trevor_hopkins

Nice work, Carl. The most interesting thing about this image for me is in discovering how the extensive colour manipulation has lessened this abstract's value in my mind, even though it is aesthetically stronger than the original. I think the great beauty of these shots is that they highlight naturally-occurring abstract art in our environment which many people fail to notice or appreciate. The fact that this image has had its colours souped-up beyond recognition in order to catch our eye suggests the revelation of natural art is absent, and we are instead being offered just another whimsy from the world of digital imaging. I also think the choice of this particular image for POW from your fine collection of similar abstracts is a sad 'reflection' of this site's infatuation with super-saturated eye candy.

 

Personally, I find the more subtle celebrations of light, line and colour in your 'Oz' folder far more refreshing and enjoyable. Knowing that this abstract's strengths are more manufactured than natural makes a big difference to me. Although I still enjoy the shot, my enjoyment is more detached and unemotional. I also prefer the square crop. I think it harnesses and strengthens the diagonals tremendously, and also helps subjugate those garish colours in a tauter composition. Regards.

Im surprised at Lucas Griegos description of boxing as the sweetest science when he describes having to clean blood spots off his camera lens and elbows when photographing these events. Is that why boxing photos work better in b&w because the viewer is shielded from the full horror of the violence being perpetrated? This is clearly a great photo, but I find depressing the fact that so many people have lavished praise on it without raising a moral objection to the subject matter. Lucas remarks that boxers train like animals. Sadly, in the ring they also behave like animals and sometimes even die like animals. My friend Tony likened the crowds bloodlust to what youd expect at a Roman gladiatorial contest. If this photograph depicted one man dispatching another by thrusting a sword through his opponents throat would the praise heaped upon this image have been so enthusiastic? When does violence cease to be beautiful?

 

I recognise this forum is not the place for a debate on the morality of blood sports. But placing a picture like this on such a pedestal could be regarded as a celebration of violence. War photos may be justified as a salutary lesson in highlighting the brutality of conflict. During the Vietnam war such images speeded the conclusion of the conflict by fuelling anti-war sentiments in America. Similarly, an image of a mauled fox or a bruised and bloodied boxer (in colour) could have a similar effect. But this photo does not highlight the brutality of boxing, it masks the cruelty through dynamic composition, chocolate-sepia tones and dramatic, almost balletic poses from the combatants. These elements appeal so strongly to our aesthetic senses that we filter out the pain and wanton violence that this sport represents. We cant see the prone boxers face. We cant feel his pain. And fortunately, there are no blood spots on the lens to spoil the view

The sky is certainly stunning and the reflections are nice, but I think the image is let down by the messy bit in the middle. The islands, far shore and clouds create an untidy dark mass which distracts from the purity of those sun rays. In a perfect world, we'd see a neatly defined island with a single tall palm tree centred on those rays without the horizon-hugging clouds... I think a weak ND grad would certainly have helped bring out some detail in the understated foreground reflections. And perhaps the square format isn't ideal for this particular landscape. In short, it's an unexceptional capture of an exceptional scene. (Sorry, Tom.) But how many folks can tell the difference...?

Duck photography at its very finest. The movement in the wings is superbly captured. The background works a treat, offering complementary colours and a diagonal to support the direction of flight. Very well done. I'm envious.

Now I love ducks, but even allowing for the originality factor of seeing a Guadalajaran duck, the ratings on this pic seem a little generous. It is pretty, though.

Hi, Kevin. I quite agree with you; Photoshop is a fantastic tool. I look forward to going fully digital myself once the price comes down and the quality goes up. But as with all things, restraint is sometimes called for and I worry about major manipulations masquerading as reality. I think subtlety is usually the best way to go (ignoring the gruesome example above!) Best regards.

You have some excellent work in your portfolio, but like many photographers who have embraced Photoshop there's a risk of getting carried away with your passion. It's always good to try pushing the envelope by experimenting with different techniques, and your intensification of light and shadow worked well with the last upload in this folder, which resembles a Turner seascape. I don't think the technique is as successful here, however, because the result looks entirely too artificial. A sky of such dramatic intensity looks completely implausible when held against the mirror of the sea with no trace of a reflection. With too much manipulation the image loses its anchor to reality, casting the viewer adrift in this lonely boat on a seascape of suspicions...

 

There is the added danger we may begin to suspect that land and sky have entirely separate pedigrees and never even met on this serendipitous occasion. I don't think this image is a composite, but others in your portfolio evidently are. We've had some embarrassing debacles in the past with fake skies, so it's usually a good idea to be open about the level of manipulation involved. The camera generally doesn't lie, but some photographers with the aid of Photoshop do. I'm not accusing you of dishonesty, but judging from some of the comments your images attract I get the impression some viewers are not aware of the extent to which your work may be more manufactured than captured.

Im glad someone agrees with something I've said. (Evolutionists burying their heads in the sands of Mars will be equally disillusioned...)

 

Well, its been a long and interesting journey but I think we both realise there is no destination in sight. (Cest la vie!) I think everything that needed to be said has been (several times, in some cases). Id just like to briefly say that the Witnessess admission that they dont have all the answers and the fact theyve admitted mistakes in the past indicates humility and an open mind, not vanity. Its a pleasure to see you quoting scripture at me, though. If Ive encouraged you to dust off your bible and start reading bits of it again, I guess this discussion has accomplished something worthwhile.

 

In answer to your questions, of those who thought the end would come in 1914, if they were part of the 144,000 they would have gone to heaven once their life ended down here. If they were part of the great crowd of other sheep they would remain asleep in death waiting for a resurrection into the new order on earth, which will occur after Armageddon.

 

It is not a sin to believe Christ died on a cross. It is a sin, however, to do obeisance in front of an image of Christ on the crucifix or to venerate the symbol in any way (which could include wearing one round your neck). But it is not for us to decide peoples guilt; that is up to Jehovah.

 

Unless you have any more probing questions, perhaps we should finally close the curtain on this debate. Your compliment that Jehovahs Witnesses are probably a force for goodness in the world seems like a good thought to end on! Thank you, Tony, for making this such a lively and enjoyable discussion, and Ive appreciated the contributions of everyone who has taken part. I will of course, let you have the last word, Tony

The wicked one according to his superciliousness makes no search; all his ideas are: There is no God. (Psalms 10:4)

 

Lannie, Jehovahs Witnesses do not claim to have everything figured out. In the past we celebrated Christmas and birthdays and used the symbol of the cross until our understanding of the bible grew to the point where we realised these traditions dishonoured God. Prior to 1914, the Witnesses did not fully understand the significance of that year. Many believed they would be taken up to heaven at that time, but they were mistaken. It wasnt until later that they understood Jesuss words concerning the other sheep who have an earthly hope of everlasting life, as opposed to the relatively small number of 144,000 who are destined for heaven. We still dont have all the answers, but with continued prayerful study of the bible our understanding of it continues to grow.

 

The Society (as we call it) produces a superb CD-ROM containing half a centurys worth of its published literature. It has an excellent word search facility and its been invaluable to me in posting these comments. The Sword of Truth has been wielded in many forms, and perhaps exposing this weapon in the armoury of Jehovahs servants will give Tony pause for thought if he thinks he can win a war of attrition on this page ;-) Anyway, to save me time and effort (and grind Tony down), Ill copy and paste some information from the Society that addresses questions you have both raised:

 

Do Jehovahs Witnesses believe that their religion is the only right one?

 

The Bible does not agree with the modern view that there are many acceptable ways to worship God. Ephesians 4:5 says there is one Lord, one faith. Jesus stated: Narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it. . . . Not everyone saying to me, Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.Matt. 7:13, 14, 21; see also 1 Corinthians 1:10.

 

Repeatedly the Scriptures refer to the body of true Christian teachings as the truth, and Christianity is spoken of as the way of the truth. (1 Tim. 3:15; 2 John 1; 2 Pet. 2:2) Because Jehovahs Witnesses base all of their beliefs, their standards for conduct, and organizational procedures on the Bible, their faith in the Bible itself as Gods Word gives them the conviction that what they have is indeed the truth. So their position is not egotistical but demonstrates their confidence that the Bible is the right standard against which to measure ones religion. They are not self-centered but are eager to share their beliefs with others.

 

Do not other religions also follow the Bible?

 

Many use it to some extent. But do they really teach and practice what it contains? Consider: (1) From most of their Bible translations they have removed the name of the true God thousands of times. (2) The Trinity doctrine, their concept of God himself, is borrowed from pagan sources and was developed in its present form centuries after Bible writing was completed. (3) Their belief in immortality of the human soul as the basis for continued life is not taken from the Bible; it has roots in ancient Babylon. (4) The theme of Jesus preaching was the Kingdom of God, and he sent his disciples out to talk personally to others about it; but the churches today seldom mention that Kingdom and their members are not doing the work of preaching this good news of the kingdom. (Matt. 24:14) (5) Jesus said that his true followers could be readily identified by their self-sacrificing love for one another. Is that true of the religions of Christendom when the nations go to war? (6) The Bible says that Christs disciples would be no part of the world, and it warns that whoever wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God; but the churches of Christendom and their members are deeply involved in the political affairs of the nations. (Jas. 4:4) In view of such a record, can it honestly be said that they really adhere to the Bible?

 

How do Jehovahs Witnesses arrive at their explanation of the Bible?

 

A key factor is that the Witnesses really believe that the Bible is Gods Word and that what it contains is there for our instruction. (2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Rom. 15:4; 1 Cor. 10:11) So they do not resort to philosophical arguments to evade its clear statements of truth or to justify the way of life of people who have abandoned its moral standards.

In pointing out the meaning of symbolic language in the Bible, they let the Bible provide its own explanation, instead of giving their theories as to its significance. (1 Cor. 2:13) Indications as to the meaning of symbolic terms are usually found in other parts of the Bible. (As an example, see Revelation 21:1; then, regarding the meaning of sea, read Isaiah 57:20. To identify the Lamb referred to in Revelation 14:1, see John 1:29 and 1 Peter 1:19.)

As for fulfilment of prophecy, they apply what Jesus said about being alert to events that correspond to what was foretold. (Luke 21:29-31; compare 2 Peter 1:16-19.) Conscientiously they point out those events and draw attention to what the Bible indicates they mean.

