Interesting Quote

Ingrid Schlueter had this quote posted on her site Slice of Laodicea the other day. An interesting web-site if your frustrated with watered-down, non-reverent churches. I don't always agree with her approach, but she brings the heresy in the churches to light.

“If I had my way, I would declare a moratorium on public preaching of ‘the plan of salvation’ in America for one to two years. Then I would call on everyone who has use of the airways and the pulpits to preach the holiness of God, the righteousness of God and the law of God, until sinners would cry out, ‘What must we do to be saved?’ Then I would take them off in a corner and whisper the gospel to them. Such drastic action is needed because we have gospel-hardened a generation of sinners by telling them how to be saved before they have any understanding why they need to be saved.”

-Paris Reidhead, Getting Evangelicals Saved

Christmas Quotes

Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
Source: Of the Lord, Angel

Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
Source: Host, Heavenly

God bless us all, every one!
Source: Tim, Tiny

God blessed us all, every one!
Source: Troy, Tiny

Honestly, what can you add to the perfect message given by the angels? This was a message sculpted and breathed no doubt, by the Almighty Himself. What a proclamation! As for the Tiny Tim quote...certainly fitting for the present tense. Mine, certainly God has blessed us all, every one! Merry Christmas to all and God bless!

We Three Kings

A few years ago I actually read through and pondered the words of this song. Since that time, this has become one of my favorites. In these five short versus, it tells of the true reason why Jesus Christ was born in the grimy confines of a stable. This is the real Reason for the Season. Not a baby that stays in a manger from year to year, but a King who was willing to die because of His love for an unworthy people. This song was written by Reverend John Henry Hopkins, Jr. in 1857 for a Christmas pageant at the General Theological Seminary in New York City.

 

We three kings of Orient are;
Bearing gifts we traverse afar,
Field and fountain, moor and mountain,
Following yonder star.

Refrain

O star of wonder, star of light,
Star with royal beauty bright,
Westward leading, still proceeding,
Guide us to thy perfect light.

Born a King on Bethlehem’s plain
Gold I bring to crown Him again,
King forever, ceasing never,
Over us all to reign.

Refrain

Frankincense to offer have I;
Incense owns a Deity nigh;
Prayer and praising, voices raising,
Worshipping God on high.

Refrain

Myrrh is mine, its bitter perfume
Breathes a life of gathering gloom;
Sorrowing, sighing, bleeding, dying,
Sealed in the stone cold tomb.

Refrain

Glorious now behold Him arise;
King and God and sacrifice;
Alleluia, Alleluia,
Sounds through the earth and skies.

Refrain

 

Request

As Isaiah’s original due date rapidly approaches, please pray for our family. Seemingly simple, meaningless things trigger memories and emotions in both Eshell and I. Although it’s not always easy to give thanks in things we don’t fully understand, we still know and trust in God’s control (and we do thank Him for that!). Also, pray as we still search for a church home. We have met some very nice families and made some friends, but still don’t have a clear direction for fellowship. As goes our life. But that’s another post for another day.

Thanks,

Troy

 

More Inconvenient Truths

Headline from ScienceDaily website: New Study Increases Concerns About Climate Model Reliability

It appears more truths are surfacing regarding the data that Al Gore used in his film about the irreversible destruction of the world as we know it because of our frivolous behavior and misuse of the earths resources (see previous post). I know, that’s a terrible run-on sentence. I don’t blame Al Gore for this. It appears that the data that was put out by the researchers was flawed. He just happened to pick it up and use it in his movie model. The new data pretty much says that the lower portion of the atmosphere is warming at a slower rate than what was originally thought. This also means that future warming will be slower than originally predicted. Maybe the sky’s not falling after all?

Sources:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071211101623.htm

 

An Inconvenient Truth

Apparently the only inconvenient truth for Al Gore is that his "documentary" and the "facts" that it contains are unsubstantiated. A couple of articles by Joseph Farah from WorldNetDaily goes into detail. It appears that the popularity of this movie has been sweeping through governments and school systems alike. Both US schools and UK schools have made this mandatory viewing material. One man in the UK had different ideas. He was a concerned parent involved in what his children are being taught. He took this matter to the court system. The UK court ruled that many of the claims in the movie that are conveyed as fact are indeed untruths. The UK ruled the following points of the movie as false:

• that sea levels will rise 20 feet in the foreseeable future due to ice melts;
• that people are evacuating Pacific island nations because of rising sea levels;
• that the "oceanic conveyor" belt is in danger of shutting down and triggering a new ice age;
• that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have historically caused temperatures to rise;
• that global warming is causing a retreat of Mount Kilimanjaro's alpine glacier;
• that global warming is causing Africa's Lake Chad to dry up;
• that global warming contributed to Hurricane Katrina;
• that polar bears are dying due to receding sea ice;
• that global warming is causing coral reefs to bleach and die.
  

