Tim Keller: The Gospel and the Poor: A Case for Compassion from Here’s Life Inner City on Vimeo.

Here are some Kool Kicks for all you fashion conscience guys out there.  The combination of the suede and patent leather is a creative twist on an old idea.  This shoe is  great for a mid-day date or a night out. Take heed fellas…

Phillip Lim Sneaker from his first ever sneaker line 3.1 Phillip Lim

Unsure how to rock em?  My pick would be with a Funkie  t-shirt like the one below by Original David :

Fela Shirt by Original David

And some nice understated jeans I like these by True Religion:

True Religion Jeans

Two years ago we noticed the Levi comeback…

last year and this year True Religion is everywhere…

…but if want a subtle pair of denim jeans that is truly worth the value, get Italian-made REPLAY.

Replay – Official Online Store

Religion or fact? What do you believe?

SCIENCE is constantly unraveling new secrets about the universe and the life that thrives on this planet. There is wide agreement among scientists that the universe had a beginning. Most also agree that before that beginning, something real must have existed. Something must have existed without a beginning, something that extended back infinitely. So the issue comes down to whether we presuppose some thing eternal or some one eternal.

Also, if life ‘evolved’ on earth over aeons of time, then we should expect to find a host of intermediate organisms, or links, between the major types of living things. However the many (over 250 million) fossils unearthed since Darwin’s time have proved disappointing in that respect.  The missing links are just that – missing! Many scientists have therefore concluded that the evidence for evolution is too weak and contradictory to prove that life evolved.

Interestingly, when we look at the fossil record we see that it closely matches the general order of the appearance of living forms found in the Bible book of Genesis. Donald E. Chittick, a physical chemist who earned a doctorate degree at Oregon State University, comments: “A direct look at the fossil record would lead one to conclude that animals reproduced after their kind as Genesis states. They did not change from one kind into another. The evidence now, as in Darwin’s day, is in agreement with the Genesis record of direct creation. Animals and plants continue to reproduce after their kind. In fact the conflict between paleontology (study of fossils) and Darwinism is so strong that many scientists are beginning to believe that the in-between forms will never be found.”

You see when we look at the fossil record and early human history, what we find is that ancient man traditionally built settlements close to the sea – a major source of food. Geological evidence shows that 5-10,000 years ago sea levels were about 150 meters lower than they are today, therefore the people that were living on or close to the shore line back then must have been 100-150km further out than the shore lines of today. So when scientists are digging for fossils – particularily human or hominid – they are digging in areas that would have been considered outback hill country 5-10,000 years ago – far from the larger settlements on the (now submerged) coast. It’s hardly surprising then that the image we get of our ancestors is one of, well, fossilized hillbillies. It’s the difference between finding New York and finding Walton’s Mountain.

The same thing applies to animal fossils – we’re digging up a large number of cave bears, woolly mammoths, dire wolves and other such creatures particular to these locations, and we have no way of digging up the vast herds of creatures who roamed the plains closer to the coastline. Therefore when we talk of  “evolution” at all, we should acknowledge that much of what science currently does is guesswork and speculation. Fact is, all the bones and fossils found in the world relating to human ‘evolution’ could fit in a cardboard box in the boot of a small car, so trying to prove that we ‘evolved’ from grunting speechless ‘ape men’ from that small amount of bones is very weak evidence indeed!

Interestingly long assumed to be brutes and erroneously portrayed by Hollywood and graphic artists in science departments as part man/part ape, Neanderthals apparently had no trouble talking – scientists have discovered a Neanderthal hyoid bone (essential for human speech) “identical” to that of modern humans!

According to Aerospace engineer Luther D. Sutherland in his book Darwin’s Enigma: “The scientific evidence shows that whenever any basically different type of life first appeared on Earth, all the way from single-celled protozoa to man, it was complete and its organs and structures were complete and fully functional.

NOTE: Amino acids & proteins (the components of dna) are interdependent. To date NO lab experiment has been able to show they can exist separately. So, DNA appears in the “primordial soup” suddenly and intact?

The following article is taken from the book Darwin’s Leap of Faith – Exposing the False Religion of Evolution By Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon.

Darwin’s theory of evolution is arguably the single most profound theory emphasized by science in the twentieth century. In terms of its impact and implications, nothing else even comes close.

But despite its weight in the world of ideas, and despite its dominance, paradoxes abound for the evolutionary establishment.

Most people consider evolution to be an indisputable fact. But then how do we account for statements by reputable scientists such as the following? Molecular biologist and medical doctor Michael Denton concludes, “Ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.”1 Other scientists actually now refer to evolution as “a fairy tale.” For example, Dr. Lewis Bounoure, Director of the Zoological Museum and Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research in France declares, “Evolution is a fairy tale for grownups.”2

If evolution were an undeniable fact, how do we account for the thousands of scientists worldwide, creationists and non-creationists alike, who say the theory of evolution is false scientifically; indeed, that it has more conclusive evidence against it than any evidence ever offered for it? Many of these scientists have their Ph.D.s in the “hard” sciences (biology, paleontology, genetics, biochemistry, etc.) from leading American universities such as Harvard, Princeton, and U. C. Berkeley.

If evolution were a fact, proven beyond doubt, or even a convincing theory, we could not possibly expect to see thousands of reputable scientists rejecting it outright. At best, we would discover only a few fringe “scientists” who would deny it—just like a few fringe “scientists” might be found in the Flat Earth Society (if such a society exists).

The fact that a lesser number of scientists reject evolution is not the issue here, as some evolutionists maintain. The issue is that thousands of credible scientists would not deny the theory of evolution if it were a proven fact. Something else, then, must account for belief in evolution, something other than the scientific data.

Perhaps things are not as they seem to most of the world.

Evolutionists say the scientific evidence for evolution is overwhelming. But critics of the theory allege that this evidence is seriously misunderstood. And if the scientific evidence is really undeniable, why have evolutionists lost hundreds of scientific debates to creationists? Again, perhaps there is more than meets the eye in the creation-evolution controversy.

On the one hand, evolutionists everywhere say that the theory of evolution represents the epitome of good science and that a theory of creation cannot possibly be scientific. As the American Anthropological Association declared in an official statement, “evolution is…a cornerstone of twentieth century science in general.”3 The American Society of Parasitologists declared, “Creationism is not a science and cannot become a science.”4 Even Pope John Paul II issued a formal statement in 1996, widely reported in the press, affirming that some evolution is compatible with Catholic beliefs. He is the fourth pope to affirm this.

On the other hand, many scientists with multiple doctorates in science, including Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov and the late Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith, have rejected evolution as bad science and say creation can be and is a legitimate scientific theory. And leading theologians other than the pope say evolution is bad science and worse theology.

Is it conceivable that most scientists are uninformed on the true nature of science? And perhaps even the pope is wrong—and the religious implications of evolution are more complex than assumed.

We find additional paradoxes as science moves rapidly into the twenty-first century. Scientific materialism, naturalism, and atheism remain a dominant and powerful Western worldview, both philosophically and practically. Yet the authors of texts like Cosmos, Bios, Theos, written by 60 leading scientists including 24 Nobel Prize winners, repeatedly inform us that only God can explain the complexity and order of life as we know it. How can this be if materialism and naturalism are as sacrosanct as proponents allege? As Arthur L. Schawlow, winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics, observes, when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, “The only possible answers are religious…I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.”5

An even more surprising statement came from perhaps the most famous existentialist atheist of the twentieth century, Jean-Paul Sartre, who publicly stated his “faith” in God just prior to his death. Although a committed atheist since the age of 11, he declared: As for me, I don’t see myself as so much dust that has appeared in the world but as a being that was expected, prefigured, called forth. In short, as a being that could, it seems, come only from a creator; and this idea of a creating hand that created me refers me back to God. Naturally this is not a clear, exact idea that I set in motion every time I think of myself. It contradicts many of my other ideas; but it is there, floating vaguely. And when I think of myself I often think rather in this way, for want of being able to think otherwise.6

How do we explain all of this? If matter alone can explain the origin of life and all its glory, why do some Nobel Prize winners invoke the belief in God to explain it? Again, if evolution is a fact, why do thousands of scientists reject it? Thousands of qualified scientists simply do not reject facts of science.

