-material energy beings called demons, the answer is No. Hawkings also believes that life on Earth is increasingly at risk of being wiped out by a disaster such as sudden nuclear war, a genetically-altered virus. For humans to survive they must go on into space.  Do scriptures speak against humans going into space?  No.  In fact God told Abraham that his descendants would become as numerous as the stars.  Christ says "my Father has many mansions." Insofar as Hawking’s personal life goes, it is known that his wife Jane is a Christian who credits her faith with her staying with him despite his having amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).  His lengthy survival with the disease has itself been called a miracle.   By age 13 his main hero was the atheist philosopher-mathematician, Bertrand Russell; but, on the other hand, two of his friends became Christians because of Billy Graham’s campaign to London in 1955.  http://www.examiner.com/creationism-in-atlanta/does-stephen-hawking-believe-god http://blog.beliefnet.com/idolchatter/2010/09/stephen-hawking-no-need-for-go.html#ixzz0z0DZY7C5 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7976594/Stephen-Hawking-God-was-not-needed-to-create-the-Universe.html  http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/68149,news-comment,news-politics,what-theyre-saying-about-stephen-hawking-god-and-creation-universe  http://churchmousepublishing.blogspot.com/2010/09/stephen-hawking-and-god-lazy-reporters.html http://physicsworld.com/blog/2010/09/talking_hawking_and_god.html

STARS AND THE EARTH Stars look the same to the human eye and when a telescope is used they still seem to just be dots of light although there are some broad color differences such as white, red, blue.  However telescopes show that not only the light spectrum but therefore gas and element composition of every star differs.  This agrees with the Bible which two thousands of years ago noted:  “There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.” (1 Corinthians 15:41) Isaiah 40:22 says “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.  Here the word translated as circle is from the Hebrew word chuwg which can also be rendered as “arch,” the more basic meaning being something that is spherical meaning round in three dimensions like a globe or the planet Earth.  It never means something that is flat.

WHAT AN ATHEIST WROTE: Not everyone who leaves the Borg (Watchtower heads over Jehovah’s Witnesses) learns to think free from tradition, authority, and revelation. Many still depend on those sources to inform their worldview because it is a less traumatic transition psychologically and because it is simply easier than living a life dominated by reason and evidence.   CHRISTIAN RESPONSE: Do you really think Newton, Copernicus, Bacon, Kepler, Galileo, Mendel, Kelvin, Planck, and Einstein led lives dominated by as you said lack of “reason and evidence”? Some non-believers in a Source for our material universe (=God) have also been fine contributors to humanity, e.g. Mark Twain, Ernest Hemingway, etc. and among the 2.2 billion Christians alive today aren’t there many other fine, logical thinkers? Respectfully, Joe

WHY I BELIEVE IN GOD IN A LOGICAL PLUS PERSONAL WAY Dear Readers, First I'm sorry if some who claim to be "the true religion" proved not to be and hurt you.  Please don't blame all who say they love Christ and are trying to be Christ-like. It seems from my perspective, although you may disagree, that for those who believe devoutly in money, money is their god/God.  For those who believe devoutly in an organization, the organization is their god/God.  For those who devoutly believe in ____, _____ is their god/God. I and some like me believe in the Source that made energy and matter and gives good things such as my life, the stars surrounding us and the wonderous planets including our own.  A good father is a good gift-giver.  The key description is Love. There are dark religious groups or cults, yes, but those lack Love.  We who care pray for all vicitms and offer them the active healing oil of love.   We sincerely wish that they may stay clear forever of darkness but instead find true love, joy, peace, actual happiness. It's very true that some people say they believe in no God, but they do believe in themselves, so whom do they really believe in?  Not trying to be anything but kind in pointing this out.  Think about it. As people receive more time for healing and reflection, may more and more of them see that it was not a truly loving heavenly Father who hurt and confused them but cult heads and the like.  Christian Witnesses is a fellowship with no hierarchy of officials but brothers and sisters equal in Christ.  A fellowship is a group with some common interests or experiences among whom happy friendships can develop. If some who read this still think it's "stupid" to believe in God, that if he exists why can't we see him, why would He allow the pain, suffering, death etc, then please be sure to go to the next article and read it thoughtfully. With Best Wishes, Joe