 

Jesus said that he would have on earth a faithful and discreet slave (his anointed followers viewed as a group), through which agency he would provide spiritual food to those making up the household of faith. (Matt. 24:45-47) Jehovahs Witnesses recognize that arrangement. As was true of first-century Christians, they look to the governing body of that slave class to resolve difficult questionsnot on the basis of human wisdom, but by drawing on their knowledge of Gods Word and his dealings with his servants, and with the help of Gods spirit, for which they earnestly pray.Acts 15:1-29; 16:4, 5.

 

Why have there been changes over the years in the teachings of Jehovahs Witnesses?

 

The Bible shows that Jehovah enables his servants to understand his purpose in a progressive manner. (Prov. 4:18; John 16:12) Thus, the prophets who were divinely inspired to write portions of the Bible did not understand the meaning of everything that they wrote. (Dan. 12:8, 9; 1 Pet. 1:10-12) The apostles of Jesus Christ realized that there was much they did not understand in their time. (Acts 1:6, 7; 1 Cor. 13:9-12) The Bible shows that there would be a great increase in knowledge of the truth during the time of the end. (Dan. 12:4) Increased knowledge often requires adjustments in ones thinking. Jehovahs Witnesses are willing humbly to make such adjustments.

 

- End of quotes.

 

Tony raises the old chestnut of Chinese Whispers in connection with extensive copying of the Bible throughout history. Well, Im getting lazy now, so Ill just copy some information on the Dead Sea Scrolls:

 

How accurate was the transmission of the text by the Sopherim and the Masoretes [Jewish scribes]? Until 1947 it was difficult to answer that question, since the earliest available complete Hebrew manuscripts were from the tenth century of our Common Era. In 1947, however, some very ancient manuscript fragments were found in caves in the vicinity of the Dead Sea, including parts of books of the Hebrew Bible. A number of fragments dated to before the time of Christ. Scholars compared these with existing Hebrew manuscripts to confirm the accuracy of the transmission of the text. What was the result of this comparison?

 

One of the oldest works discovered was the complete book of Isaiah, and the closeness of its text to that of the Masoretic Bible we have today is amazing. Professor Millar Burrows writes: Many of the differences between the [recently discovered] St. Marks Isaiah scroll and the Masoretic text can be explained as mistakes in copying. Apart from these, there is a remarkable agreement, on the whole, with the text found in the medieval manuscripts. Such agreement in a manuscript so much older gives reassuring testimony to the general accuracy of the traditional text. Burrows adds: It is a matter for wonder that through something like a thousand years the text underwent so little alteration.

 

Footnote: Not all the manuscripts found at the Dead Sea agreed so exactly with the surviving Bible text. Some showed quite a lot of textual variance. However, these variations do not mean that the essential meaning of the text has been distorted. According to Patrick W. Skehan of the Catholic University of America, most represent a reworking [of the Bible text] on the basis of its own integral logic, so that the form becomes expanded but the substance remains the same . . . The underlying attitude is one of explicit reverence for a text regarded as sacred, an attitude of explaining (as we would put it) the Bible by the Bible in the very transmission of the text itself.

 

Another commentator adds: In spite of all uncertainties, the great fact remains that the text as we now have it does, in the main, represent fairly the actual words of the authors who lived, some of them, nearly three thousand years ago, and we need have no serious doubt on the score of textual corruption as to the validity of the message which the Old Testament has to give us.

 

In the case of the part of the Bible written in Greek by Christians, the so-called New Testament, the copyists were more like gifted amateurs than like the highly trained professional Sopherim. But working as they did under the threat of punishment by the authorities, they took their work seriously. And two things assure us that we today have a text essentially the same as that penned by the original writers. First, we have manuscripts dated much closer to the time of writing than is the case with the Hebrew part of the Bible. Indeed, one fragment of the Gospel of John is from the first half of the second century, less than 50 years from the date when John probably wrote

Ive noticed that the pop-up advertising banner that appears on my community member page now has links to biblical prophecy sites. The floating banner at the top of this page still advertises Space-related sites, despite the fact that most of this pages comments arent concerned with Space (even though they consume a lot of it!) This leads me to wonder if there is any guiding intelligence behind these banners, or are they generated by some clever program that samples words from the page and generates links on a similar theme? What would happen if for the next month I only commented on photographs of ducks? (Something Id quite happily do, given the chance.) Would that advertising banner at the top of my community page advertise links to sites dedicated to duck enthusiasts? Perhaps when Tony and I are through Ill give it a try

 

Im not qualified to comment on quantum physics, but the bible tells us that Jehovah can determine the future, which shouldnt be surprising since he is omnipotent. Interestingly, though, it would appear that Satan and the demons have limited powers of precognition, also. Acts 16:16-24 describes how the apostle Paul encountered a

servant girl who used to furnish her masters with much gain by practicing the art of prediction. But when Paul expelled from her a spirit, a demon of divination, she was no longer able to make accurate predictions. This greatly annoyed the girls masters, since it meant a loss of livelihood, and they had Paul thrown in prison! Because of this demonic involvement in fortune-telling, Deuteronomy 18:10-12 offers the following counsel:

 

There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, anyone who employs divination, a practicer of magic or anyone who looks for omens or a sorcerer, or one who binds others with a spell or anyone who consults a spirit medium or a professional foreteller of events or anyone who inquires of the dead. For everybody doing these things is something detestable to Jehovah, and on account of these detestable things Jehovah your God is driving them away from before you.

 

The interesting question is whether spirit beings are able to foresee events that will occur in the physical world by chance, or whether they influence those events themselves, thus fulfilling their own prophecies. Manipulating physical matter at a subatomic level is no problem for a spirit being (ghosts and aliens have no difficulty walking through solid walls) and if time itself is wrapped up in the equation at a quantum level, perhaps spirits have either option for seeing or setting the future, to a degree. As Ive mentioned, the name Jehovah means he causes to become, which can imply that he manufactures elements of our future. He did this with the Great Flood and he will do it again at Armageddon. The fact that many clairvoyants predictions involve death and disaster (such as the sinking of the Titanic) makes you wonder if the demons play an active part in their fullfilment But the bible also tells us that chance and unforeseen occurrence befall us all, and common sense dictates that we all have freewill over our actions. (Either you will respond to the cautionary information on this page, or you wont.) So it seems likely that spirit beings, independent as they are of our space-time continuum, really can predict the roll of a dice without influencing the result. Dont ask me how this applies to Chaos Theory, though!

 

Naturally, chaos often reigns supreme in the human mind (I know it does in mine), and we all perceive the world through different mental filters. But the really important messages in the bible are presented with a black & white clarity easily discernable to any mind. Differences arise over details. Jehovahs Witnesses, for instance, believe Jesus died on a stake, not a cross. The original Greek word used in the bible was stauros, meaning an upright pole. The symbol of the cross originated in ancient Chaldea and Egypt from worshipers of the God Tammuz (using the initial T). In the 3rd century the Christian church allowed Pagan recruits to retain this symbol of their faith and it was adopted as the symbol of Christs death. So like Christmas, the cross is another Pagan perversion of Christianity. Nevertheless, this is just a detail (albeit a significant one). The really important thing is not the manner of Christs execution but the fact of his ransom sacrifice which for all those exercising faith in him allows redemption from sin and death. On this point all divisions of Christianity agree (as far as I know) But it is worth making sure on the detail of his death concerning the cross, because Christians could otherwise be offending God by the idolatrous use of a Pagan symbol.

 

Yes, Witnesses debate amongst themselves peripheral issues where the scriptures dont offer definitive answers. Questions such as who in the New Order will be allowed to marry and produce children (since Jesus indicated that resurrected ones will not be able to). But we dont argue about issues; we humbly accept the spiritual guidance of the governing body. Unity of worship is essential and provided as individuals we are serving Jehovah whole-souled we dont need to worry about speculative minor scriptural issues.

 

In answer to your questions, a Witness would need to be disfellowshipped to be considered no longer a part of the congregation, although some individuals simply drift away. If a baptised Witness commits a serious sin (such as pre-marital sex) he or she will be counselled by some elders of the congregation. If the Witness is repentant of their sin they will be allowed to remain a member of the congregation and an announcement will be made at one of the meetings that the individual has been reproved (without identifying the nature of the offence). If, however, the individual is not repentant they will have to be disfellowshipped, which means exclusion from the congregation.

 

Happily, this is a very rare event. And in many cases a disfellowshipped individual will later rejoin the congregation once they realise what theyve lost. And this is not so much the hope of everlasting life as the more immediate genuine love and support of Jehovahs servants.

 

Jehovah God himself can read a persons heart, so he knows if any individual is a loyal servant of him. But to gain his acceptance an individual must be actively associated with Gods organisation, although that is no guarantee of Jehovahs approval, if their motive is not pure. Anyone who has had no contact with his organisation will be judged according to Jehovahs perfect qualities of wisdom, justice and love.

Eskimos, Tierra Del Fuegans and Hottentots will have no excuse for leniency. There are currently 128,000 active Jehovahs Witnesses in Argentina and 70,000 in Chile. The good news of Gods kingdom is alive and well in Tierra Del Fuego. Witnesses in Alaska have used squadrons of small aircraft to reach remote Eskimo villages. Interested individuals maintain regular contact by mail. Greenlands population of 56,000 is attended to by 141 proclaimers of Gods word. The first Hottentot to become one of Jehovahs Witnesses was a colourful character called Oupa (Grandfather) Jod. As a boy he was captured by the Germans during the Hottentot wars in 1890. The rejection of his old religion caused a lot of consternation since he was formerly a pillar of the church. Ministers from different parts of the country gathered at his home in an effort to persuade him to give up his new faith, but despite their efforts and the pleadings of his relatives he remained a loyal servant of Jehovah. Many Hottentots have since followed his lead. In total, South Africa has 75,500 Jehovahs Witnesses, from all tribes and ethnic groups, united in sharing the good news of Gods kingdom with others.

 

Remember, Jesus said it would be possible to identify his disciples by the fact they would have love amongst themselves and they would bear fine fruit. On the basis of this evidence I believe the Witnesses interpretation of scripture is likely to be as accurate as you can find.

 

The book of Revelation tells us only 144,000 individuals go to heaven to rule as kings and priests over the earth, under Jesus Christ. Most of these are already up there. Everyone else and that includes you and me have an earthly hope of everlasting life. So your amusing signpost would be better positioned outside the entrance to the Garden of Eden, alongside those angelic security guards Jehovah positioned after Adam & Eve were expelled. Because in essence, the earth will be transformed into a global Garden of Eden in which we will enjoy the conditions God originally intended for mankind on this planet (except well be wearing clothes and most probably still using mobile phones).