Perhaps things aren’t quite as they seem to committed naturalists? And perhaps most scientists and most Americans are wrong to believe in evolution so uncritically.

“So what?” some might say. So everything. Whether or not evolution is true makes all the difference in the world. Whether or not we believe it has profound implications. The theory of evolution has significantly impacted almost everyone’s life. As the great novelist Aldous Huxley correctly declared, “Evolution has resulted in the world as we know it today.”7 That is no small declaration. For those who think about it, such a statement is indeed profound. No one can over estimate the importance of evolution if it is true or its consequences if it is false.

The issue of evolution is crucial today because, whether right or wrong, it tells us who we are. And no one can ignore his or her own portrait.

We hope open-minded evolutionists will consider the ethical implications of continuing to advocate an undemonstrated explanation of origins as a proven scientific fact. Evolution is simply a belief that people may accept or reject—no more, no less. But beliefs should be accepted on the basis of the evidence, without allowing philosophical premises (e.g., naturalism) to skew the interpretation of the evidence.

Given the major philosophical, theological, biblical, and moral implications of evolution, Christian interest in this subject is more than justified. If evolution isn’t even a good scientific theory as critics charge, then these Christians should feel intellectually satisfied in letting the Scripture speak for itself about creation and related issues. There is no need to revise the historic orthodox theology of biblical anthropology (the nature of man/the Fall), harmartiology (sin), bibliology (inerrancy), or soteriology (salvation). In essence, there is no need to misinterpret the Bible in light of the “truth” of evolution.

To put it another way, there is no need for any Christian to feel intimidated by science just for accepting what the Bible plainly declares. In the end, the weight of the evidence tells us the Bible will always prove true.8 No Christian should think there would be legitimate evidence, scientific or otherwise, to deny what God has clearly spoken.

Evolutionists are, unfortunately, often rather condescending to Christians for allegedly taking an irrational “leap of faith” in believing in God, miracles, and the supernatural. Not only are their charges false (as we indicated in Ready with an Answer), evolutionists themselves take an incredible “leap of faith” that far exceeds in credulity anything Christians have ever believed.

Notes: 1 Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Bethesda, MD: Adler & Adler Publishers, Inc., 1986), p.358. 2 J. Rostand, “LaMonde et la Vie,” October 1963, p. 31 from V. Long, “Evolution: A Fairy Tale for Adults,” Homiletic and Pastoral Review, Vol. 78 (1978), no. 7, pp. 27-32). 3 The National Center for Science Education, Inc., Voices for Evolution, rev. edition Molleen Matsumura (ed.) (Berkeley, CA: The National Center for Science Education, Inc., 1995), p. 20. This is a compilation of official statements by leading scientific, religious, educational, and civil liberties organizations containing their views on science, evolution, and creation. 4 Ibid, p. 37. 5 Arthur L. Schawlow, “One Must Ask Why and Not Just How?” in Henry Margenau and Roy Abraham Varghese, Cosmos, Bios, Theos: Scientists Reflect on Science, God and the Origins of the Universe, Life, and Homo Sapiens (LaSalle, IL: Open Court, 1994), p. 105. 6 Simone de Beauvoir, “A Conversation About Death and God,” Harper’s magazine, February 1984, p.39. 7 Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means: An Inquiry into the Nature of Ideals and into the Methods Employed for Their Realization (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1937), p. 303. 8 For detailed documentation, see our Ready with an Answer (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1997).

 (1) On what are it’s teachings based? Are they from God or largely from men? (2 Tim. 3:16; Mark 7:7) Ask, for example: Where does the Bible teach that God is a Trinity? Where does it say that the human soul is immortal?

(2) Consider whether it is making known the name of God. Jesus said in prayer to God: “I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world.” (John 17:6) He declared: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” Matt 4:10

(3) Is true faith in Jesus christ being demonstrated? This involves appreciation of the value of the sacrifice of Jesus’ human life and of his position today as heavenly King. (John 3:36; Ps. 2:6-8) Such appreciation is shown by obeying Jesus – sharing personally and zealously in the work that he assigned to his followers. True religion has such faith that it is accompanied by works. – Jas. 2:26

(4) Are it’s members active witnesses concerning God’s Kingdom? Jesus foretold: “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.” (Matt 24:14) What religion is really proclaiming God’s Kingdom as the hope of mankind instead of encouraging people to look to human rulership to solve their problems? Has your religion equipped you to share in this activity, and to do it from house to house as Jesus taught his apostles to do? – Matt. 10:7, 11-13: Acts 5:42; 20:20

www.False-Religion.com

Religion or fact? What do you believe?

How did the universe come to be? What existed before that? How did life arise here on earth? Why are we here?

SCIENCE is constantly unraveling new secrets about the universe and the life that thrives on this planet. There is wide agreement among scientists that the universe had a beginning. Most also agree that before that beginning, something real must have existed. Something must have existed without a beginning, something that extended back infinitely. So the issue comes down to whether we presuppose some thing eternal or some one eternal.

When we look at the design, order, and complexity of the universe with its billions of galaxies, each containing billions of stars, and we see that all the heavenly bodies are controlled by precise laws, such as those for motion, heat, light, sound, electromagnetism, and gravity, then we must ask ourselves……can there be laws without a lawmaker?

Rocket scientist Dr. Wernher von Braun stated: “The natural laws of the universe are so precise that we have no difficulty building a spaceship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of a fraction of a second. These laws must have been set by somebody.” John Polkinghorne, formerly a physicist at Cambridge University, concluded: ” When you realise that the laws of nature must be incredibly fined tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.”

If the universe and our being alive in it are accidental, our lives can have no lasting meaning. But if our life in the universe results from design, there must be a satisfying meaning to it.

If life ‘evolved’ over aeons of time, then we should expect to find a host of intermediate organisms, or links, between the major types of living things. However the many (over 250 million) fossils unearthed since Darwin’s time have proved disappointing in that respect.  The missing links are just that – missing! Many scientists have therefore concluded that the evidence for evolution is too weak and contradictory to prove that life evolved.

Interestingly, when we look at the fossil record we see that it closely matches the general order of the appearance of living forms found in the Bible book of Genesis. Donald E. Chittick, a physical chemist who earned a doctorate degree at Oregon State University, comments: “A direct look at the fossil record would lead one to conclude that animals reproduced after their kind as Genesis states. They did not change from one kind into another. The evidence now, as in Darwin’s day, is in agreement with the Genesis record of direct creation. Animals and plants continue to reproduce after their kind. In fact the conflict between paleontology (study of fossils) and Darwinism is so strong that many scientists are beginning to believe that the in-between forms will never be found.”

You see when we look at the fossil record and early human history, what we find is that ancient man traditionally built settlements close to the sea – a major source of food. Geological evidence shows that 5-10,000 years ago sea levels were about 150 meters lower than they are today, therefore the people that were living on or close to the shore line back then must have been 100-150km further out than the shore lines of today. So when scientists are digging for fossils – particularily human or hominid – they are digging in areas that would have been considered outback hill country 5-10,000 years ago – far from the larger settlements on the (now submerged) coast. It’s hardly surprising then that the image we get of our ancestors is one of, well, fossilized hillbillies. It’s the difference between finding New York and finding Walton’s Mountain.