WHAT ATHEISM OFFERS TO REASON SOME: In the United States, Europe, etc most of the charities have always been Christian and Jewish, some also Islamic and from smaller religious groups. If Atheism is a better alternative that will give us all greater happiness, then Atheists are invited to tell about the good things it does anywhere around the globe, and then we can all consider becoming Atheists.  For example tell us how many orphanages Atheism or Atheists have founded in past 2,000 years.  Off-hand, I don’t know of any.  Do you?   However, I do know that thus far those Atheists whose words I have read or heard to speak have offered no better options for helping other people to have greater happiness, neither during the course of everyday life , nor when death is fast approaching.  For those dying Atheism imparts the feeling of absolute hopelessness, no joy for true believers in Atheism nor for the loved ones they leave behind.   Assume for a moment that Atheists were right in saying Christ never existed, then it would still be 100% true that this never-existing Christ in a work of fiction called the Bible is shown to focus on teaching that we need to show Love even to others, even our enemies.  Can any Atheist really, seriously argue that genuine Love is anything but positive and good?   My own belief is that Christ died so that ALL of us (Christians, Buddhists, Atheists, Agnostics, Hindus, Animists etc) might live again in happiness, both those declared righteous because knowing and doing what is right as well as those declared unrighteous because they did not know and do what was right when alive. (John 3:16, Acts 24:15)  God will be proved loving and fair; He does have a Plan for it.   So to all Atheists reading here, I send you sincere love too.   Joe

SCIENTISTS EDGING TOWARD AN ADAM? Human Ancestors Less Ape-Like Than Thought http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5150668/Human-ancestors-less-ape-like-than-thought.html An article by Sarah Knapton in the United Kingdom’s newspaper called The Telegraph notes that scientists now conclude that new research suggests “human ancestors living millions of years ago were bad at climbing trees and not nearly as ape-like as many experts believe.”   They studied ankle joints from hominins dating back over four million years who lived.a relatively short time after humans and chimpanzees split from a common ancestor.  Experts have argued this ancestor was probably similar to chimpanzees and so earliest humans were also probably very similar to apes.  But new research shows that ancient humans were not designed to climb trees. Dr Jeremy DeSilva (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor) analyzed video of chimpanzees in Uganda for their skeletal motion and in focusing on the ankle joint found that the chimps were capable of a 45-degree bend but the range in humans is between 15 and 20 degrees. When Dr DeSilva examined 12 fossil tibias from early hominins he found no such adaptation. This evidence is supported by other details about the skeleton, so it shows early human ancestors could not have been good at climbing.  Dr DeSilva’s article in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences therefore suggests that early hominins may have sometimes climbed trees even as humans do today but they didn’t do so any more often than modern humans do so.