 

A similarly appropriate sign outside every church, temple and mosque in the world would be: Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here, or Here Be Dragons. (Revelation 12:9)

 

By the way, I hope you didnt hire your secretary because of her provocative dress sense. Thats one of the oldest tricks in the book for young women attending job interviews (now Ill probably get into trouble).

Good folks like yourself all over the world have being trying various alternatives for 6000 years now, and where has it got them? Only Gods kingdom can rid the earth of crime, corruption and injustice, forever.

 

The Yosemite Valley, so beloved of photographers, was scoured out by glaciers only ten-thousand years ago... and the changeover period may have been as short as ten years. Ten years!

 

Or could it have been just 4 ½ thousand years ago, caused by something even faster and more dramatic?

 

Geology professor John McCampbell wrote: The essential differences between Biblical catastrophism [the Flood] and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student.

 

That the Flood DID happen is seen in the fact that mankind never forgot it. All around the world, in locations as far apart as Alaska and the South Sea Islands, there are ancient stories about it. Native, pre-Columbian civilisations of America, as well as Aborigines of Australia, all have stories about the Flood. While some of the accounts differ in detail, the basic fact that the earth was flooded and only a few humans were saved in a man-made vessel comes through in nearly all versions. The only explanation for such a widespread acceptance is that the Flood was a historical event.

 

Carl says: the notion that you have to destroy things in order to fix them is counterintuitive. This is true unless we are talking about sentient beings with freewill who refuse to be fixed. Since these rotten apples will spoil the whole barrel it becomes necessary to remove them.

 

Moreover, just as it occurred in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of man [Christs heavenly kingdom, ruling since 1914]: they were eating, they were drinking, men were marrying, women were being given in marriage, until that day when Noah entered into the ark, and the flood arrived and destroyed them all. (Luke 17:26,27)

 

Sorry. I know, you want me to lighten up. It isnt easy to tactfully warn people that Something Big is about to happen to the world. When telling people about Gods kingdom we would normally emphasize the benefits of being there instead of the penalty for not getting there. Youre quite right that a loving, humble approach is the best way to win peoples hearts. Humility is something I need to work on. But then those old testament prophets certainly didnt mince their words when warning people to mend their ways. Nor did Christ on occasions, like when he criticised the hypocrisy of religious leaders in his time (Matthew chapter 23). At least I havent yet called anyone on this page a serpent or the offspring of a viper

 

Its only to be expected that some governments would put the interests of industry before the environment. I wouldnt worry too much about the failure of the Kyoto Treaty, since Jehovah has promised that he will soon bring to ruin those ruining the earth. (Revelation 11:18)

 

Give my regards to your Witness friend Bob, Tony. Tell him Faversham and Sittingbourne congregations send their love. Even better, ask him for a bible study next time you meet him that will be a pleasant shock for him!

Or just ask for a copy of Is There a Creator Who Cares About You?. This book could have been written specifically for you, and best of all, it doesnt have one of those schmaltzy cover illustrations, but a fine picture of the Eagle Nebula. We dont charge for any of our publications, by the way. We pay for them ourselves, but any voluntary contribution is appreciated. The reason you see lions feeding peacefully out of the hands of smiling people is because predators will most likely revert to a vegetarian diet as originally prescribed in the Garden of Eden. Sadly, even us humans will probably have to give up our sausages and bacon. So enjoy those cheeseburgers while you can!

 

Bob would never have threatened you with hellfire because that teaching is not found in the bible. There are not laws for every moral dilemma we face in life, but we all have a god-given conscience. This can be trained by studying Gods word the bible, enabling us to make informed judgements about the right thing to do. Those who ignore the wisdom of Jehovahs morality often do the wrong thing, and end up paying the price for their actions.

Its true that Jehovah will be lenient on those who have never had a chance to gain accurate knowledge of him, since the bible tells us there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous (Acts 24:15). But those who have been told and have subsequently chosen another path to goodness that suited their cultural tradition cannot expect leniency since the only way to true goodness is Gods way. Everything else, no matter how wholesome it may appear on the surface is liable to be rotten at the core, since Satan keeps transforming himself into an angel of light. (2nd Corinthians 11:14)

 

The experience of your ex-secretary is sadly not uncommon. Many young Witnesses find our faith restrictive, especially when they view it against the sexually promiscuous freedom experienced by non-Witness peers at school or college. Some abandon worship of Jehovah because of this, but most, to their credit, remain loyal. And many who do leave later return to the fold when they discover all that glitters is not gold. The term witnessing has no meaning other than the preaching work we engage in. Its quite possible some Witnesses would have been less willing to socialise with your secretary after she began dating a non-believing mate. This is because of the bibles counsel at 1st Corinthians 15:33: Do not be misled. Bad associations spoil useful habits. The bible says we should marry only in the Lord, meaning only to someone also practicing true worship. When both partners share a love for Jehovah and his righteous standards there is a far greater chance of the marriage being successful (and less chance of one partner being left holding the baby). I sincerely hope your ex-secretary is happy now, but in my experience there is no greater source of happiness than associating with spiritual brothers and sisters united in their love for Jehovah.

 

Lannie, Ive quoted from Jesuss sermon on the mount at least five times on this page. All of those quotes should be of interest to you. The theme of Jesuss ministry was always Gods kingdom, and that cannot be achieved without retribution against the wicked. No one likes being told that they are naughty and should be punished. We dont like it as children, and we dont like it as adults. Many of us feel a natural instinct to resist authority and we often tend to believe that we know best. This is because we are living in a world dominated by the rebellious spirit of Satan. Jeremiah 10:23 says: It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step. We need Jehovahs guidance, and this is provided by the bible. The warnings God has issued through his prophets are no more than the loving discipline any father would give to his children. He really does have our best interests at heart.

 

I have often wondered why many intelligent people refuse to believe in God, even when presented with compelling evidence and arguments. I suspect that ultimately it comes down to this rejection of authority; this spirit of rebellion and a lack of humility to submit to Jehovahs rule. Denial of God is not an intellectual act; its an emotional reflex against the discipline of a father figure perceived to be authoritarian and unfair. Its like the little child who screams I hate you! to a parent after being scolded. Instead of perceiving the love behind the discipline they reject the parent altogether. Estranged from the source of love and well-being in their lives they grow into embittered, sceptical adults. Their father still loves them, and earnestly wishes for a reconciliation, but they continue to reject him. And they continue to be unhappy, without consciously understanding the reason why.

(Remember the story of the prodigal son? Its there for a good reason, and can be found at Luke chapter 15.)

 

I think somewhere above this mountain of words is a picture of some radio telescopes. After I grew out of dinosaurs, my next obsession was astronomy. In 1999 I was lucky enough to fulfil an ambition by witnessing a total eclipse of the sun (in Bucharest, Romania). That was an awesome experience. Ive seen many amazing and beautiful things through the viewfinder of my trusty old Canon, but the scene presented to my eyes with a 1000mm lens pointed at the sun during totality beats them all. It carried an intellectual and emotional kick that defies words. But I wonder how many people fortunate to witness that event considered what an extraordinary coincidence it is that the sun and moon are at precisely the correct relative distances from the earth to make this astonishing spectacle possible. Perhaps it is just a coincidence. Or perhaps Jehovah arranged things that way to provide us with an occasional spectacular treat, and fill us with wonder at the glory of his handiwork.

 

The heavens are declaring the glory of God; And of the work of his hands the expanse is telling. (Psalm 19:1)

 

Weve had snow here in England today. An astronomical quantity of snowflakes has landed all around us, turning the landscape into a magical, winter wonderland. But amazingly, every single snowflake is of a different, exquisitely beautiful design. On a macroscopic and microscopic level, Jehovah God fills our universe with wonders.

Doug makes a good point about looking to the source of a religion before criticising its practitioners. Christ preached that we should love one another. Christians have often fought and killed each other. Nothing wrong with the source; its the end product thats become corrupt. Jesus himself warned this would happen

 

Heres todays bible reading, taken from Matthew chapter 7:

 

Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.

 

(In light of the verses that follow, we can see Jesus is warning that most people who profess to be his followers are in fact doomed because of the corrupted, God-dishonouring worship they practice.)

 

Be on the watch for the false prophets that come to you in sheeps covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will recognize them. Never do people gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? Likewise every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces worthless fruit; a good tree cannot bear worthless fruit, neither can a rotten tree produce fine fruit. Every tree not producing fine fruit gets cut down and thrown into the fire. Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those [men].

 

(We need only look to the religions of mainstream Christendom to see the fruit they bear: supporting military action, sometimes against members of the same church in another country; backing political candidates or even running for office themselves; promoting celebrations steeped in Paganism; appointing homosexual clergy or condoning the practice amongst laymen; displaying a lack of unity by bitterly arguing over issues like gay or women priests; promoting idolatry such as worshiping statues of Mary; sexually abusing children and then concealing the evidence)

 

Not everyone saying to me, Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name? And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness.

 

These perversions of Christianity along with all other false religions are described in Revelation as Babylon the Great. And as Ive mentioned, God tells us he will soon put it in the hearts of world rulers to completely destroy this global network of false worship, before bringing destruction upon themselves. It is therefore important to free oneself from involvement in any religion that proves rotten by its fruits.

 

To clarify Carls question about religion and politics, here are some more quotes:

 

Jesus, knowing they [the Jews] were about to come and seize him to make him king, withdrew again into the mountain all alone. (John 6:15)

 

Later, he told the Roman governor: My kingdom is no part of this world. If my kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source. (John 18:36)

 

John 17:16, again: They are no part of the world, just as I [Jesus] am no part of the world.

 

Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God. (James 4:4)

 

The reason for this? As 1st John 5:19 says: the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.

 

And at John 14:30, Jesus referred to Satan as being the ruler of the world.

So, whichever candidate you vote for, youll just be voting for one of Satans stooges!

 

Jesus repeatedly emphasised that the only real hope for mankind was Gods kingdom. This was the central theme of his ministry. How can a Christian display faith in Christs message if he believes voting for one political candidate or another will make the world a better place? Does such behaviour really show loyalty to Christ, who as our role model refused to become a political leader?

 

The fact that you guys are so preoccupied with your political debates just demonstrates that you think Gods kingdom is irrelevant to our world. But do any of you honestly believe that casting your vote will solve any of the big problems facing our planet?