The same thing applies to animal fossils – we’re digging up a large number of cave bears, woolly mammoths, dire wolves and other such creatures particular to these locations, and we have no way of digging up the vast herds of creatures who roamed the plains closer to the coastline. Therefore when we talk of  “evolution” at all, we should acknowledge that much of what science currently does is guesswork and speculation. Fact is, all the bones and fossils found in the world relating to human ‘evolution’ could fit in a cardboard box in the boot of a small car, so trying to prove that we ‘evolved’ from grunting speechless ‘ape men’ from that small amount of bones is very weak evidence indeed!

Interestingly long assumed to be brutes and erroneously portrayed by Hollywood and graphic artists in science departments as part man/part ape, Neanderthals apparently had no trouble talking – scientists have discovered a Neanderthal hyoid bone (essential for human speech) “identical” to that of modern humans!

According to Aerospace engineer Luther D. Sutherland in his book Darwin’s Enigma: “The scientific evidence shows that whenever any basically different type of life first appeared on Earth, all the way from single-celled protozoa to man, it was complete and its organs and structures were complete and fully functional.

NOTE: Amino acids & proteins (the components of dna) are interdependent. To date NO lab experiment has been able to show they can exist separately. So, DNA appears in the “primordial soup” suddenly and intact?

The following article is taken from the book Darwin’s Leap of Faith – Exposing the False Religion of Evolution By Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon.

Darwin’s theory of evolution is arguably the single most profound theory emphasized by science in the twentieth century. In terms of its impact and implications, nothing else even comes close.

But despite its weight in the world of ideas, and despite its dominance, paradoxes abound for the evolutionary establishment.

Most people consider evolution to be an indisputable fact. But then how do we account for statements by reputable scientists such as the following? Molecular biologist and medical doctor Michael Denton concludes, “Ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.”1 Other scientists actually now refer to evolution as “a fairy tale.” For example, Dr. Lewis Bounoure, Director of the Zoological Museum and Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research in France declares, “Evolution is a fairy tale for grownups.”2

If evolution were an undeniable fact, how do we account for the thousands of scientists worldwide, creationists and non-creationists alike, who say the theory of evolution is false scientifically; indeed, that it has more conclusive evidence against it than any evidence ever offered for it? Many of these scientists have their Ph.D.s in the “hard” sciences (biology, paleontology, genetics, biochemistry, etc.) from leading American universities such as Harvard, Princeton, and U. C. Berkeley.

If evolution were a fact, proven beyond doubt, or even a convincing theory, we could not possibly expect to see thousands of reputable scientists rejecting it outright. At best, we would discover only a few fringe “scientists” who would deny it—just like a few fringe “scientists” might be found in the Flat Earth Society (if such a society exists).

The fact that a lesser number of scientists reject evolution is not the issue here, as some evolutionists maintain. The issue is that thousands of credible scientists would not deny the theory of evolution if it were a proven fact. Something else, then, must account for belief in evolution, something other than the scientific data.

Perhaps things are not as they seem to most of the world.

Evolutionists say the scientific evidence for evolution is overwhelming. But critics of the theory allege that this evidence is seriously misunderstood. And if the scientific evidence is really undeniable, why have evolutionists lost hundreds of scientific debates to creationists? Again, perhaps there is more than meets the eye in the creation-evolution controversy.

On the one hand, evolutionists everywhere say that the theory of evolution represents the epitome of good science and that a theory of creation cannot possibly be scientific. As the American Anthropological Association declared in an official statement, “evolution is…a cornerstone of twentieth century science in general.”3 The American Society of Parasitologists declared, “Creationism is not a science and cannot become a science.”4 Even Pope John Paul II issued a formal statement in 1996, widely reported in the press, affirming that some evolution is compatible with Catholic beliefs. He is the fourth pope to affirm this.                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

On the other hand, many scientists with multiple doctorates in science, including Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov and the late Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith, have rejected evolution as bad science and say creation can be and is a legitimate scientific theory. And leading theologians other than the pope say evolution is bad science and worse theology.

Is it conceivable that most scientists are uninformed on the true nature of science? And perhaps even the pope is wrong—and the religious implications of evolution are more complex than assumed.

We find additional paradoxes as science moves rapidly into the twenty-first century. Scientific materialism, naturalism, and atheism remain a dominant and powerful Western worldview, both philosophically and practically. Yet the authors of texts like Cosmos, Bios, Theos, written by 60 leading scientists including 24 Nobel Prize winners, repeatedly inform us that only God can explain the complexity and order of life as we know it. How can this be if materialism and naturalism are as sacrosanct as proponents allege? As Arthur L. Schawlow, winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics, observes, when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, “The only possible answers are religious…I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.”5

An even more surprising statement came from perhaps the most famous existentialist atheist of the twentieth century, Jean-Paul Sartre, who publicly stated his “faith” in God just prior to his death. Although a committed atheist since the age of 11, he declared: As for me, I don’t see myself as so much dust that has appeared in the world but as a being that was expected, prefigured, called forth. In short, as a being that could, it seems, come only from a creator; and this idea of a creating hand that created me refers me back to God. Naturally this is not a clear, exact idea that I set in motion every time I think of myself. It contradicts many of my other ideas; but it is there, floating vaguely. And when I think of myself I often think rather in this way, for want of being able to think otherwise.6

How do we explain all of this? If matter alone can explain the origin of life and all its glory, why do some Nobel Prize winners invoke the belief in God to explain it? Again, if evolution is a fact, why do thousands of scientists reject it? Thousands of qualified scientists simply do not reject facts of science.

Perhaps things aren’t quite as they seem to committed naturalists? And perhaps most scientists and most Americans are wrong to believe in evolution so uncritically.

“So what?” some might say. So everything. Whether or not evolution is true makes all the difference in the world. Whether or not we believe it has profound implications. The theory of evolution has significantly impacted almost everyone’s life. As the great novelist Aldous Huxley correctly declared, “Evolution has resulted in the world as we know it today.”7 That is no small declaration. For those who think about it, such a statement is indeed profound. No one can over estimate the importance of evolution if it is true or its consequences if it is false.

The issue of evolution is crucial today because, whether right or wrong, it tells us who we are. And no one can ignore his or her own portrait.

We hope open-minded evolutionists will consider the ethical implications of continuing to advocate an undemonstrated explanation of origins as a proven scientific fact. Evolution is simply a belief that people may accept or reject—no more, no less. But beliefs should be accepted on the basis of the evidence, without allowing philosophical premises (e.g., naturalism) to skew the interpretation of the evidence.

Given the major philosophical, theological, biblical, and moral implications of evolution, Christian interest in this subject is more than justified. If evolution isn’t even a good scientific theory as critics charge, then these Christians should feel intellectually satisfied in letting the Scripture speak for itself about creation and related issues. There is no need to revise the historic orthodox theology of biblical anthropology (the nature of man/the Fall), harmartiology (sin), bibliology (inerrancy), or soteriology (salvation). In essence, there is no need to misinterpret the Bible in light of the “truth” of evolution.

To put it another way, there is no need for any Christian to feel intimidated by science just for accepting what the Bible plainly declares. In the end, the weight of the evidence tells us the Bible will always prove true.8 No Christian should think there would be legitimate evidence, scientific or otherwise, to deny what God has clearly spoken.

Evolutionists are, unfortunately, often rather condescending to Christians for allegedly taking an irrational “leap of faith” in believing in God, miracles, and the supernatural. Not only are their charges false (as we indicated in Ready with an Answer), evolutionists themselves take an incredible “leap of faith” that far exceeds in credulity anything Christians have ever believed.