HOW MIGHT SCIENCE BE APPROACHING MARY’S VIRGINAL BIRTH? This article presents scientific information which indicates a possible melding of science and religion insofar as regards the account of the Jewish virgin Mary giving birth to Jesus Christ of Nazareth.  A year or two ago this would have been thought wholly impossible among scientists, but science marches on. To begin, although there are “no known cases of naturally-occurring mammalian parthenogenesis,” (underlining for emphasis) in 1936 Gregory Goodwin Pincus reported that he had successfully induced parthenogenesis (virginal birth) in a rabbit in 1936.  In 2004, scientists at Tokyo University of Agriculture used parthenogenesis to give birth to a fatherless mouse in April 2004.  In the same year, the monkey named Kayuga was also born by induced parthenogenesis.  The statistical estimate that a human being has ever been born by parthenogenesis, that is born from a virgin mother, is 1 in 12,000,000,000, possibly meaning only once among all  humans ever lived.  However, given that such a human would be getting only “XX” chromosomes, that is lacking a Y chromosome, the person would have to be a female – unless there might be some other unusual occurrence at conception. Dr. Aarathi Prasad has noted some rare, implausible and yet possible condition by which Mary could have given birth as a virgin.  One would be if she were a “genetic mosaic—the fusion of twins, one of which had a Y (chromosome).” When parthenogenesis is induced in mice and monkeys, it does not always cause abnormal development, but it more often does.  This is because the offspring get double the genes of its mother, and if she had any abnormal gene, that the offspring gets a double dose. Parthenogenesis also occurs naturally in some aphids, water fleas, nematodes, some bees, some Phasmida (walking sticks etc), some scorpions, and parasitic wasps.  It is also known to have occurred naturally among vertebrates, for example among some reptiles like pythons, fish, and on rare occasions birds, Komodo dragons, hammerhead- and blacktip sharks. As published March 10, 2009, Kathrin P. Lampert of the University of Bochum in Germany has noted that:   “isolated cases of parthenogenetic development have been reported in all vertebrate groups. Facultative parthenogenesis in vertebrates has only been found in captive animals but might simply have been overlooked in natural populations.  Even though its evolutionary impact is hard to determine and very likely varies depending on the ploidy restoration mechanisms and sex-determining mechanisms involved, facultative parthenogenesis is already discussed in conservation biology and medical research."   Human eggs spontaneously activate on their own all the time and no doubt some have entered the uterus, but there has never been a single case of a virginal human birth confirmed by any modern scientists or officials.  Even in religion and myths, it has been spoken of as an extremely unusual or miraculous occurrence.    Finally, it is interesting to note that the Dickey Amendment passed by the U.S. Congress in 1996 added parthenogenesis in with the rest of embryo research, thus putting it on ban.  However Scientists in the U.S. hope to get it deleted from the amendment listing because they believe it is an effective way to obtain embryonic stem cells for research to help possibly 100 million Americans.  So no doubt Christians and others will keep watching this closely.   Some have argued that the New Testament speaking of Mary being a virgin is a mistranslation, that the word given as “virgin” should actually read “young woman” or “maiden.”  However, Isaiah 7:14, which is in the Old Testament, also says, “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”  To have “faith” is not to be “gullible,” but to have belief based upon solid footing.  Science appears to be giving those who have faith all the more reason for having it. REFERENCES Kathrin P. Lampert.  Evolutionary Ecology and Biodiversity of Animals, University of Bochum Universitätsstr. 150, D-44780 Bochum (Germany).  Tel. +49 234 322 5573, Fax +49 234 321 4114.  E-Mail kathrin.lampert@ruhr-uni-bochum.de Dr. Ann Kiesling, Harvard virologist. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3209/04-alternative.html Dr. Aarathi Prasad was born in 1975 and has a PhD in biology and worked in cancer genetics at Imperial College London. She now works at Sense About Science, a charity promoting evidence-based science in public discussion. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/2009/01/09/the-science-of-virgin-birth/  “Virgin birth backs dads' role.”  ABC Science. http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2004/04/22/1091904.htm “The Science of Virgin Birth.” « Live From CES: 3D HD TVs Powered by “They Live” Technology.  Weekly Science Blog Roundup.»  http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2004/04/22/1091904.htm “Female Shark Gets Pregnant on Her Own, No Male Required.”  Discover. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/10/10/female-shark-gets-pregnant-on-her-own-no-male-required/

GOD IS THE SOURCE OF ALL SPACE, MATTER AND TIME UNIVERSE OR MULTIVERSE: Scientists including Stephen Hawking in 2001 noted that laws thought to govern the universe, including the theory of relativity may only work for our universe, but not in other universes now also thought to possibly exist.  For example Einstein believed light always went 186,000 miles a second but now some say it may have moved much faster even in our own early universe. Notable also, is that our universe only exists because of a fine balance between several crucial factors. The rate at which nuclear fusion releases energy in stars such as the sun by squashing hydrogen atoms into helium and then other elements is exactly 0.7%, and, if this figure had been just a fraction different, carbon and other elements essential to life could never have formed.  Too, the distribution of matter and radiation is just right for life in our universe. At least in theory, the big bang could have produced a universe where all matter clumped into a few black holes, or another universe where it spread out evenly into nothing but a thin vapor. Hawking, Sir Martin Rees, Neil Turok and others have examined the idea that our universe is just one of an infinite number of universes, that is a multiverse, with different laws of nature operating in each of the universes.  Some universes would be matter clumped into a few huge black holes while others would be only a thin uniform freezing gas. Hawking and the others increasingly disagree about how this "multiverse" could work.  Hawking has dismissed the idea of an eternal series of big bangs because if extended into the infinite past it could never have had a beginning any more than a completely final end. http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/ (London Sunday Times Sep 9, 2001)  Many verses also speak of a new heaven and new earth although also Ecclesiastes 1:4 says earth remains forever.  Some Christians and other people may view this as supportive of an eternal series of big bang explosions followed by the creations of starry heavens and earth or earth-like planets.  In any case it is interesting and we know for such that God says that at least for this universe there was a beginning when He created the heavens and the Earth. (Ge 1:1)