Farah then states "This is the very heart of Gore's film! It has all been ruled a fraud in a court of law. Yet American schoolchildren are still being massively subjected to this torturous propaganda." His points are basically two-fold. First being that we (as Americans) are still willingly allowing the public educational system feed this drivel to our children. And second, why isn't Al Gore being confronted with these findings. He has not come forward and denied the court ruling. He has not tried to clear his name. He has remained rather hushed about the episode. The UK schools are still allowed to show the film, but it must be introduced with "an explicit disclaimer that it is "partisan," "political" and is riddled with misleading exaggerations and factual errors".
My Take:
I have not seen the movie. I have no desire to see the movie. So how can I report on it? Two reasons. One, this is MY blog. And two, I am just relaying a couple articles that I read. Actually, I have read a lot about the movie. And I've read both sides. The court ruling goes along with a lot of what many scientist and climatologist are saying. I understand that there are many on the other side as well. I feel that we do misuse many of the resources that God has given us. What the others are saying is that we need to "inconvenience" ourselves to reverse these detrimental effects to great mother earth. Is there more we could do? Sure, but so many studies have proven that man is not cause of this. This is a natural cycle. Cows and camels pump more carbon into the atmosphere than what man does. Maybe we should cleanse the earth of camels and cows. You know...for the sake of the planet. Maybe Al Gore should stop zooming around the world in jet airplanes consuming mass amounts of fossil fuel and expelling huge amounts of carbon.
At any rate. I thought the articles were interesting and I thought the cartoon was funny. Feel free to read the articles yourself.
Sources:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59066
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59117

Evolving Faster

New scientific reports state that we are evolving a lot faster than we did 50,000 years ago. Scientist analyzed our genes and compared them to those of a chimpanzee, our closest evolutionary relative. If we had evolved at the same rate that we were evolving at some 50,000 years ago, we would have 160 times more differences than what we currently do from the chimps. They claim that humans throughout the world are evolving in different directions. Proof is that genes that suppress body odor and dry earwax are spreading rapidly in Asia. Many of the changes noted are diet related. Some people can drink fresh milk, as others cannot. All concrete proof that we are evolving at a different rate than originally thought. They do believe, however, that this rate of evolution will stabilize in a while. By ‘while’ they mean tens of thousands of years, of course.

My Take:

So, they find another inconsistency with their theory of evolution. What do they do? Create another theory to “explain” why they are changing directions. They will never prove the origin of man because their theory continues to change. As they catch up to science and the evidence disproves their theory, they must scramble and develop a new and improved theory. When their “truth” is based on assumptive theories, the theory remains dynamic (constantly changing) as opposed to taking a static, historical approach (history does not change). Until they realize that the truth of the origin of man is recorded in a historically proven book, their story will continue to change. The more evidence that is revealed, the more the book is proven. Proof that God’s word is unchanging.

Sources:

1) http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071211-human-evolution_2.html

2) http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/science/11gene.html?ref=science

Children Today

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers." – Socrates (469-399 BC)

There’s much we could add to this, but it stands fairly sufficiently on its own. What would Socrates think about children of this generation? What can we do to reverse what we see? My wife and I have kind of become observers. We sit back and watch people and families and how they interact. At an airport earlier this year I saw a family heading out on spring break. Dad, mom and two kids. Each had their own iPod/MP3 players. They even had kind of a unique form of sign language. Something developed, I assume, to avoid having to de-cyborg yourself every time mom wanted to talk to you or ask you a question. She would just use some impromptu hand signals. The kids would typically respond with an agitated yes or no nod or shake. I wondered what supper was like at their home; or if they even sat together to eat supper. Does dad yell at the kids when sports are on; or maybe just ignore them altogether? Does mom disregard the kids when “Dancing With The Stars” comes on? Are the children an interruption to their lives? Not if you plant them in front of their own TV or video game machine. We’ve become removed and annoyed from spending time with them.

I came across an article while reading through the news. There’s a proposal in the Massachusetts House of Representatives that would ban corporal punishment (House Bill 3922). Lovingly spanking your child would turn you into a criminal. They tried to push this through California a while back. This is not how we correct what we see in the children today. The Bible is very clear on how to remedy this, and it’s not retiring the “rod of correction”.