Notes: 1 Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Bethesda, MD: Adler & Adler Publishers, Inc., 1986), p.358. 2 J. Rostand, “LaMonde et la Vie,” October 1963, p. 31 from V. Long, “Evolution: A Fairy Tale for Adults,” Homiletic and Pastoral Review, Vol. 78 (1978), no. 7, pp. 27-32). 3 The National Center for Science Education, Inc., Voices for Evolution, rev. edition Molleen Matsumura (ed.) (Berkeley, CA: The National Center for Science Education, Inc., 1995), p. 20. This is a compilation of official statements by leading scientific, religious, educational, and civil liberties organizations containing their views on science, evolution, and creation. 4 Ibid, p. 37. 5 Arthur L. Schawlow, “One Must Ask Why and Not Just How?” in Henry Margenau and Roy Abraham Varghese, Cosmos, Bios, Theos: Scientists Reflect on Science, God and the Origins of the Universe, Life, and Homo Sapiens (LaSalle, IL: Open Court, 1994), p. 105. 6 Simone de Beauvoir, “A Conversation About Death and God,” Harper’s magazine, February 1984, p.39. 7 Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means: An Inquiry into the Nature of Ideals and into the Methods Employed for Their Realization (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1937), p. 303. 8 For detailed documentation, see our Ready with an Answer (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1997).

FACT. Most of the world’s population believe that there is an Almighty powerful creator or God that has brought everything into existence, but why all the religions??? Logically there can only be ONE truth and ONE faith, so how can a person know which religion is right?

(1) On what are it’s teachings based? Are they from God or largely from men? (2 Tim. 3:16; Mark 7:7) Ask, for example: Where does the Bible teach that God is a Trinity? Where does it say that the human soul is immortal?

(2) Consider whether it is making known the name of God. Jesus said in prayer to God: “I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world.” (John 17:6) He declared: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” Matt 4:10

(3) Is true faith in Jesus christ being demonstrated? This involves appreciation of the value of the sacrifice of Jesus’ human life and of his position today as heavenly King. (John 3:36; Ps. 2:6-8) Such appreciation is shown by obeying Jesus – sharing personally and zealously in the work that he assigned to his followers. True religion has such faith that it is accompanied by works. – Jas. 2:26

(4) Are it’s members active witnesses concerning God’s Kingdom? Jesus foretold: “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.” (Matt 24:14) What religion is really proclaiming God’s Kingdom as the hope of mankind instead of encouraging people to look to human rulership to solve their problems? Has your religion equipped you to share in this activity, and to do it from house to house as Jesus taught his apostles to do? – Matt. 10:7, 11-13: Acts 5:42; 20:20

www.False-Religion.com

I read an article recently, posted to facebook by my friend (and former student) Matt Bucher. It is called “The War Prayer” and is credited to Mark Twain. (Note: I have not verified whether this attribution is accurate. The story has a quality to it that makes the attribution at least seem plausible.) The story is thought provoking, I think. This is especially true for those from a Just War Theory or military background. However, even those from the peace tradition can fall into the trap in other areas of our lives.

In the story, the writer has the prophetic character call the soldiers “idols” and points out that prayers for their success are prayers that desire curses upon the enemy. This is, of course, never uttered in the actual prayers, but is a natural side effect of the prayers for military success in battle. This should give anyone pause, though I doubt it will sway those who view war as a necessary evil.

My immediate response, however, was to try to make it more personal. What elements of my prayers may have this same type of unintended consequence? I long ago stopped praying for success for my sports teams. This had two causes. First, I really cannot believe that God cares all that much about who actually wins and loses sporting events. (For more of my thoughts on this see my post “We Care About What Doesn’t Matter“.) I think God cares about injuries, and certainly we can pray that no one is injured. I also think that God receives glory when athletes use their abilities and play their best. I certainly think that prayers along this line are also warranted.

The second reason I stopped praying for victory is more important here. I realized that praying for victory for my team implies that I want the other team to lose, and their fans to be disappointed. In the past, this has honestly been my true feelings. I wanted Cowboys, Yankees, Braves, the University of Miami, etc.  fans to suffer. I sort of had the impression that they deserved it for their choice of teams. I came to realize that God cared more about the people who were fans of the other teams (as well as fans of “my” teams) than He did about the actual outcome. Also, I have been specifically tasked to pray for my enemies and bless them. How does praying for the success of my own team accomplish this clear directive from my Messiah?!

Of course, this also works out in other ways. Does praying for the best possible parking spot imply that I want others to be inconvenienced? Does praying that the line will be short when I go to lunch imply that I want the store to not be doing good business? or just that I want others to have to wait behind me? Does praying that the light will change quickly so I can keep going mean that I want others to be delayed by the light going their direction?

How would my prayer life be different if I really though about whether I really meant everything that my prayers implied, and not just the part that sounded fine when I said it out loud? How different would yours be?

————

The biggest success I’ve had in this issue was in our foster/adoption process. I honestly tried to never pray specifically that the kids would be ours. I prayed that God would work out his best for the kids. If that meant going back to their biological mom, so be it. If that meant staying with us permanently, we would be delighted! We reminded ourselves to pray often for their biological parents and family. We prayed for God’s blessings on them. We prayed that their biological parents would find God, and get their lives back on track, even if that cost us the kids. If it brought God glory, and brought salvation to lost children of God, who were we to stand in the way? It wasn’t always easy, but we knew that we wanted God’s best, not our own way. I’m sure God will bless you as you learn to seek His heart and pray in ways consistent with His desire for your life!

One of the hottest items for the season seems to be True Religion jeans, as reported by eBay Pulse.   True Religion is a relatively new company, founded in 2002. 

But buying jeans for someone else can be tricky;  heck, buying jeans for yourself is often anything but easy.  Different styles can fit differently, even when made by the same company!  But, if you have a True Religion fan on your list we are sure you will be able to find something they will like.  You can shop online at the True Religion website, where they are offering free shipping for the holidays. 

Better yet, check eBay!  Many reputable sellers have True Religion jeans in stock and you can snap up a pair for way, way less than retail.  You won’t believe the large selection of True Religion jeans  on eBay! 

Happy shopping, and may your days be filled with Dream-Adventures!

“Fist Pumpin like Champs!”

MTV has assembled an All Star line up of Guidos from all over NYC and has brought them together to capture the essence of the “Jersey Shore”. Sure, a show about  bunch of Guidos on the Jersey Shore sounds entertaining but its the castmembers that truly make the show special. With cast members sporting names such as ”The Situation”, “J-Wow” , the self proclaimed “Kim Kardashian of Staten Island” , and everyones favorite “Snooki”  its a show you cant help but love.  & When we say Guidos we mean Guidos, so as you can imagine there will be copious amounts of Gel, Muscles, Spiked Hair, Fist Pumps, Gold Chains, Tanned Skin, and Ed Hardy throughout the entire seson. A recipe for Hilarity.

I mean with moments like this. You kindaa have to watch!

Back in 1956, a news columnist wrote:  “It is estimated that a century ago the average man had 72 wants, of which 16 were regarded as necessities. Today, the average man is estimated to have 474 wants, 94 of which are regarded as necessities. A century ago, 200 articles were urged upon the average man by salesmanship – but today there are 32,000 articles which require sales resistance. Man’s necessities are few – his wants, infinite.”

Today, people are bombarded with the idea that material wealth and possessions are the principle thing in life. Thus, many come to ignore the wise advice of Ecclesiastes 7:12: “Wisdom is for a protection the same as money is for a protection; but the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom itself preserves alive its owners.”

The Prime Importance

What pursuits consume your time and energy? Is making a good name for yourself a matter of concern to you? Do you devote yourself to the gathering of riches? How about pursuing a career in a certain field of endeavour or developing expertise in one or more branches of learning? Is cultivating good relationships with others important to you? Is staying in good health your main concern? All of the foregoing may seem to have some value. But what is of prime importance? The Bible answers: “Wisdom is the prime thing. Aquire wisdom.” (Proverbs 4:7)

What is the Purpose of Life?

 In the search for wisdom, many people start to wonder about the purpose of life. Why is life so full of problems? Where are we going? Why are we here? True, some people are preoccupied with caring for their family, earning a living, traveling, or other personal interests because they know of no other meaning to life.