JESUS SEMINAR, WESTAR INSTITUTE, LIBERAL THEOLOGY The Jesus Seminar consists of about 150 critics opposed to the Bible and God who run lectures and worships across the U.S. They teach miracles are falsehoods, Jesus Christ is only a man who was not resurrected, sightings of Christ only the visionary experiences of some disciples.  They demand that believers prove that any Bible passage is actually historical, claim the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas is more true than the Gospel of John. The Jesus Seminar is backed by the Westar Institute non-profit foundation founded in 1986 spearheaded by now deceased Robert Funk (1926-2005) who described Jesus' parables as containing shocking messages contradicting established religious attitudes.  It sponsors seminars and discussions of the Jesus Seminar and keeps a directory of churches "receptive to the work of the Jesus Seminar."  The philosophy of the Jesus Seminar and Westar Institute is called Liberal Christianity or sometimes Liberal Theology.  Such writers present the Bible as non-factual, not divinely inspired but narratives with superstitions.  In the 1800s and 1900s they wrote in mockery of miracles and by 1910 the Presbyterian Church felt it necessary to distinguish believers in genuine Christianity from false professors fronting as “educated, ‘liberal’ Christians.”  Today Liberal Theology proponents are entrenched throughout mainline churches. They have included William E Channing (1780-1842, Unitarian) who attacked the Trinity and scriptures, Charles Filmore (1854-1948, a Unity Church founder), Leslie Weatherhead (1893-1976 author of The Christian Agnostic), Hans Kung (1928- Catholic rejector of infallibility).   Photogenic Francesca Stavrakopoulou, a senior lecturer at Oxford, has done an entire series of documentaries that have played on United Kingdom television, denigrating the Bible and God.  Her book King Manasseh and Child Sacrifice: Biblical Distrotions of Historical Realities is illustrative of this.  In it she tries to portray the Israelites as sacrificers of children, and nations such as the Philistines as innoncent and unfairly accused of being child sacrificers, in other words a total twisting around of what the Bible says.  See samples of it by googling on the internet.