 

Do not be loving either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; because everything in the world - the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of ones means of life - does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world. Furthermore, the world is passing away and so is its desire, but he that does the will of God remains forever. (1st John 2:15-17)

 

Tony, Im still hoping you will pinpoint SOMETHING in this world that tells you God either doesnt exist or simply isnt important in our lives. Youve already indicated that you think he does exist, so why your reluctance to give honour where honour is due? Shouldnt you at least spend a little time getting to know him better?

 

The scripture about looking at a woman was a warning about falling into the trap of adultery. Heres another good one:

 

For as a honeycomb the lips of a strange woman keep dripping, and her palate is smoother than oil. But the after-effect from her is as bitter as wormwood; it is as sharp as a two-edged sword. (Proverbs 5:3,4)

 

When you consider the heartache of broken marriages, the distraught children and the financial wrangles that can arise from adultery, who would question the wisdom of these words?

 

As for singles dating, you already have Pauls words about dressing modestly. A Christian wouldnt dress provocatively to attract a mate (no mini skirts for the ladies, Im afraid!). And dating should be done in public places or chaperoned (such an old-fashioned word), in order that the couple dont place themselves in a situation where they might get carried away with themselves How many churches of Christendom would reprove members for engaging in pre-marital sex or exclude them altogether if they remained unrepentant?

 

People who are homosexual by orientation are as deserving of Gods love as anyone else. The immoral sexual urges they feel are a consequence of inherited imperfection, but if they genuinely love God they will respect his prohibition of these practices. God doesnt class certain activities as sinful because hes a spoil-sport who just wants to stop people having fun. No, he warns us against certain behaviours because he knows they are harmful. There are good reasons why God prohibited murder, stealing or sleeping with your neighbours wife. There are also good reasons why God condemns homosexual behaviour, bestiality and incest. These laws are made with our best interests at heart, because God loves us. He is our creator and he knows better than anyone else what is good or bad for us physically, mentally or socially.

 

Romans 1:24-27 says: Therefore God, in keeping with the desires of their hearts, gave them up to uncleanness, that their bodies might be dishonoured among them, even those who exchanged the truth of God for the lie and venerated and rendered sacred service to the creation rather than the One who created, who is blessed forever. Amen. That is why God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error.

 

With sexually-transmitted diseases such as AIDS so prevalent in the world, we can see how people who behave in this way receive the full recompense, which was due for their error.

 

God promises that under his kingdom, during Christs millennial reign, humans will regain the physical and mental perfection that he originally bestowed on Adam and Eve. Any of his servants who previously held immoral desires will be cleansed of them as they joyfully serve their God under his perfect new government.

 

At the start of these posts I didnt identify my religion because I felt it would probably prejudice your view of my arguments against evolution, and my support for the Bible. But it would be unfair of me to give the impression that the information Ive presented here has come from my own independent research. Some of it has, but most has come from the superb educational programme offered by the organisation I believe is currently best representing pure worship today. They have abandoned false religious practices and are renowned for their global preaching activity, in response to Jesuss commandment. They remain politically neutral and many even died during the last world war for refusing to fight. (They were identified in Hitlers concentration camps by purple triangles on their uniforms.) The subterfuge Ive employed on this page is in not using Gods name...

 

You should have guessed by now that I am one of Jehovahs Witnesses. If this thread has any life left in it, Ill now use Gods name as I should have done throughout.

 

Glorifying Jehovahs name is an important aspect of pure worship. Hallowed be thy name the churches of Christendom recite, and yet they have abandoned Gods personal name. Hallelujah! (Praise Jehovah!), they sing, but how often do you hear that name uttered from the pulpit? Clearly, it is not possible to befriend someone without using their personal name and that is what Jehovah has dire

Today's bible reading is from 2nd Peter, chapter 3:

 

For you know this first, that in the last days there will come ridiculers with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires and saying: Where is this promised presence of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep [in death], all things are continuing exactly as from creations beginning.

 

However, let this one fact not be escaping your notice, beloved ones, that one day is with The Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow respecting his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance But there are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell.

 

In [the Bible], however, are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unsteady are twisting, as [they do] also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. You, therefore, beloved ones, having this advance knowledge, be on your guard that you may not be led away with them by the error of the law-defying people and fall from your own steadfastness.

 

Hello again, Tony. Im glad you share some of my feelings about Christmas. It would certainly seem better to give someone a gift spontaneously out of love, than because its to be expected on a certain day of the year. I do wish youd read my posts more carefully, though. I told you Christ was born in October. We dont know the exact day, and it doesnt matter.

 

Nothing has changed in Trevor World because the Bible has not changed. Its morals remain the same, while the worlds have declined sharply. Just consider what passes for entertainment on our TV screens now, compared to 50 or even 20 years ago. There were a lot of outraged protests when The Exorcist appeared on cinema screens in 1973. This film had its terrestrial TV premiere in Britain a couple of years ago and no one batted an eyelid. Satan has been very busy in these Last Days

 

You ask me whose reading of the bible is correct. My answer would be anyone who can prove their interpretation by comprehensive scriptural references. That is what Ive aimed to do on this page. If someone has a different interpretation backed up by scriptures then we can hopefully have a dialogue to resolve the apparent contradiction. For example, Trinitarians often quote John 1:1 as proof of the trinity. Many bible translations read the Word [ie Jesus] was God. But the rules of Greek grammar concerning qualitative anarthrous predicate nouns (!) mean this scripture should more accurately read the Word was a god. And looking at the context of this scripture with others as well as examining many other verses that flatly contradict the notion of a trinity it is not difficult to prove beyond doubt which interpretation is correct.

 

1st John 4:1 says: Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions to see whether they originate with God, because many false prophets have gone forth into the world.

 

Let me ask you bluntly: is anyone who calls themselves a Christian, who reads the Bible, but interprets it differently to you simply wrong?

 

- Probably. (Unless they can prove otherwise from the bible)

 

And if wars have been fought over this issue, then all the participants in that war were wrong. No true Christian would fight.

 

You again say that the bible contradicts simple observation of the world around us but again fail to justify your generalisation with a specific example.

 

Why is it that I am happy to answer other peoples specific questions but nobody answers mine?

 

What is the point in anyone believing only parts of the Bible? It is either Gods Word or it is not. You either accept all of it as literally true or you dismiss it all as superstitious hogwash (with perhaps a few words of wisdom in the new testament). There is sufficient proof of divine inspiration throughout the bible for us to have confidence in the complete text as reliable and trustworthy. God has no time for salad bar Christians who pick and choose which passages of scripture they like, while rejecting others. So-called Gay Christians, for instance, whose interpretation of the bible amounts to a complete rejection of numerous scriptures in both old and new testaments condemning homosexual behaviour. They are only deceiving themselves if they believe they can continue their immoral lifestyle and have Gods approval.

 

This leads us to Christian Naturists! (The phrase Only in America, springs to mind.)

 

You say A Biblical citation would be appreciated. Are you having a laugh? You, who have repeatedly complained about my parading passages from that dusty old book.

 

Well, we all know Adam & Eve started out in the buff, but after they sinned God made clothes for them himself. (Genesis 3:21). He wouldnt have done this if hed intended for them to continue living naked.

 

Noah was found naked in his tent after getting drunk. His sons, Shem and Japheth walked backwards into the tent so they wouldnt see their father naked and they spread a cloth over him to conceal his shame. (Genesis 9:21-23) This is hardly an endorsement of naturism!

 

1st Timothy 2:9 says: I desire the women to adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind.

 

Revelation 16:15: Happy is the one that stays awake and keeps his outer garments, that he may not walk naked and people look upon his shamefulness.

 

The practice of nudism can be linked to false prophets: Sabbatai Zevi arose in the 17th century out of Smyrna. He proclaimed his messiahship to Jews throughout Europe. Christians, too, listened to him. Zevi offered his followers liberation - apparently by letting them practice sin without restraint. His closest followers carried out orgies, nudism, fornication, and incest, then punished themselves with whippings, by rolling about naked in the snow, and by burying themselves neck-deep in the cold earth. When he travelled to Turkey, Zevi was seized and told that he must either convert to Islam or die. He converted. Many of his devotees were shattered. Yet, for the next two centuries, Zevi was still called messiah in some quarters.

 

Leviticus chapter 18 states repeatedly you must not lay bare the nakedness of (followed by every relative you can think of). Although in this instance, it is specifically condemning incest.

 

Matthew 5:28 says: Everyone that keeps on looking at a woman so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

 

And we all know that nudist camps attract the wrong sort of people for the wrong sort of reasons.

 

I hope that has answered your question. If any of these Christian Naturists can offer any scriptural counter proofs Id be very interested in reading them.

 

Lannie, we all have doubts. But without faith in God life has no meaning, hope or future.

 

Carl, if all those Christian Science meetings have convinced you that the bible is Mans word and not Gods, I would suggest you need to find another church.

 

There are other holy books, like the Quran. But an examination of these books does not reveal the evidence of divine inspiration we find in the Bible. Certainly the Quran has no success in prophecies to match the Bible. I could produce reams of information on this subject if anyones interested

 

The bible makes it clear that not all forms of worship are acceptable to God. Many Christian religions deviate from or abandon altogether bible principles in shocking ways. The only yardstick for true worship can be the Bible itself. There are Christians devoted to pure worship in 235 countries of the world today, actively promoting the good news of Gods kingdom. These countries have very diverse cultures, but the truth of Gods word motivates them to break free from false religious practices and adopt a form of worship pleasing to God.

 

Allowing for a subtle subterfuge on my part, Im surprised no one has yet guessed which religion I belong to

Right, where were we? Okay, read this 350 year-old poster:

 

PUBLICK NOTICE

 

The Observation of CHRISTMAS having been deemed a Sacrilege, the exchanging of Gifts and Greetings, dressing in Fine Clothing, Feasting and similar Satanical Practices are hereby FORBIDDEN with the Offender liable to a Fine of FIVE SHILLINGS

 

This was a statute passed in 1660 in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in New England, where Christmas was banned from 1659 to 1681. In 17th-century England, Christmas celebrations were also outlawed as pagan and papish, Saturnalian and Satanic, idolatrous and leading to idleness.