Albert Einstein once said: “The man who regards his life as meaningless is not merely unhappy but hardly fit for life.” In line with such thinking, some seek to put meaning in their life by pursuing the arts, scientific research, or humanitarian efforts to curb suffering. Do you know some like that?

It is understandable that basic questions about the meaning of life arise, especially questions like; Why do we suffer? Why is the world so unjust? What is the purpose of pain and tragedy? Finding satisfying answers would surely make a difference.

Finding satisfying answers to life’s biggest questions will add meaning to your life and lay the basis for a happier future. Questions like: How did the universe come to be? What existed before that? How did life arise here on earth? Why are we here?

SCIENCE is constantly unraveling new secrets about the universe and the life that thrives on this planet. There is wide agreement among scientists that the universe had a beginning. Most also agree that before that beginning, something real must have existed. Something must have existed without a beginning, something that extended back infinitely. So the issue comes down to whether we presuppose some thing eternal or some one eternal.

When we look at the design, order, and complexity of the universe with its billions of galaxies, each containing billions of stars, and we see that all the heavenly bodies are controlled by precise laws, such as those for motion, heat, light, sound, electromagnetism, and gravity, then we must ask ourselves……can there be laws without a lawmaker?

Rocket scientist Dr. Wernher von Braun stated: “The natural laws of the universe are so precise that we have no difficulty building a spaceship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of a fraction of a second. These laws must have been set by somebody.” John Polkinghorne, formerly a physicist at Cambridge University, concluded: ” When you realise that the laws of nature must be incredibly fined tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.”

If the universe and our being alive in it are accidental, our lives can have no lasting meaning. But if our life in the universe results from design, there must be a satisfying meaning to it.

If life ‘evolved’ over aeons of time, then we should expect to find a host of intermediate organisms, or links, between the major types of living things. However the many (over 250 million) fossils unearthed since Darwin’s time have proved disappointing in that respect.  The missing links are just that – missing! Many scientists have therefore concluded that the evidence for evolution is too weak and contradictory to prove that life evolved.

Interestingly, when we look at the fossil record we see that it closely matches the general order of the appearance of living forms found in the Bible book of Genesis. Donald E. Chittick, a physical chemist who earned a doctorate degree at Oregon State University, comments: “A direct look at the fossil record would lead one to conclude that animals reproduced after their kind as Genesis states. They did not change from one kind into another. The evidence now, as in Darwin’s day, is in agreement with the Genesis record of direct creation. Animals and plants continue to reproduce after their kind. In fact the conflict between paleontology (study of fossils) and Darwinism is so strong that many scientists are beginning to believe that the in-between forms will never be found.”

You see when we look at the fossil record and early human history, what we find is that ancient man traditionally built settlements close to the sea – a major source of food. Geological evidence shows that 5-10,000 years ago sea levels were about 150 meters lower than they are today, therefore the people that were living on or close to the shore line back then must have been 100-150km further out than the shore lines of today. So when scientists are digging for fossils – particularily human or hominid – they are digging in areas that would have been considered outback hill country 5-10,000 years ago – far from the larger settlements on the (now submerged) coast. It’s hardly surprising then that the image we get of our ancestors is one of, well, fossilized hillbillies. It’s the difference between finding New York and finding Walton’s Mountain.

The same thing applies to animal fossils – we’re digging up a large number of cave bears, woolly mammoths, dire wolves and other such creatures particular to these locations, and we have no way of digging up the vast herds of creatures who roamed the plains closer to the coastline. Therefore when we talk of  “evolution” at all, we should acknowledge that much of what science currently does is guesswork and speculation. Fact is, all the bones and fossils found in the world relating to human ‘evolution’ could fit in a cardboard box in the boot of a small car, so trying to prove that we ‘evolved’ from grunting speechless ‘ape men’ from that small amount of bones is very weak evidence indeed!

Interestingly long assumed to be brutes and erroneously portrayed by Hollywood and graphic artists in science departments as part man/part ape, Neanderthals apparently had no trouble talking – scientists have discovered a Neanderthal hyoid bone (essential for human speech) “identical” to that of modern humans!

According to Aerospace engineer Luther D. Sutherland in his book Darwin’s Enigma: “The scientific evidence shows that whenever any basically different type of life first appeared on Earth, all the way from single-celled protozoa to man, it was complete and its organs and structures were complete and fully functional.

NOTE: Amino acids & proteins (the components of dna) are interdependent. To date NO lab experiment has been able to show they can exist separately. So, DNA appears in the “primordial soup” suddenly and intact?

The following article is taken from the book Darwin’s Leap of Faith – Exposing the False Religion of Evolution By Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon.

Darwin’s theory of evolution is arguably the single most profound theory emphasized by science in the twentieth century. In terms of its impact and implications, nothing else even comes close.

But despite its weight in the world of ideas, and despite its dominance, paradoxes abound for the evolutionary establishment.

Most people consider evolution to be an indisputable fact. But then how do we account for statements by reputable scientists such as the following? Molecular biologist and medical doctor Michael Denton concludes, “Ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.”1 Other scientists actually now refer to evolution as “a fairy tale.” For example, Dr. Lewis Bounoure, Director of the Zoological Museum and Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research in France declares, “Evolution is a fairy tale for grownups.”2

If evolution were an undeniable fact, how do we account for the thousands of scientists worldwide, creationists and non-creationists alike, who say the theory of evolution is false scientifically; indeed, that it has more conclusive evidence against it than any evidence ever offered for it? Many of these scientists have their Ph.D.s in the “hard” sciences (biology, paleontology, genetics, biochemistry, etc.) from leading American universities such as Harvard, Princeton, and U. C. Berkeley.

If evolution were a fact, proven beyond doubt, or even a convincing theory, we could not possibly expect to see thousands of reputable scientists rejecting it outright. At best, we would discover only a few fringe “scientists” who would deny it—just like a few fringe “scientists” might be found in the Flat Earth Society (if such a society exists).

The fact that a lesser number of scientists reject evolution is not the issue here, as some evolutionists maintain. The issue is that thousands of credible scientists would not deny the theory of evolution if it were a proven fact. Something else, then, must account for belief in evolution, something other than the scientific data.

Perhaps things are not as they seem to most of the world.

Evolutionists say the scientific evidence for evolution is overwhelming. But critics of the theory allege that this evidence is seriously misunderstood. And if the scientific evidence is really undeniable, why have evolutionists lost hundreds of scientific debates to creationists? Again, perhaps there is more than meets the eye in the creation-evolution controversy.

On the one hand, evolutionists everywhere say that the theory of evolution represents the epitome of good science and that a theory of creation cannot possibly be scientific. As the American Anthropological Association declared in an official statement, “evolution is…a cornerstone of twentieth century science in general.”3 The American Society of Parasitologists declared, “Creationism is not a science and cannot become a science.”4 Even Pope John Paul II issued a formal statement in 1996, widely reported in the press, affirming that some evolution is compatible with Catholic beliefs. He is the fourth pope to affirm this.

On the other hand, many scientists with multiple doctorates in science, including Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov and the late Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith, have rejected evolution as bad science and say creation can be and is a legitimate scientific theory. And leading theologians other than the pope say evolution is bad science and worse theology.

Is it conceivable that most scientists are uninformed on the true nature of science? And perhaps even the pope is wrong—and the religious implications of evolution are more complex than assumed.