I’m fairly certain that my children would be ecstatic to spend every waking moment with me or their mother. Why? At times, we have put our interest on hold and taken up their interest. We take ourselves to their level. Whether it’s playing a game or reading a book or coloring a picture. We also involve them in our interest; baking, hunting, fishing, etc... I don’t claim to have perfect children or to have this all figured out. I do know that if we put our selfish “I-need-my-time” attitude on the back burner and show an interest in what our children are doing, you build a bond and a friendship that will outlast any spanking you ever give. That’s not to say that spankings are never necessary. And when I say that you need to build a friendship, that is not the permissive, anything-goes, kids rule the roost mentality that many parents have taken. “If I give them everything they want, maybe they’ll like me!” That’s just sick and way out of order! Catering to them is only fanning the flame. I think parents are just trying to get by long enough to get them out of the house. From there on, it’s society’s problem. Even those that claim Christ have this same misguided thinking. They hope that the Sunday school class will “train them up in the way they should go”. I believe we have made a turn in a very poor direction, and it will take something huge to correct it. Something larger than a push from man. Something like a revival of hearts. And that only comes from God.

Try Again

I tried to post this yesterday in the comments, but blogger must have went wild. This is response to the comment from the last post.
Typically I don't come out swinging like that when it comes to Bible translations. I've never been a fan of the NIV, but it was mainly for the missing scriptures. When I stumbled across this I had to pass it along. As for Virginia Mollenkott, here are just a couple links: Way of Life an interesting, if not disturbing read; and AV 1611 which is apparently a 1611 KJV only website. As for King James being a homosexual. I don't know for sure. Most of what I've read says that the accusations didn't even surface until 25 years after his death, and that it originated from his arch nemesis. A quick google search turned up these pages: The first one seems to be written by a homosexual "christian", here. Another one that I found by a homosexual "christian" utilized filthy language, therefore gets disqualified from getting a link from me. Here's another. The next three oppose the thinking: here, here and here. What I do know is that he only promoted the translation of the scripture. He didn't take part in it.
As for books. The best that I've read is "Which Version Is The Bible?" by Floyd Nolen Jones. It's very detailed in the history and canonization of the Bible, who translated what and what the other Bible translations are missing or changing. I let a friend borrow it, but if I can get it back, I'll certainly pass it off to you.
Just to sum it up. I believe that all faith and foundation come from the word of God. If you can't believe that God has preserved His word for us and remains infallible, then how can you know what portions of the Bible to trust and what to disregard? And there are too many contradictions between translations for them all to be correct. The history that I've studied on the subject convinces me that the KJV is the authorized and preserved version.
Hope this helps to at least see where we come from. I don't like to stir up controversy or be divisive, but we too like to find truth.

Christmas Gift Ideas

I stumbled across a news article the other day. These selfless ladies across the pond are gifting the world with their own sterilization. They both feel that having a child would only add to the problem of climate change and overpopulation. One went so far as to have an abortion before sterilization. All for the sake of the earth. One made the comment about meeting her second husband "We both passionately wanted to save the planet - not produce a new life which would only add to the problem." What a caring lady.
The other lady in the article filtered through several boyfriends before finding the right one. Her revelation of the evils of childbearing went like this: "I realised then that a baby would pollute the planet - and that never having a child was the most environmentally friendly thing I could do."
How much of yourself are you willing to give this holiday season?

Next up for the gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender christian in your life: the Gay and Lesbian Bible.
We have here another lady who did the world a favor. She's the first of all previous bible scholars who could actually translate the bible properly. A bible that does NOT speak out against homosexuality. Up until now, we had no way to translate some of the Hebrew and Greek words accurately. But now, we have a bible that caters to the gay and lesbian christians. "Don't feel comfortable coming to the Lord and allowing him to change your life? Don't worry about it! We have a bible that says you can live in the sinful, hell-bound lifestyle that your accustomed to!" If you go to the "About Us" page of the website, she gives some ridiculous example of why she needed to do this. And no, she didn't do this just for the gays and lesbians. She did this to get the accurate translation into the hands of a misled world. She just happened to name it the Gay and Lesbian Bible.

And lastly as I was doing some research, I found out that the original NIV translation had a very open, very active lesbian on it's translating team. In fact, she believes that God is a woman. She also believes that Jesus was born parthenogenetic (because Mary had a child without male fertilization); meaning that "born in parthenogenesis; that parthenogenetic births are always female; that in some cases, therefore, he would be willing to refer to Jesus as 'she' -- up until the last minute of sex reversal, in which case Jesus remains chromosomally female throughout life, but functions as a normal male and looks like a normal male". If your curious about who helped translate the holy, infallible word of God into the train wreck that is the NIV, do a search for Virginia Ramey Mollenkott. She's very proud of her work.

Being an engineer, I have a theory. I think we should pick and island and put the sterilized ladies (and their mates) as well as the gay and lesbian christians on an island. Let them have all the food and water they need for survival. Than check on them in 50 years. See how the commune is thriving. I have a feeling that Darwin may have been right. The weak of the species would die out. Obviously the sterilized men/ladies won't be reproducing. Even more obviously the gays and lesbians won't be reproducing (unless they're cheating). How can this thinking be right? Do they not understand science and biology? My head hurts...