 

The pagan Saturnalia was a seven-day Roman festival running from December 17 to 24, held in honour of Saturn, the god of agriculture. The festival was marked by boisterous feasting, drinking, merrymaking, dancing, gift-giving and the decorating of homes with evergreens. December 25, the birthday of Mithra the sun-god, originally the Babylonian god of light, became the climax of the week-long celebrations. Jesus himself would have been born in October since he was 33 ½ years old when he died on Nisan 14 in the Jewish calendar. (Furthermore, shepherds would not have been out tending sheep in the middle of winter when the flocks would have been kept undercover.)

 

In an effort to make converts of the pagans and to win back Christians who had fallen away to such worldly practices, the Roman Catholic Church, in the middle of the fourth century, Christianized Mithras birthday and adopted the date and customs, but designated it as a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. Thus was born Christmas.

 

There are only two references to birthday celebrations in the bible. The first belonged to Pharaoh of Egypt, and it was marked by the hanging of his baker. The second celebration was in honour of King Herod and involved the be-heading of John the baptiser. How are we to look at these two birthday celebrations? Is it just coincidental that they are mentioned and that both were for persons not having Gods approval? Or could it be that God deliberately had these details recorded in his Word, which he says is beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight? (2nd Timothy 3:16) At the very least it can be said that these two accounts Biblically put birthday celebrations in a bad light, as a practice of those estranged from God. The first century Christians certainly didnt celebrate either their own birthdays or that of Jesus Christ, the date of which isnt even recorded.

 

Keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord; and quit sharing with them in the unfruitful works that belong to the darkness, but, rather, even be reproving them. (Ephesians 5:10,11)

 

What fellowship do righteousness and lawlessness have? Or what sharing does light have with darkness? Further, what harmony is there between Christ and Be´lial? Or what portion does a faithful person have with an unbeliever? And what agreement does Gods temple have with idols?... Therefore get out from among them, and separate yourselves, says the Lord, and quit touching the unclean thing; and I will take you in, and you will be sons and daughters to me, says the Lord Almighty. (2nd Corinthians 6:14-18)

 

Compare Exodus 32: 4-10. Notice that the Israelites adopted an Egyptian religious practice but gave it a new name, a festival to the Lord. But God severely punished them for this. Today we see only 20th-century practices associated with holidays such as Christmas, Easter and birthdays. Some may appear harmless. But God observed firsthand the pagan religious practices from which these originated. Should not his view be what matters to us?

 

Genuine love for God and a strong desire to be pleasing to him will help a person to break free from unchristian practices that may have had an emotional appeal. A person who really knows and loves God does not feel that by shunning practices that honour false gods or promote lies he is being deprived of happiness. Genuine love causes him to rejoice, not over unrighteousness, but with the truth. (See 1st Corinthians 13:6.)

 

 

As an illustration: Suppose a crowd come to a mans home saying they are there to celebrate his birthday. He does not favour the celebration of birthdays. He does not like to see people overeat or get drunk or engage in loose conduct. But some of them do all those things, and they bring presents for everyone there except him! On top of all that, they pick the birthday of one of the mans enemies as the date for the celebration. How would the man feel? Would you want to be a party to it? This is exactly what is being done by Christmas celebrations.

 

In short, Christmas is not for Christians.

 

The doctrine of eternal damnation in hellfire has its roots in ancient Babylon and Assyria. It is not something taught by the bible, which clearly states the dead are conscious of nothing at all (Ecclesiastes 9:5,10). Depictions of hell portrayed in Catholic churches in Italy have been traced to Etruscan origins. But the real root of this God-dishonouring doctrine is of course, Satan. God is love, and he would never condone torture.

 

The scientists Ive quoted highlight major problems not only with the fossil record, but with mutations, spontaneous generation, scientific speculation and assumptions, fraud, and the empirical validity of the theory as a whole. It would be foolish and arrogant to dismiss all these issues as irrelevant to the inviolable fact of evolution. If Creationists argue amongst themselves it is because some of them havent read their bibles properly or lack an understanding of Hebrew or Greek. The only authoritative account for the origin of life on Earth is the Bible, which is demonstratively the Word of God, the creator of all life on Earth.

 

It doesnt surprise me that no one has conceded any of my arguments. It takes courage and humility to admit that long-held beliefs could be wrong. Only you have attempted to challenge the evidence I presented against the fossil record. No one has yet challenged me on the prophecies I described from the bible or on the wisdom of any specific scripture Ive quoted. All you can do is make generalised, condemnatory remarks about the bible with nothing to support them. You criticise me for quoting the bible in an attempt to prove its worth. This is like asking a defendant in a court of law to remain silent, since a judgement of guilt has already been passed. It betrays your closed mind and a blind allegiance to faulty dogma.

 

Whats your explanation for paranormal phenomena, Tony? How do you explain numerous, well-documented accounts of several eye witnesses simultaneously seeing a human apparition appear and disappear? Are they all to be dismissed as liars because their observations cannot be tested empirically?

 

It is not enough to simply say I believe and then sit back and wait for salvation. The fact that so many Christians celebrate pagan, God-dishonouring festivals, as well as smoke, gamble, drink to excess, and even engage in sexual immorality, demonstrates how important an accurate knowledge of Gods word the bible is. Furthermore, faith without works is dead (James 2:26) so true worshipers are obliged to take an active part in spreading the good news of Gods kingdom. Regular attendance at meetings for worship is also required (Hebrews 10:24,25) as well as a personal dedication to God, symbolised by water baptism. This is how Christ instructed the first Christian congregations, and those instructions should still be followed by Christians today.

 

Which scientific observations indicate that God doesnt exist?

 

Neither George Bush nor any other human can initiate Armageddon. It is Gods war and he will carry it out in his own time.

 

You should believe in the occult, but also avoid it like the plague.

 

Carl, which of my beliefs are irrational?

 

My beliefs do not stem from my environment, culture, parents or any personal need. They stem from an examination of Gods word, the Bible. They would not change in a different culture because the bible does not change. And in view of the wildly unpopular and unconventional beliefs Ive expressed on this page I dont think social conformity is one of my motives!

 

The future for you and your children is of utmost concern to our loving creator. He wants you all to gain an accurate knowledge of his will and purpose in order that you may benefit from his imminent kingdom (on Earth, including Rockville). His kingdom is a continuation of this plane of existence. Hopefully, a great many people now alive will never have to die at all. That is how God originally intended things. The reason death feels instinctively wrong to so many of us is because we were never designed to face it. God put eternity in our hearts (Ecclesiastes 3:11) and eternal life is what he promises for all who love him.

And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite. (Daniel 2:44)

 

There, you see. The USA, UK & Australia are about to be crushed and replaced by Gods kingdom, so why waste your breath arguing about them?

 

Carl, your suggestion that Ive bought my beliefs implies that Ive been hoodwinked. You are saying the only real reason I believe in God and the bible is because my beliefs fulfil a personal need. You are ignoring all the evidence Ive presented on this page - all the serious doubts expressed by evolutionists, all the prophecies and wisdom of the bible. I dont deny that my belief in God fulfils a spiritual need we all have such spiritual needs but are you seriously suggesting there are not solid, evidential reasons for believing in God or the truth of his word, the Bible?

 

I didnt adopt my beliefs through a weak-willed, lazy whim because they felt right. Ive studied this stuff for over twenty years. Ive read a lot of books (including some by evolutionists and agnostics, Lannie) and attended a lot of Christian meetings. Ive been for long, lonely walks at sunset and pondered deeply on the mysteries of the cosmos. Ive even read through reams of ungodly bunk on this page. I am more convinced than ever that a belief system based on Gods word the bible is as close as anyone can get to absolute truth. It all fits. All the Big Questions are answered. And cultivating a knowledge of God and his purposes through the bible brings a peace, contentment and joy that is simply not available anywhere else.

 

We are all born guilty because as sons and daughters of Adam & Eve we inherit sinful imperfection. But there is hope for anyone who exercises faith in the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ. And the focus of hope for most of Gods servants is not heaven, but a paradisaic Earth restored to the peaceful conditions God originally intended.

 

Lannie, the bible is Gods word. It describes his personality, laws and dealings with mankind. The theme running through both old and new testaments is Gods kingdom. The book is full of evidence of divine inspiration. I do not worship the book but the person revealed in the book. The One who wrote it and created the world, and to whom all honour and glory are due.

 

Youve said on this page that you believe in God, so why shouldnt you believe in Satan? God created humans with freewill and many of us have rebelled against God. Why is it so ridiculous to believe that before he made us God created spirit creatures with freewill also, and that some of them also chose to rebel? Satan is the father of the lie and a master of deception. Perhaps his greatest trick has been convincing most of the world he doesnt exist. People can then blame all the worlds troubles unfairly on God, unwittingly playing into Satans hand. Remember when Satan tempted Jesus in the wilderness with all the kingdoms of the Earth? He could only do this because he really is the invisible ruler of the world. And that is why the Earth is so full of wickedness, lies and corruption (and why most of the internet is pornography).

 

Perhaps if you lived in my part of the world, with more ghost-sightings and hauntings than you can shake a stick at, you wouldnt be so sceptical about the existence of a spirit realm. The most haunted village in England, called Pluckley is just a short drive south of where I live (www.pluckley.net). Ive known a lot of people (mostly non-Christians) who have had inexplicable supernatural experiences. Even my parents dog would refuse to be walked past a house in my town that is reputedly haunted. Ive heard enough first-hand eye witness accounts to know there is something out there. Im just very grateful for my knowledge of the bible which explains the true identity and purpose of these manifestations.

 

Tony, youve now asked me three times when the world will end. Ive already told you twice I cant answer that question. Im beginning to get the impression that beneath your bluster and bravado youre a worried man

 

Your questions about the contest between good and evil reveal that you havent paid any attention to the answers Ive already given. You are simply repeating your incredulity at the issue of Gods sovereignty, which offers no basis for argument.

 

George Bush is as blind to the truth of Gods kingdom as those who dont believe in God. If he was earnestly interested in pursuing pure worship and Gods glory instead of his own, he would resign from politics.

 

The reason Ive bothered to comment on this page and field questions is because its my duty as one of Gods servants to share my faith with others. Jesuss instruction to his disciples and all who would follow him was very clear: Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And, look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things. (Matthew 28:19,20)

 

What better way for me to give a global witness than via the internet?

 

And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14)

Are you sure that's a plastic bag, Phil? It's hanging very close to the ankles if it is. I think it's just a reflection of light. But as you say, the visual ambiguities in this image are what make it such a fascinating abstract. Can those slender dark forms really be people? Are we looking at a city street or do the dark shapes and reflections suggest trees? And what's with the little grey squares?