We find additional paradoxes as science moves rapidly into the twenty-first century. Scientific materialism, naturalism, and atheism remain a dominant and powerful Western worldview, both philosophically and practically. Yet the authors of texts like Cosmos, Bios, Theos, written by 60 leading scientists including 24 Nobel Prize winners, repeatedly inform us that only God can explain the complexity and order of life as we know it. How can this be if materialism and naturalism are as sacrosanct as proponents allege? As Arthur L. Schawlow, winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics, observes, when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, “The only possible answers are religious…I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.”5

An even more surprising statement came from perhaps the most famous existentialist atheist of the twentieth century, Jean-Paul Sartre, who publicly stated his “faith” in God just prior to his death. Although a committed atheist since the age of 11, he declared: As for me, I don’t see myself as so much dust that has appeared in the world but as a being that was expected, prefigured, called forth. In short, as a being that could, it seems, come only from a creator; and this idea of a creating hand that created me refers me back to God. Naturally this is not a clear, exact idea that I set in motion every time I think of myself. It contradicts many of my other ideas; but it is there, floating vaguely. And when I think of myself I often think rather in this way, for want of being able to think otherwise.6

How do we explain all of this? If matter alone can explain the origin of life and all its glory, why do some Nobel Prize winners invoke the belief in God to explain it? Again, if evolution is a fact, why do thousands of scientists reject it? Thousands of qualified scientists simply do not reject facts of science.

Perhaps things aren’t quite as they seem to committed naturalists? And perhaps most scientists and most Americans are wrong to believe in evolution so uncritically.

“So what?” some might say. So everything. Whether or not evolution is true makes all the difference in the world. Whether or not we believe it has profound implications. The theory of evolution has significantly impacted almost everyone’s life. As the great novelist Aldous Huxley correctly declared, “Evolution has resulted in the world as we know it today.”7 That is no small declaration. For those who think about it, such a statement is indeed profound. No one can over estimate the importance of evolution if it is true or its consequences if it is false.

The issue of evolution is crucial today because, whether right or wrong, it tells us who we are. And no one can ignore his or her own portrait.

We hope open-minded evolutionists will consider the ethical implications of continuing to advocate an undemonstrated explanation of origins as a proven scientific fact. Evolution is simply a belief that people may accept or reject—no more, no less. But beliefs should be accepted on the basis of the evidence, without allowing philosophical premises (e.g., naturalism) to skew the interpretation of the evidence.

Given the major philosophical, theological, biblical, and moral implications of evolution, Christian interest in this subject is more than justified. If evolution isn’t even a good scientific theory as critics charge, then these Christians should feel intellectually satisfied in letting the Scripture speak for itself about creation and related issues. There is no need to revise the historic orthodox theology of biblical anthropology (the nature of man/the Fall), harmartiology (sin), bibliology (inerrancy), or soteriology (salvation). In essence, there is no need to misinterpret the Bible in light of the “truth” of evolution.

To put it another way, there is no need for any Christian to feel intimidated by science just for accepting what the Bible plainly declares. In the end, the weight of the evidence tells us the Bible will always prove true.8 No Christian should think there would be legitimate evidence, scientific or otherwise, to deny what God has clearly spoken.

Evolutionists are, unfortunately, often rather condescending to Christians for allegedly taking an irrational “leap of faith” in believing in God, miracles, and the supernatural. Not only are their charges false (as we indicated in Ready with an Answer), evolutionists themselves take an incredible “leap of faith” that far exceeds in credulity anything Christians have ever believed.

Notes: 1 Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Bethesda, MD: Adler & Adler Publishers, Inc., 1986), p.358. 2 J. Rostand, “LaMonde et la Vie,” October 1963, p. 31 from V. Long, “Evolution: A Fairy Tale for Adults,” Homiletic and Pastoral Review, Vol. 78 (1978), no. 7, pp. 27-32). 3 The National Center for Science Education, Inc., Voices for Evolution, rev. edition Molleen Matsumura (ed.) (Berkeley, CA: The National Center for Science Education, Inc., 1995), p. 20. This is a compilation of official statements by leading scientific, religious, educational, and civil liberties organizations containing their views on science, evolution, and creation. 4 Ibid, p. 37. 5 Arthur L. Schawlow, “One Must Ask Why and Not Just How?” in Henry Margenau and Roy Abraham Varghese, Cosmos, Bios, Theos: Scientists Reflect on Science, God and the Origins of the Universe, Life, and Homo Sapiens (LaSalle, IL: Open Court, 1994), p. 105. 6 Simone de Beauvoir, “A Conversation About Death and God,” Harper’s magazine, February 1984, p.39. 7 Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means: An Inquiry into the Nature of Ideals and into the Methods Employed for Their Realization (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1937), p. 303. 8 For detailed documentation, see our Ready with an Answer (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1997).

 (1) On what are it’s teachings based? Are they from God or largely from men? (2 Tim. 3:16; Mark 7:7) Ask, for example: Where does the Bible teach that God is a Trinity? Where does it say that the human soul is immortal?

(2) Consider whether it is making known the name of God. Jesus said in prayer to God: “I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world.” (John 17:6) He declared: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” Matt 4:10

(3) Is true faith in Jesus christ being demonstrated? This involves appreciation of the value of the sacrifice of Jesus’ human life and of his position today as heavenly King. (John 3:36; Ps. 2:6-8) Such appreciation is shown by obeying Jesus – sharing personally and zealously in the work that he assigned to his followers. True religion has such faith that it is accompanied by works. – Jas. 2:26

(4) Are it’s members active witnesses concerning God’s Kingdom? Jesus foretold: “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.” (Matt 24:14) What religion is really proclaiming God’s Kingdom as the hope of mankind instead of encouraging people to look to human rulership to solve their problems? Has your religion equipped you to share in this activity, and to do it from house to house as Jesus taught his apostles to do? – Matt. 10:7, 11-13: Acts 5:42; 20:20

www.False-Religion.com

“Free jeans for everyone!!”  It’s a phrase all women would love to hear and only those in the Oprah audience experience.  For the rest of the other  million women out there free jeans will just have to wait.  Jeans are the one article of clothing that seem to get the most questions and stand as the ultimate mystery piece that will continue to befuddle ( yes, befuddle is an official word now) women every”wear”.  I might not be able to solve the problem of finding the perfect jean for every body type, but I am hopefully going to help solve some jean mysteries that will make shopping for them a heck of lot easier! 

I will first start off by saying the only jeans that you can wash multiple times and miraculously stay the same size are designer jeans!  The price is normally anywhere from $150 – $300; however, it is an investment worth  making.  Designer examples:  7 for all Mankind, William Rast, CJ by Cookie Johnson, and True Religion.

Stay away from bulging pockets, pleats, or anything that has an extra layer to a jean.  Pockets with flaps can often make you look bigger without you even realizing it. A great article to check out is: http://blogs.suntimes.com/oprah/2009/03/justin_timberlake_reveals_what.html

It explains what makes your butt look good in a jean!!

Understand the rises of the jean. Mid-rise are the absolute best for covering the problem area also known as the stomach.  Avoid low-rise especially if your stomach is your problem area.  High-waisted jeans should be worn with a caution sticker attached.  We’ve all seen the seen the Jessica Simpson photos that infamously claimed she looked large.  She looked large because she was wearing TERRIBLE jeans!  High-waisted jeans only look good on tiny waisted people, and if you have big boobs you should avoid them at all times.  You’ll look as if you have no torso which is quite frankly unflattering! 

Color is another important factor in the jean world.  Dark denim is often more flattering to the figure than a lighter wash.

The best style for majority of women is normally a boot-cut.  However, skinny jeans are great for showing off your legs or for tucking them into boots!  Flare and Wide Leg are another way to make a statement and can accentuate your shoes rather than your thighs.

If feeling frustrated and flustered when shopping for a jean, there is no better time to break through the misery and discover your perfect jean!  Just a friendly reminder…don’t let the  jean tackle you…go out and tackle the jean!

Abortion, fatherlessness, & socialism will not end until God sends a revival. God will not send a revival & hear the prayers of His people until we stop the shedding of innocent blood, deliver the fatherless, and speak out against idolatry. Which is true ? THEY BOTH ARE !
****************************************

A couple of weeks ago, we were petitioning at a Flea Market & came across a table with several very unique books — CHEAP. Being rank bibliophiles, the Riley’s indulged.
I walked away with rare finds like Industrialization and Southern Society 1877 – 1984 and “Revolutions of 1848” for ONE BUCK each.