CHRIST AS A HISTORICAL PERSON New Testament Fragment Dated 90 to 160 AD According to wikipedia.org "Prominent critics like John Remsburg and Richard Dawkins say that while the Gospel accounts are no more historical than any other myth (Dawkins likens them to an ancient Da Vinci Code) the odds are Jesus did exist."  And, yes, there are ancient writings about Christ outside of the Christian Bible.  As seen in the following examples, from the early days of Christian onward enemies of Christ and the early Christians have written about Christ and although doing so negatively, all the same in the process have also shown that they themselves or others then alive did believe that he existed.   To begin, Jewish Rabbinical writings from the Tannaitic period of 70-200 A.D. at Sanhedrin 43a state: “Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously the herald had cried, ‘He is being led out for stoning, because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy. Whoever has anything to say in his defence, let him come and declare it.’ As nothing was brought forward in his defence, he was hanged on Passover Eve.” http://bibletimeline.net/biblehistoryblog/christs-birth-and-a-census-biblical-timeline/ The Roman historian Tacitus was against Christianity but yet between 115-117 A.D. wrote about Christians: “They got their name from Christ, who was executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius.  That checked the pernicious superstition for a short time, but it broke out afresh-not only in Judea, where the plague first arose, but in Rome itself, where all the horrible and shameful things in the world collect and find a home.”  From Tacitus' Annals, XV, 44.   The historian Josephus write during the First Century, "About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared." The Jewish Babylonian Talmud which had as its earliest period of compilation 70-200 AD says "On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."  The name Yeshua is Hebrew for Jesus. Lucian of Samosata lived during the 100 ADs and was a Greek satirist. He wrote this of the early Christians, referring to Jesus Christ although not directly naming him: "The Christians . . . worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws." Julius Africanus wrote about 221 AD about Thallus who in possibly 52 AD tried to explain away the darkness that occurred at Christ's death: "On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun." (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1) Pliny the Younger (61-113AD) was an enemy of the Christians. He wrote to the Roman emperor Trajan in mention of the early Christians and Christ:  "They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind." Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. He wrote about Christians describing how they were treated under the Emperor Claudius (41-54 AD): "Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome)." (Life of Claudius, 25:4) The Syrian philosopher Mara Bar-Serapion wrote to encourage his son at some point after the year 70 AD.  He compared Jesus' life and persecution with that of other philosophers also persecuted for their ideas.  Here he refers to Christ as "the wise king.": "What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?...After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men...The wise king...Lived on in the teachings he enacted." Origen wrote "Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14) ... “And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place ... ” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33) ...“Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59) Phlegon had lived around 80-140 AD. Celsus was a pagan who about 175AD wrote negatively of Jesus Christ but in the process also confirming belief by himself and others that Christ had existed: “Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard.  Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt.  While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing.  He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.” Critics sometimes laugh and say: Well, if Christ was real and was ever in Jerusalem, then where's the newspaper fragments of that time period telling about his being there?  Surely there would be the equivalents of letters-to-the-editor or the like?  What those who skoff do not note is that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 A.D. at which time any such "newspaper fragments" were likely burnt.  Indeed many of the people who had seen Christ with their own eyes must have been among the great numbers who were slain by the Romans or taken away into captivity as slaves at that time.   However, there are also hundreds of remnants of New Testament manuscripts that did survive since Christians, being persecuted, had borne them to distant places long before Jerusalem was destroyed.  Some of the extant fragments date from the 100s AD, others into the 200s AD etc.   Most atheists refuse to accept those as they are not non-Biblical sources, but for some reason many atheists and agnostics do seem to accept that many of the earliest Christians gave up their own lives which shows that they believed that Christ had existed and did as the Bible says.  Indeed there is such evidence of belief in Christ not only from when he and his generation walked the earth but the evidence for such belief has only grown over the centuries now up to some 2,000 years since Christ died as ransom for all.

FLORAL WONDERS OF CREATION If one's eyes appreciate the floral gems in the following youtube video, then his eyes, even if he is a doubter that God exists, appreciate the who or the what which created such floral gems. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsYnMS257HA