 

To my eye this image perfectly captures the fine balance between meaningful abstract and incomprehensible chaos. Perhaps those who rated it low can only see the chaos. Personally, I think it does an excellent job at evoking a rain-splattered experience. Those little squares remind me of rain drops splashing in puddles. The eyes-down viewpoint and blur perfectly evoke a watery-eyed vision of walking in the rain. My hunch is it was taken through a window and the squares are interior reflections. But however it was produced it's an absorbing image that deserves more credit.

Hi, Tony. I'm starting to get that head-banging feeling you complain of. I'm sure you're not really as dim as you pretend to be.

 

If God destroyed Satan as soon as he caused some trouble, what would that prove? Only that God is all-powerful and that he ruthlessly crushes any opposition. It wouldn't prove that worshiping God is really the best thing to do. In order to settle this issue he has to allow Satan time to influence others and thus determine whether God is right or Satan's rebellion is justified. It's really very simple.

 

The demons are not invented. They are angels who sided with Satan after he challenged God's authority. They were permanently expelled from heaven along with Satan in 1914 and have been causing problems ever since. Sometimes in subtle ways, like appearing as deceased relatives (ghosts) thus encouraging unscriptural belief in an after-life or the immortality of the soul. They are involved in all forms of spiritism, which is why dabbling with the occult is a seriously dangerous thing to do. They may even be impersonating little green men in spaceships in order to deflect religious devotion from God to a belief in benign extra-terrestrials (as well as indirectly supporting the theory of evolution). Obviously, they could never land a flying saucer on the White House lawn without exposing their true identity to the world. This would provide conclusive proof of the existence of a spirit realm and God, which is the last thing they want.

 

God hasn't caused all the misery in the world. Satan was initially responsible for defying God and deceiving Eve into disobeying God. Adam wasn't deceived but followed his wife, so he is more reprehensible.

God has to allow the present Satan-led system to run for a time, before ending it once and for all. This is a demonstration of his wisdom. Soon he will exercise his justice and power. Thereafter, all mankind will benefit from his love. These are his four cardinal virtues. The greatest has always been love and we can all benefit from this love today. I really don't understand why all this seems a mystery to you, or why you find God's sense of justice so abhorrent.

 

Yes, I was aware of Santa being an anagram of Satan. This is quite appropriate in view of the fact that Christmas is a pagan festival that anyone interested in pure worship would steer well clear of. Regards.

Yes, God could have scrubbed Adam & Eve out of existence and started again, but that would have left the issue of universal sovereignty unresolved. He has allowed mankind a long history of painful independence to settle the question of his right to rule. The doom & gloom prophecies concerning the end of this wicked system should be a cause for joy, since they herald an end to human suffering. What sort of a loving God would our creator be if he didnt threaten to destroy the wicked? Dont the righteous deserve a chance at happiness? The promises of Gods kingdom are not too good to be true; it is this world we currently live in that is too bad to continue.

 

God didnt create the serpent. He created a powerful spirit being with freewill who came to covet Gods glory and question his right to rule. This spirit came to be called Devil and Satan, and it was he who spoke to Eve by means of the serpent. If God had simply destroyed Satan the issue over his sovereignty would still remain unresolved. There is also the associated question of whether people will unselfishly worship God and remain loyal to him despite opposition or persecution. Satan introduced the spirit of selfishness into the world, which is all too evident today. Most people would rather pursue their own pleasures than worship and serve God, especially when such loyalty curtails some of the pleasures they formerly enjoyed, such as smoking, gambling or promiscuous sex. They dont realise these worldly enticements are illusions that simply lead to pain and sorrow. The only source of meaningful contentment and joy is a close relationship with God. (Isaiah 48:17,18)

 

This age-old issue of universal sovereignty is therefore being decided by the tragic history of our world and by the attitude and behaviour of individuals like you and me. The bible says you are either for God or against him; there can be no sitting on the fence. Gods greatest quality has always been love. That is why he will soon bring an end to all pain, sorrow and death, forever. That is why he wants everyone to accept his right to rule and live by his righteous standards so we may enjoy the benefits of his imminent kingdom. But in his wisdom he has allowed us freewill to make this choice for ourselves. So we all need to ask ourselves the question, whose side am I on?

 

Be wise, my son, and make my heart rejoice, that I may make a reply to him that is taunting me. (Proverbs 27:11)

Hi, Tony. I had planned to dig up some more prophecies from Daniel and Revelation to help answer your question, but like 1914, they take a bit of explaining, and like you, I could do with a rest from this discussion. Ill just whet your appetite by saying they involve the succession of world powers through history. Very briefly:

 

One describes how Alexander the Great (the king of Greece) would destroy the Medo-Persian Empire that was to follow Babylon as the dominant world power of Daniels day. It even describes the four-way division of Alexanders Greek Empire following his death.

 

Another prophecy describes by means of a symbolic horned beast the powerful arrival of the Roman Empire, followed by Britain defeating the three rival empires of France, Spain and Holland. (Sounds far-fetched, I know, but given the benefit of hindsight, history fits the facts remarkably well.) Britain in turn, would lead to an Anglo-American world power which would stand as the last king during the time of the end. This two-horned beast described in Revelation displays the arrogant behaviour you are so fond of complaining about concerning the United States and its sidekick, Britain. The recent war in Iraq is a good example of this prophecied dual world power flexing its muscles. The prophecy also describes how this last beast would help create a new beast in the form of the League of Nations which would be temporarily abyssed (as it was during World War II) before rising again as the United Nations, following which it will go off into destruction.

 

If you want me to flesh out the details of these prophecies I might find the energy at a later date, or better still, I could point you in the direction of some publications that will do the job better than I could.

 

Ive already answered your question about the time of the end. We know the last days began in 1914 and would continue for a short time. They are now 90 years old and all the signs suggest we are very close to the end. But no one knows precisely when that will be. There remains just one significant prophecy to be fulfilled before Armageddon, which involves the complete destruction of false religious authority. The political powers will turn against organised religion, described in Revelation as a harlot and called Babylon the Great. It says they will eat up her fleshy parts and completely burn her with fire. This will be a surprising event in nations like our own, where freedom of worship is sanctioned, but the bible says God will put it in their hearts to carry out this act. In other words, hell get human rulers to do his dirty work for him.

 

So when you see news reports of churches being closed, worship banned and religious leaders imprisoned, youll know theres very little sand left in the hour glass

 

Until that time, we should draw close to God, not through fear of getting squashed at Armageddon, but because we love him and want to serve him whole-heartedly without a selfish desire for reward. You cant pull the wool over Gods eyes. And seeing the beautiful Earth for what it is - a product of his loving creation and not an evolutionary accident - is a good first step to cultivating an appreciation for our creator. The ransom sacrifice of his own son on our behalf, liberating us from sin and death is, perhaps, an even more powerful reason to love him.

 

Lannie, I dont quite follow your reasoning that Pauls instruction to be submissive to worldly authorities somehow contradicts Jesus instruction to turn the other cheek. Both are saying we shouldnt go looking for trouble. No Christian could conscionably join the armed forces. Im sure most would think twice about joining the police, even though they perform an essential job in this current world system.

 

In the days of ancient Israel God sometimes intervened in their wars with other nations, to demonstrate his power and authority, since the defeated nations worshiped false Gods and behaved indecently in his eyes. Israel finally lost Gods favour (after testing his patience on many occasions), when they rejected and killed his son, the Messiah. Thereafter, God has not supported any nation in conflict, but has gathered a spiritual nation for himself out of all nations of the Earth. True Christians would therefore remain neutral in political affairs and refuse to serve in armed forces.

 

At times of war, many have been imprisoned as conscientious objectors. In Germany, many were put in concentration camps and killed. But God promises a resurrection for such ones, so their deaths were not in vain. God permits these worldly governments to exist temporarily, and they serve the purpose of bringing a measure of law and order. The fact that some governments can produce characters like Hitler is a testament to human inability to rule itself independent of God. This is all part of the issue of universal sovereignty discussed earlier. Murderous leaders such as Hitler and Stalin are also a consequence of the invisible God of this system of things, Satan the Devil, who has been puppet master to all worldly governments for many years, but most especially since 1914.

Well, for someone who bemoans the grubby politics of organised religion you certainly seem to enjoy wallowing in muddy political waters of your own

 

My response to your response to my quotes:

 

Darwin: He was writing in 1859. You say science has progressed since then, and I fully agree. But has the evidence from the fossil record changed since then? No. You ignore my following quote from Heribert Nilsson, but heres another to illustrate my point: The pattern that we were told to find for the last 120 years does not exist, - Niles Eldridge, palaeontologist from the American Museum of Natural History in New York. He believes new species arise, not from gradual changes, but in sudden bursts of evolution. The many transitional forms needed for Darwinian evolution never existed and no fossils will ever bridge the gaps. The grandly-named cover story for this embarrassing absence of evidence is called punctuated equilibrium, which you mention in your post. But this sub-theory is nothing new. It was first proposed by Richard Goldschmidt in the 1930s, when he gave it the more endearing name hopeful monsters. He was maligned and ridiculed by his scientific peers at the time, but the evolutionary fraternity have now come to see the merits of Goldschmidts idea, since it does away with any need for the fossil evidence that has persistently eluded them. All they had to do was come up with a more respectable, scientific-sounding title for this latest article of faith.

 

Stephen J Gould has faith in it: Certainly the [fossil] record is poor, but the jerkiness you see is not the result of gaps, it is the consequence of the jerky mode of evolutionary change. The problem with hopeful monsters/punctuated equilibrium is that it relies on random chance more than natural selection formerly the bedrock of evolutionary theory. As Gould admits: Substantial amounts of genetic change may not be subject to natural selection and may spread through populations at random. In other words, lifes just a game of dice. Summing up this controversy at a convention on punctuated equilibrium, Science magazine reported: The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution [small changes within the species] can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution [big jumps across species boundaries]the answer can be given as a clear, No.

 

Jastrow: You produce a curious non-sequiter by firstly stating that invertebrates cannot be fossilised, and then quoting Jastrow describing this very process. Your quotation then describes the absence of any visible evolution for half-a-billion years before the sudden appearance of vertebrates. Call this hopeful monsters if you like, but a deliberate act of creation seems more sensible to me.