But my most prized find was the 800 page tome “The Christian Almanac” by George Grant & Gregory Wilbur. The book contains a couple of pages of readings for each day of the year, plus and introduction, vast index & footnotes. On each day, the suggested passages from McCheyne’s daily Bible reading calendar is at the top (designed to help you read through the Bible in a year). This is followed by two pages of important events, people, anecdotes, quotes, etc from the last 2000 years of history. Some of them you wonder why they were included. Most, you are excited & encouraged to learn of.

A couple of entries from the last two days (Dec. 3 &4) caught my eye, excited me, and prompted me to write this.

Dec 3 — 1846 Leslie Printice was a young widow in New York City when she became active in the pro-life movement. A member of Gardner Spring’s congregation at the prominent Brink Presbyterian Church, she was encouraged by his sermons on child-killing to take a bold and active stand. She organized several meetings in her midtown Manhattan brownstone of . . . community leaders to hear the facts about the abortion trade. Under the auspices of the church, she set up the New York Parent & Child Committee. The committee established prayer networks, sidewalk counselling shifts, and even alternative care programs with Christian doctors. It also organized regular protests in front of Ann Lohman’s five area abortion franchises — known professionally as “Madam Restell. Lohman as the boldest, richest, and most visible child-killer. Tenacious and unrelenting Leslie Printice led a rally outside Lohman’s lush home on this day that was by turns emotional, physical, and fierce.
When Loman went to trial for the first time the next year Leslie was there — despite innumerable threats on her life by a number of the gangsters on Lohman’s payroll — to testify with several children “saved from the butcher’s knife”. Nearly half a century later, her efforts were recognized in Albany by Theodore Rooselvelt as the primary catalyst for the state’s tougher laws & stricter enforcement.

For the sake of space — and in hopes that you’ll read the rest of this, I will not post the entire entry fromDec. 4. But it was about a man named Samuel Taylor — a mild mannered, Methodist small town Midwestern pharmacist; quiet with an aversion to controversy. On this date in 1856 the daughter of one of his customers was poisoned by a dose of a mail order abortafacient pills. He discovered that the abortafacient business was booming across the United States — completely unrestricted. He began a one man educational crusade about the child-killing trade– starting with his fellow pharmacists and then moving to the general public and elected officials. Taylor eventually testified before legislatures in three Midwestern states and wrote model legislation to ban abortafacients that was adopted by fourteen states.

As Dr. Grant documented in his work “Third Time Around” abortion has been legal & culturally acceptable before and Christians have turned it back every time.

The Almanac entries above caught my eye for a couple of reasons.

As we go out petitioning for the Mississippi Personhood Amendment & speaking on behalf of the cause of life across the state, I have heard some form of two dismissive objections repeatedly from liberals, libertarians, and well meaning or cynical Christians. One “abortion has always been around” and two “ abortion is entrenched legally & culturally in our day that you are never going to get rid of it”.

The first, I think is meant to shock me. The second I think is aimed to make me give up, or at the very least to get me to shut up & leave them alone.

On the first point, they are somewhat right. Abortion has always been around, with a few exceptions. Just like rape; the slave trade; child sacrifice, abuse, & exploitation; sexual degeneracy & family/ moral breakdown; tyrannical governments; war & police state tactics killing people; theft & corruption by the government or private entities; the trend towards centralization and away from freedom in the public & private spheres; worship of the state or political leaders as demigods by leftists who want welfare & right wing hawks; and every other form of selfish explotation man’s sinful man can come up with — along with millions of orphans, broken lives, slaughtered & tortured people.
All these evils have “always been around” except where Christianity flourished and became the dominant influence in the culture. When worship of the “one true God” in “Spirit and in Truth” prevails social evils subside. Conversely, since Old Testament times, in periods of Spiritual decline — in cultures that had been blessed by God’s favor — social evils, tyranny & human suffering increase. As the Spiritual decline and apathy grows along with personal sins among God’s people idolatry inside & outside the Church increases along with it come child sacrifice & abortion, sexual perversions, broken homes, orphans, tyrannical government leaders/ programs/ police/ armies.

Does this mean that we need to repent, cry out to God, and pray/ labor for revival — a real move of God as our only hope ? Yes. Absolutely, I say YES !

Does that also mean that we should “just preach the Gospel” ? Or just concerntrate on personal Spiritual growth & pietistic, introspective (me-centered) sanctification ? Or should we, at least, focus on reforming our churches and families — knowing that the culture will not be reformed until revival & repentance in the church comes ?

The answer to that, I believe can be found in the same place as the answer to the second objection above :
One “abortion has always been around” and two “ abortion is entrenched legally & culturally in our day that you are never going to get rid of it”. And the answer to the charge that the orphan crisis is too big (150 million plus) so we can’t do anything effective but wring our hands and pray. And the answer to the common belief that idolatrously big government that involves itself in everything cannot be turned back (and it is wrong to even speak out). And the answer to the hopelessness of 70% multigenerational fatherless ness in places like the Delta & inner cities that has spawned incredible levels of crime and recreated dependant slavery to a much more harsh master (the government). And the answer to the worldwide industry of sexual slavery & human trafficking so large that there are more people in slavery in the world today than during the entire 400 year history of the Transatlantic slave trade. And so on . . .

Social evils & human suffering are reduced, families restored, and cultures reformed when revival comes. BUT that does not make praying/ labouring for revival our only task or make the Spiritual & the temporal mutually exclusive.

A careful study of the Scripture and of Church history will prove this to be true. When God begins to stir His people, He will work both in the Spiritual realm & give people a new earnestness in their Spiritual hunger/ prayer & zeal for personal holiness & evangalism of the lost. BUT He will also stir the hearts of many of His people to fight idolatry, tyranny, aleiviate human suffering, etc.

Sometimes this manifests itself when God simultaneously raises up a great preacher & a great. Godly political leader or social reformer — Ezra & Nehimiah; John Newton & William Wilberforce.
Sometimes the godly preacher IS the social reformer or political leader — Spurgeon or Whitfield or Mueller with their orphanages; Rutherford speaking out against the idea that tyrannical government must be obeyed by godly people no matter what.
Sometimes (rarely) it is actually the political leader that is the agent for Spiritual renewal and the reform of society/ government in accordance with God’s Word — King Josiah; Abraham Kuyper.

But most often, societies are changed, social evils are turned back, tyranny overcome when the hearts of common people are stirred. Athiestic Communism was on an uninterrupted march across the globe for most of the 20th Century. It was believed by all Marxists and most of the academic world that this was destiny.
That was, of course, until unknown pastors in Romanian underground churches preached the Gospel in the face of unrelenting persecution and peasants with pitchforks in places like Poland & Ukraine overcame a global Superpower.

Likewise, in the stories above we are reminded that abortion has been overcome in the past by common people with an uncommon God. Widows and mild mannered pharmacists stood down the abortion industry & their allies in government 150 years ago. It can happen again !

Abortion, the orphan crisis, the growth of homofacism, human trafficking, socialism, etc will end when God stirs the hearts of common people like me & you.
BUT it’s not going to happen because we hide our heads in the sand, Spiritualize our own self centered apathy, and hide behind theological platitudes while a suffering world collapses around us. IN other words, the gates of hell are not coming to your Church any time soon.
Gates are defensive structures. The captives of hell are “out there”, outside our comfort zones. However, as the Church continues Her retreat into irrelevance, partisan politics, worldliness, or pietism — the dominance of hell-on-earth grows. And the gates of hell get closer to the doors of our church buildings and our neat little sanitized, isolated “christian” sub culture. No matter how tightly we cram our fingers into our ears the cries of the fatherless get louder. No matter how hard we cover our eyes (or turn them towards a clean Vanity Fair or read lots of poetic books & listen to emotional praise songs about Spiritual things) the ugly truth is creeping through the cracks in front of our very eyes.
Eventually, it becomes more and more difficult to be able to slip our of our churches, and go to our Christian homes, and to our soccer games, and social events with our Christian friends, and go rent our G-rated movies without bumping into the gates of hell & smelling the foul stench of death. The gates of hell are at the church door and engulfing the world around us. The jaws of the pit of hell that our culture has become are wide open waiting to devour us, our children, and our neatly ordered lives. Just as this culture has devoured the lives of millions of unborn children & scarred the souls of many more.