THE DEATH OF BIBLICAL MINIMALISM In the Biblical Archaeology Review, Yoseph Garfinkel has noted that during the mid-1980s some archaeologists in Denmark and England proposed “Biblical Minimalism.” They claimed the Bible had only been written in the Hellenistic period about 700 years after David and Solomon.  That would in turn have meant that descriptions in the Bible of King David, King Solomon and a United Kingdom of Israel and Judah were just imaginative.  However in 1993 and 1994 at the excavation site of Tel Dan,  fragments of an Aramaic stela were found dating to the 9th Century BCE.   Its text mentioned a king of Israel and a king of the House of David (Hebrew: Byt Dwd).  The famous Mesha Stela, a Moabite inscription was re-examined, and it too was shown to also refer to King David’s dynasty.   The Minimalists panicked, claiming that Byt Dwd instead mean things such as House of Uncle or House of Kettle.  Next they tried to claim the other archaeologists had misdated materials to the time of David and Solomon by about a hundred years.  They said that if David and Solomon had existed in the assigned time period then the Israelites where still agrarian tribes without centralized cities and at the most David and Solomon were no more than local kings in agrarian tribes. In the Biblical Archaeology Review, Yoseph Garfinkel has noted that during the mid-1980s some archaeologists in Denmark and England proposed “Biblical Minimalism.” They claimed the Bible had only been written in the Hellenistic period about 700 years after David and Solomon.  That would in turn have meant that descriptions in the Bible of King David, King Solomon and a United Kingdom of Israel and Judah were just imaginative.  However in 1993 and 1994 at the excavation site of Tel Dan,  fragments of an Aramaic stela were found dating to the 9th Century BCE.   Its text mentioned a king of Israel and a king of the House of David (Hebrew: Byt Dwd).  The famous Mesha Stela, a Moabite inscription was re-examined, and it too was shown to also refer to King David’s dynasty.   The Minimalists panicked, claiming that Byt Dwd instead mean things such as House of Uncle or House of Kettle.  Next they tried to claim the other archaeologists had misdated materials to the time of David and Solomon by about a hundred years.  They said that if David and Solomon had existed in the assigned time period then the Israelites where still agrarian tribes without centralized cities and at the most David and Solomon were no more than local kings in agrarian tribes. This has now also been shown untenable due to excavations at an ancient fortified settlement called Kirbet Qeiyafa.   Existences of the settlement or city itself proves a non-agrarian society.  Furthermore, in it have been found jars stamped “l’melekh” [to (the) king] which held tax goods such as olive oil or wine.  These also reflect not an agrarian society but one with a centralized government, that is a state or nation.   Some potsherds were found, and they are written in Hebrew.  Although hard to read, they appear to refer to ethics and justice.  So a society with scribes thus existed even at some distance from Jerusalem.  Although would-be detractors have argued that the settlement might be Philistine, still more evidence shows this is wrong.  Besides the writing in Hebrew, excavations have produced no pig or dog bones which shows it was not a site of the Philistines who unlike Israeli or Jewish people did eat pigs and dogs.  The settlement’s main entrance faces Jerusalem instead of Philistia.  The settlement has a double or casemate wall such as was used in Judah but not use in Philistia.  Also, that the site was fortified is also significant because Philistine settlements were not fortified as were those of Israel and Judah. Thus we now see all of the past arguments for Biblical Minimalism are overturned.   It is a victory for those archaeologists who do not excavate with a particular agenda or bias but are simply interested in the facts.  The Bible remains an excellent source of facts useful for archaeologists and others. http://www.bib-arch.org/bar/article.asp?PubID=BSBA&Volume=37&Issue=03&ArticleID=06&Page=1&UserID=0&

POSSIBLE MODERN ANSWERS ABOUT SOME SPECIFIC VERSES Atheists sometimes scorn Matthew 24:30 which says “Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”  They ask, “how could everyone on earth see some sign of the fact that Christ has returned?”  Yet probably every hour on earth people are watching TV show events such as wars, famines, earthquakes, etc. Some atheists also make fun of Revelation 11:9-11 which says “Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into graves. And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth. Now after the three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them.” They object, saying “how could all these nations, tribes etc see corpses several days, and how could the corpses come back alive, stand up and cause people to be scared?”  God created human bodies including our brains, and our own brains have created movies and TV shows including horror movies and shows where such things can potentially be seen everywhere around the globe. We notice that 2 Peter 3:10 says “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.” In Biblical Koine Greek the word for day can also refer to period of time greater than a literal 24 hours just as in English where we can speak of “Napoleon’s day” or “the Day of the dinosaurs.”  So the “day of the Lord” is the time period of the Lord Jesus Christ during which there is great tribulation and anguish of nations, remindful to what humans have seen at the least since the coming of World War I, and especially too since the coming of nuclear weapons.  In the Lord’s day, when Christ is quietly present yet also visible to every eye by world events, we find that nuclear bombs have exploded and in so doing darkened the calm blue of the heavens, given off a great sound, and melted the very elements, the earth and its contents.  Yet atheists say to ignore 2 Peter 3:10, that it’s just a childish fiction.  But is it really?  How can we deny what we have seen occurring with such bombs?  Everyone nowadays with any degree of sense says that atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs are very real and dangerous.  So it's not at all illogical to believe what the Bible says and those who dismiss it lightly do well to ponder if they are as smart as they think.  Good science and logic do support the Bible and plain reality.