 

Evolution from Space: Apologies for not citing my sources more accurately. A quick Google search reveals this book was written by Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe. Publishers: Dent, London, 1981. Yes, in this book they are proposing the theory that life could have arrived on Earth from a comet or meteorite. Both scientists believe evolution controls the development of life forms, but their extensive studies also lead them to the conclusion that there has to be a creator God. (Similar to your position, Tony.) Once we seethat the probability of life, originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favourable properties of physics on which life depends are in every respect deliberate, [or created].

 

Wickramasinge writes: From my earliest training as a scientist I was very strongly brainwashed to believe that science cannot be consistent with any kind of deliberate creation. That notion has had to be very painfully shed. I am quite uncomfortable in the situation, the state of mind I now find myself in. But there is no logical way out of it. She goes on: I now find myself driven to this position by logic. There is no other way in which we can understand the precise ordering of the chemicals of life except to invoke the creations on a cosmic scale We were hoping as scientists that there would be a way round our conclusion, but there isnt.

 

Fred Hoyle concludes: Rather than accept the fantastically small probability of life having arisen through the blind forces of nature, it seemed better to suppose that the origin of life was a deliberate intellectual act.

 

[Gods] invisible attributeshave been visible, ever since the world began, to the eye of reason, in the things he has made. - Romans 1:20

 

A View of Life: This was written by Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould & Sam Singer (California, 1981). The quotation is from page 649. If the question of how fossils of trilobites can show more efficient eyes than modern arthropods troubles you, perhaps your faith in Stephen Jay Gould is misplaced, since he wrote those words.

 

Alfred S. Romer: I take your point about the date of his viewpoint, but thanks to your Jastrow quote we can see that subsequent findings of pre-Cambrian life reveal nothing but hopeful monsters and deluded evolutionists.

 

Encyclopaedia Britannica: Wheres the joke? Is this reference work not qualified to comment on Evolution?

 

Stephen Jay Gould: To spare me some effort, Ill copy and paste an article concerning Gould that appeared in the July 22nd, 1987 issue of Awake!:

 

ON September 30, 1986, The New York Times published an article by a New York University professor, Irving Kristol. His contention is that if evolution were taught in the public schools as the theory it is rather than as the fact it isnt, there would not be the controversy that now rages between evolution and creationism. Kristol stated: There is also little doubt that it is this pseudoscientific dogmatism that has provoked the current religious reaction.

 

Though this theory is usually taught as an established scientific truth, Kristol said, it is nothing of the sort. It has too many lacunae [gaps]. Geological evidence does not provide us with the spectrum of intermediate species we would expect. Moreover, laboratory experiments reveal how close to impossible it is for one species to evolve into another, even allowing for selective breeding and some genetic mutation. . . . The gradual transformation of the population of one species into another is a biological hypothesis, not a biological fact.

 

The article touched a raw nerve in Harvard professor Stephen Jay Gould, a fervent defender of evolution as a fact, not just a theory. His rebuttal of Kristols article was published in a popularized science magazine, Discover, January 1987 issue. It revealed the very dogmatism Kristol deplored.

 

In his protesting essay, Gould repeated a dozen times his assertion that evolution is a fact. A few examples: Darwin established the fact of evolution. The fact of evolution is as well established as anything in science (as secure as the revolution of the earth around the sun). By the time Darwin died, nearly all thinking people came to accept the fact of evolution. Evolution is as well established as any scientific fact (I shall give the reasons in a moment). The fact of evolution rests upon copious data that fall, roughly, into three great classes.

 

For the first of these three great classes of copious data, Gould cites as direct evidence for evolution the small-scale changes within species of moths, fruit flies, and bacteria. But such variations within species are irrelevant to evolution. Evolutions problem is to change one species into another species. Gould extols Theodosius Dobzhansky as the greatest evolutionist of our century, but it is Dobzhansky himself who dismisses Goulds argument above as irrelevant.

 

Concerning the fruit flies of Goulds argument, Dobzhansky says mutations usually show deterioration, breakdown, or disappearance of some organs. . . . Many mutations are, in fact, lethal to their possessors. Mutants which equal the normal fly in vigor are a minority, and mutants that would make a major improvement of the normal organization in the normal environments are unknown.

 

Science, the official magazine for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, also spiked Goulds argument: Species do indeed have a capacity to undergo minor modifications in the physical and other characteristics, but this is limited and with a longer perspective it is reflected in an oscillation about a mean [a position about midway between extremes]. In both plants and animals, variations within a species will oscillate or move about like pellets shaken in a glass jarthe variations are held within the boundaries of the species just as the pellets are confined within the jar. Just as the Bibles account of creation says, a plant or an animal may vary, yet it is restricted to reproduce according to its kind.Genesis 1:12, 21, 24, 25.

 

For the second of his three classes, Gould offers big mutations: We have direct evidence for large-scale changes, based upon sequences in the fossil record. By saying the changes were large scale, one species changing into another in a few big jumps, he escapes the need for the nonexistent intermediate fossils. But in going from small changes to big jumps, he goes from the frying pan into the fire.

 

Kristol comments on this: We just dont know of any such quantum jumps that create new species, since most genetic mutations work against the survival of the individual. And Goulds greatest evolutionist of our century, Theodosius Dobzhansky, agrees with Kristol. His statement about many mutations being lethal is especially true of large-scale, quantum-jump mutations; also significant are his words that mutations that make big improvements are unknown. Lacking evidence for his large-scale chang

Greetings, Tony. Apologies for the lateness of my reply, but even Prophets of Doom have to earn a living some of the time. I realise Im flogging a dead horse, here. You are stubbornly determined to dig your heels in despite my best efforts to save your soul. I didnt really expect anything else, and I think this discussion sheds as much light on human nature as it does on the evolution/creation issue. Well, this is the first and last time Ill attempt this sort of debate over the internet, so I may as well do a thorough job.

 

So, in response to your last post my comment about your faith being up the spout was in reference to your claim about being a teapot. That sounded sardonic to me, not celebratory. Its certainly nice to feel liberated, but too much freedom can be dangerous, especially for children. And in the eyes of our father in heaven we are all his children, no matter how bald, baggy-eyed and toothless we may become.

 

The fact that terrible things have been done in Gods name is not Gods fault. Man chose freedom from God and must suffer the consequences of that choice. The bible condemns the behaviour of anyone who abuses Gods name with acts of violence.

 

You correctly point out that my criticism of the fossil record is lacking detail and substance, so Ill remedy that now. Ill let the scientists speak for themselves:

 

The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, [must] be truly enormousWhy then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the [evolutionary] views here entertained There is another and allied difficulty, which is much more serious. I allude to the manner in which species belonging to several of the main divisions of the animal kingdom suddenly appear in the lowest known fossiliferous rocks The abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations has been urged by several paleontologistsas a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species.

Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species

 

That was then. Whats the situation now, over a century of digging later? Swedish botanist Heribert Nilsson described the situation this way, after 40 years of his own research: It is not even possible to make a caricature of an evolution out of palaeobiological facts. The fossil material is now so complete thatthe lack of transitional series cannot be explained as due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, they will never be filled.

 

The critical first billion years, during which life began, are blank pages in the earths history The fossil record contains no trace of these preliminary stages in the development of many-celled organisms The record of the rocks contains very little, other than bacteria and one-celled plants until, about a billion years ago, after some three billion years of invisible progress, a major breakthrough occurred. The first many-celled creatures appeared on earth. Robert Jastrow, Red Giants and White Dwarfs

 

Going back in time to the age of the oldest rocks, fossil residues of ancient life-forms discovered in the rocks do not reveal a simple beginning. Although we may care to think of fossil bacteria and fossil algae and microfungi as being simple compared to a dog or horse, the information standard remains enormously high. Most of the biochemical complexity of life was present already at the time the oldest surface rocks of the Earth were formed. Evolution From Space

 

Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet Some extinct trilobites, in fact, developed more complex and efficient eyes than any living arthropod possesses. A View of Life

 

Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times. To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, said Darwin, I can give no satisfactory answer. Nor can we today, - Paleontologist Alfred S. Romer

 

The fossil record does not give any information on the origin of insects.- Encyclopædia Britannica

 

Some evolutionists argue that Precambrian rocks were too altered by heat and pressure to retain fossil links, or that no rocks were deposited in shallow seas for fossils to be retained. Neither of these arguments has held up, say evolutionists Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould and Sam Singer. They add: Geologists have discovered many unaltered Precambrian sediments, and they contain no fossils of complex organisms.

 

The creation account in Genesis and the theory of evolution could not be reconciled. One must be right and the other wrong. The story of the fossils agreed with the account of Genesis. In the oldest rocks we did not find a series of fossils covering the gradual changes from the most primitive creatures to developed forms, but rather in the oldest rocks, developed species suddenly appeared. Between every species there was a complete absence of intermediate fossils. - Biochemist D. B. Gower

 

Fossil remains, however, give no information on the origin of the vertebrates. Encyclopædia Britannica

 

To our knowledge, no link connected this new beast to any previous form of life. The fish just appeared. Marvels & Mysteries of Our Animal World

 

Unfortunately, the fossil record which would enable us to trace the emergence of the apes is still hopelessly incomplete.- The Primates

 

Modern apes, for instance, seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no yesterday, no fossil record No fossil or other physical evidence directly connects man to ape. Science Digest

 

Regarding the finding of a fossil fly that was labelled 40 million years old, Dr. George Poinar, Jr., said: The internal anatomy of these creatures is remarkably similar to what you find in flies today. The wings and legs and head, and even the cells inside, are very modern-looking. And a report in The Globe and Mail of Toronto commented: In 40 million years of struggling up the evolutionary ladder, they have made almost no discernible progress.

 

The record now reveals that species typically survive for a hundred thousand generations, or even a million or more, without evolving very much After their origins, most species undergo little evolution before becoming extinct. The New Evolutionary Timetable

 

If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best To secular scientists, the fossils, evidences of the life of the past, constitute the ultimate and final court of appeal, because the fossil record is the only authentic history of life available to science. If this fossil history does not agree with evolutionary theory - and we have seen that it does not - what does it teach? It tells us that plants and animals were created in their basic forms. The basic facts of the fossil record support creation, not evolution.

- Zoologist Harold Coffin

 

Species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record. And it is not always clear, in fact its rarely clear, that the descendants were actually better adapted than their predecessors. In other words, biological improvement is hard to find. Bulletin Chicagos Field Museum of Natural History

 

''[Evolution] predicts that a complete fossil record would consist of lineages of organisms showing gradual change continuously over long periods of time Unfortunately, the fossil record does not meet this expectation, for individual species of fossils are rarely connected to one another by known intermediate formsknown fossil species do indeed appear not to evolve even over millions of years. New Scientist

 

Darwinian evolution has not taught us how birds descend from reptiles, mammals from earlier quadrupeds, quadrupeds from fishes, nor vertebrates from the invertebrate stockto seek for stepping-stones across the gaps between is to seek in vain, for ever. - DArcy Thompson, On Growth and Form

 

The concept of evolution cannot be considered a strong scientific explanation for the presence of the diverse forms of life No fine analysis of biogeographic distribution or of the fossil record can directly support evolution. - Edmund Samuel, Order: In Life

 

The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer. - Carl Sagan, Cosmos

 

How many-celled animals originated and whether this step occurred one or more times and in one or more ways remain difficult and ever

Me again. Tony, your exasperated ruminations on corruption in politics, business and religion just illustrate the truth of 1st John 5:19: the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one. Or Revelation 12:9: the one called Devil and Satanis misleading the entire inhabited earth. Concerning those greedy business tycoons, what do you think of this description: those who are determined to be rich fall into temptation and a snare and many senseless and hurtful desires, which plunge men into destruction and ruin. For the love of money is a root of all sorts of injurious things ? (1st Timothy 6:9,10) Once again you see, the wisdom of Gods word rings true.

 

Your next observations confirm Jesuss prophecy concerning false prophets leading many astray through their failure to respect the bibles teachings. Christ said of his followers: By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves. (John 13:35). These words are worth remembering when we consider the behaviour of most churches of Christendom during the last world wars, when members of the same church killed each other with the blessing of the clergy on both sides. Or we need only look to Northern Ireland today, the Islamic extremists you mentioned, or the bloodshed in India and Pakistan between Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims. All this conflict just confirms the truth of the bible:

 

But know this, that in the last days critical times hard to deal with will be here. For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, self-assuming, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, disloyal, having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, without love of goodness, betrayers, headstrong, puffed up [with pride], lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God, having a form of godly devotion but proving false to its power; and from these turn away. For from these arise those men who slyly work their way into householdsalways learning and yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge of truth. (2nd Timothy 3:1-7)

 

They publicly declare they know God, but they disown him by their works, because they are detestable and disobedient and not approved for good work of any sort. (Titus 1:16)

 

Clearly then, it is most organised religions and their disrespect for the bible that are at fault, not the truth of Gods word itself.

 

Instead of banging your head against a brick wall Tony, why not refute my denial of the fossil record with some evidence of your own? If evolution is a fact, this shouldnt be too difficult. Your only defence so far has been empty denials of the evidence I present, a lot of homespun waffle and a sardonic admission that your own faith is up the spout. You've still made no comment on the prophecies I highlighted apart from blindly asserting that 1914 was fiddled after the event. This prophecy was first published in March 1880, as testified by the August 30, 1914 edition of the New York paper The World: The terrific war outbreak in Europe has fulfilled an extraordinary prophecy. For a quarter of a century past, through preachers and through press, the International Bible Students...have been proclaiming to the world that the Day of Wrath prophesied in the Bible would dawn in 1914.

 

The bible is true not because it says it is true, but because history, archaeology, science, prophecy and human behaviour in the world today all prove that it is true. You allude to missing links in the evolutionary model, when in fact the greater part of the whole chain is missing. Of course creationism wins by default. It is the only serious contender. The fact that this truth eludes many otherwise intelligent people just confirms Pauls words at 2nd Corinthians 4:3,4: If, now, the good news we declare is in fact veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through. This again refers to Satan, as described in the scriptures at the beginning of this post. Is it possible your mind is blinded to the truth?

 

The theory of evolution is a powerful weapon in the arsenal of the God of this system of things. When Satan challenged Gods authority, he was seeking glory for himself. By rejecting God through pseudo-science, humans are unwittingly honouring Satan. And the tragic consequences of this are all too plain to see in the world today. The scriptures dont befuddle people with arguments based on incorrect assumptions. The scriptures are assumed incorrect by people befuddled through Satans system.

 

If God wanted to make man in his image (reflecting his qualities, not his form), why would he start with an amoeba and then wait millions of years before something capable of love, justice and wisdom evolved? Evolution is not compatible with a creator, and it is certainly not compatible with his word the bible. Any Christians who think otherwise are being misled by those false prophets again, under the influence Satan.

 

The bible does not promote the theory of predeterminism. King Solomon observed that time and unforeseen occurrence befall [us] all (Ecclesiastes 9:11). God can predict future events because he causes them to happen. His name, most commonly rendered Jehovah, means He causes to become. This is why we can have confidence in his promises concerning an end to this wicked system. Since he is not governed by time as we are, he can most likely see our futures, but we have always been free to shape those futures for ourselves. What future do you want, Tony?

 

As for the Old Testament, it is true that the Law covenant given to the nation of Israel is no longer binding on Christians. The ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ made the old laws obsolete. (Ephesians 2:15; Hebrews 8:13).

But there is far more to the Hebrew scriptures than the Law covenant. There is a great deal of important history, upbuilding poetry and faith-inspiring prophecy, all of immense value to modern-day Christians. Jesus himself believed in the old testament, frequently referring to the ancient texts in his teachings. The fire and brimstone God of the old testament reveals his cardinal qualities of power and justice. Fittingly, though, the bible concludes with an emphasis on Gods greatest attribute, love.

 

You must love the Lord your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind. This is the greatest and first commandment. The second, like it, is this, You must love your neighbour as yourself. On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets. (Matthew 22:37-40)

 

Concerning Christs message of love, its nice to know we finally agree on something, Tony. Regards.

Well, if theres a few folks still left sitting round the fire Im happy to stoke it a while longer. Let me just chuck some more scriptures at you:

 

Look out: perhaps there may be someone who will carry you off as his prey through the philosophy and empty deception according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ. (Colossians 2:8) NietzscheDarwinReverend Pat Robertson?

 

For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. (1st Corinthians 3:19)

 

If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth (1st Timothy 6:3-5)

 

And sorry, Jason, but I couldnt resist including this one for you: In the same way also, unless you through the tongue utter speech easily understood, how will it be known what is being spoken? You will, in fact, be speaking into the air. (1st Corinthians 14:9) ;-)

 

Do you think weve seen any evidence here of people being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words? Doesnt that sum up a great many human philosophical wranglings? Personally, Ive always felt that philosophy never provided any answers, just many more pointless questions. And many of the contributions in this thread qualify as homespun philosophy. I get the clear impression that many folks are more comfortable with uncertainties than facts. This reminds me of the philosophers Majikthise & Vroomfondel in The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. They objected to the super-computer Deep Thought searching for the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything through fear that if it actually found the answer theyd be out of a job!

 

G. asserts that if we ever understood the eternal verities there would be nothing left to learn or reach for. She says searching for the truth is more important than finding it, and that if we ever did find it, all meaning in our lives would evaporate. I disagree. There are very good historical, archaeological, scientific and prophetic reasons for believing that the bible is Gods word. The bible tells us how we got here, why we are here, and (to an extent) where we are going. Knowing the answers to these questions doesnt leave a hole in ones life, but fills one that we may not have even been aware of. Happy are those conscious of their spiritual need is how Jesus began his sermon on the mount, with one of the wisest statements ever made. There will always be more to learn about the world, the universe and ourselves. Eternal life in a perfect world would never get boring. Ever wanted to learn the piano? Try your hand at carpentry? Study bacteria, mould and fungi? Nows your chance!

 

The fact that Homo Sapiens is an incredibly funny species just reminds as of the salutary fact that God has a sense of humour. I expect hes chuckled a few times reading this thread

 

King Solomon was given a special gift of wisdom by God. He owned everything money could buy, he built palaces and gardens and even had all the women he could want. But after enjoying all that, he said: I saw all the works that were done under the sun, and, look! everything was vanity and a striving after wind. The conclusion of the matter, everything having been heard, is: Fear the [true] God and keep his commandments. For this is the whole [obligation] of man. (Ecclesiastes 1:14; 12:13) If you ever wanted to find a single-sentence summary of the meaning of life, you wont do better than Solomons words here.

 

In response to Ilan, the problem under discussion is the creation of our physical universe. God is not a physical being, but a spirit being, and we dont understand the spirit realm. We cannot comprehend infinity or eternity, and yet we willingly accept their existence. If space and time are part of a continuum as scientists suggest, as inseparable as two sides of a sheet of paper, God is independent of time and space. Our notions of time and beginning cease to have any meaning as far as God is concerned, since he is not confined to our physical universe where these concepts are an issue. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. (Revelation 22:13)

 

We are created with finite minds contained inside a finite space within our heads. We will never be able to comprehend the full nature of God, but he has left us enough evidence of his existence and purpose to satisfy anyone whose heart is disposed to accept him and honour him. The main reason some people reject this proof is because they simply dont want to know God, perhaps due to the responsibilities carried with such knowledge. This is a tragedy, because the benefits of drawing close to God far outweigh any perceived disadvantages, which quickly prove to be illusory.

 

No one has (seriously) responded to the evidence presented in the prophecies I mentioned. Were they just incredibly lucky guesses? Do you just sweep any such proof that challenges your own philosophy under the carpet?

There are many other prophecies I could relate that prove divine inspiration in the bible, if the server for this website could cope with them And what about the fossil record? Is that swept under the carpet? The failure of scientists to generate spontaneous life in the laboratory? The failure to demonstrate successful mutation from one species to another? The failure to find life on other worlds? Before long, that lump under the carpet becomes too conspicuous to ignore and carries the risk of causing you to trip up and hurt yourself.

 

Dont bury your head in the sands of idle faith. You will never find happiness there. Draw close to God, and he will draw close to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you indecisive ones. (James 4:8) The benefits of doing this are greater than you could imagine, both now and in the future.

 

This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ. (John 17:3)

 

With that I heard a loud voice from the throne say: Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away. (Revelation 21: 3,4)

I appreciate your support Jason, but lets please keep this friendly. I freely admit to displaying arrogance myself on this website and its not something Im proud of. As a Christian, my role model is Jesus Christ, and he was never arrogant or rude. That is never the way to win an argument. I also wouldnt like to see Tony pull the plug on this page because of offensive comments. Let your utterance be always with graciousness, seasoned with salt, so as to know how you ought to give an answer to each one. (Colossians 4:6)