Will you not speak up ? Will you not cry out to God — “here am I, send me” ?

It’s easy to agree that “abortion will end when God moves” or the global orphan crisis or human trafficking or welfare dependency or sexual degeneracy or broken homes or socialism will end when God moves AS LONG AS IT DOESN’T COST US ANYTHING.

It is much more difficult to love your unborn neighbours when gansters threaten your life like they did Leslie Printance in 1846 or crazy people shoot at you like the man that killed pro-life martyr Jim Poulian in Michigan earlier this year.
It is difficult to care about orphans when it might mean standing in the face of incredible Spitiual and cultural opposition like Amy Carmichael faced; or it might upset our neat little world’s or mean no nice house, new car, & latest electronic gadget in our time.
It is difficult to stand for God & against tyrrany when it might cost you your freedom like Knox & Rutherford or your life like modern Christians in Communist or Islamic countries.

Do we not believe the promises God makes to those who overcome the world ? Do we not believe that Jesus’ assurance that anyone who follows Him must “die to self” & “take up his cross ? Do we think we live in a time when the warning that we must “count the cost” has been suspended ?

I do not know if God has called you to get involved in Personhood or other pro-life work or adoption or other things we are involved in (I think He is calling more of you than you think). I am not your judge or the Holy Spirit. But I do know that God has not called any of His people into a life of comfort, ease, and sloth. He delivered us from the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of His Dear Son. These kingdoms are at war until our King claims the final victory. He has called you to the fight. Life is a battleground, not a playground. RUN TO THE FIGHT !

By Angela Alsie Borromeo

I am almost five years in service to God. Yet in my mind, it is still clear how I came to know Him. We are thought to fear God since childhood. And I kept that in my heart ; the holy fear of God and the knowledge  that He sees me wherever I am. I even used to think that He records all the things that I do that He dislikes. That is the reason why I lived a ‘limited’ life.

As a child, I had no constant playmate. My older brother and I were left in the house after school when my father and mother are out to work.  But usually, my kuya goes out to play and I am the one left playing in a world of my own. During those times, I prayed a lot, introducing my pleas and hardships to God as a child. I even used to ask God to take away all my worries and fears in life. Back then, I cried often and  hard – my tears were unstoppable.

Years passed by and we moved to a new house.  This was when my father started watching Ang Dating Daan (The Old Path). I saw the show’s opening billboard wherein there were soldiers at war in a cruel place while a classical music played in the background. I was curious as to what the show was about. And so I watched the show and began to adore it. Before I knew it, the show’s wise host, Bro. Eliseo Soriano, accompanied us every night. It was almost as if he was part of the family.

We used to have weekend family gatherings before. I looked forward to every weekend because it was when I saw my relatives and enjoyed good food as well. One weekend, I was surprised to see my jet- setter aunt who arrived with her hair tied up in a bun and wearing a Chinese-collared blouse and a long skirt. I thought to myself, “What happened to her? ” She used to wear very short shorts and haltered tops. My aunt announced that she was already a Christian. She explained that the reason for the great change in her and my uncle was because of Ang Dating Daan. I said to myself, “Okay, some weird things really happen!” But I admit that I look up to her. That is why I became even more curious as to what  it’s all about.

One morning came and my father approached me and said, “Let’s get indoctrinated in the Ang Dating Daan.” He also invited my mother, but unfortunately, my mother told him to go ahead without her. On a sadder note, my father decided to put things on hold as well. But although I haven’t voiced out my answer to his invitation, my heart said “Yes, let’s go.”

I was in high school when I experienced great struggles in life. I never knew why  my father became mad almost everyday. He was mad about everything  and at everyone. I kept on praying to be in a different atmosphere where there is peace. Where there are no pressures or phobias, no pains and fears.

I was a junior high school student when I asked my father to allow me to get indoctrinated in the Members Church of God International. He grabbed my hair with his right hand and pulled it on top of our dining table. I was shocked when he shouted at me saying, “If you come home with your hair still this long, I will cut it until you’re bald!” I used to have long hair, a biblical lesson I learned from when I attended a  Bible Expo in Laguna. But because of my father’s threat, I had no choice but to cut it. I felt so sad that day coming home with my new haircut. And it was strange because from that day on, I felt so low. I cried every night.

On the night of my debut, I told myself that my sadness had to stop. I decided to proceed with the mass indoctrination  sessions no matter what. It was January 2005 when I started listening to Bro. Eli’s indoctrination videos. I used to call the mass indoctrination  as “Step One” since I am used to putting sequences to the things I need to do. “Step one” for mass indoctrination and “Step two” for my holy baptism, and now, I’m currently on “Step N” – the process of getting better in service to God each day. February 4, 2009 marked the big change in my life. It was a fresh start;  it was when I left loneliness behind.

Because of my faith, I was prohibited by my father to step inside our house for some time. That is because he wanted me to turn back from what I have believed. He even told me that I have been  a fool since I was a child. My father told me that I kept on trying to live a foolish life. I told him, “I accept your decision to abandon me as your child, but your accusing my God as turning my life into sheer foolishness is something that I will never accept.”

“The time I started to love You is the time I started to love myself,” this is what I would always remind myself to remember how it all started and to once again feel that unexplainable feeling of happiness and contentment.

I feel blessed that I have seen the God I used to talk to since I was a kid, the Lord who mediates in spite of all my erroneous works, my leaders who cared and loved me more than my own parents did, my significant other who held on and followed me in service to God, and to the entire brethren who completed my life with God.

I have found the answer – I have cried a river and experienced great pain to realize how great God is!I am blessed and no one could ever contest that. And I pray that God would guide me all the days of my life, that I may be with Him until the end.

Thanks be to God! May His peace and blessings be with us always.

My borrowed life suddenly became more meaningful due to this wondrous experience. I have seen his daily workings; and his Godly teachings extend with everything that he does, even when he is not preaching on television or standing behind the pulpit.

By Aaron Romero

Because of my father’s listening to Don Manolo’s Genius Family program in the 80’s,  I too started listening to Bro. Eliseo Soriano’s preaching.  I was still young  then and I grew up listening to that radio program. When my father finally decided to get indoctrinated and join the true Church, I then had the chance to attend services in the locale.

I was  21 years old when I joined the Church of God, just a few months before I graduated from college. I got indoctrinated with my girlfriend, who now, I’m proud to say, is my loving wife.  I will never forget the fateful date of May 11, 2001. It was during that day that I felt the lightest I’ve ever felt in my entire life – it was when I finally joined God’s Church.

Years went by and tribulations from friends and family arose. But with God’s help, I’ve been blessed to have had the chance to come to America to work and  be one of the brethren who established the locale of New York.   I started serving with humble duties such as a locale choir member, ADDProductions staff member, and locale officer . It was hard because we were  few back then – we were one body with a multitude of tasks – but it gave us a sense of fulfillment knowing that even with our small duties, we were able to help the administration. As our years in the Church grew,  our duties grew as well.

Another great blessing that we were able to witness was when our preachers Bro. Eli Soriano and Bro. Daniel Razon visited  America. After much introspection on Bro. Eli’s invitation to join the workers’ ministry, I’ve finally decided to  heed the call and become a worker for the Church.  On most days, stress and exhaustion arise, but my soul is most glad in my chosen Church profession.

Due to my being a worker, I was blessed to have had the opportunity to serve with Bro. Daniel here in the West; I am a living witness to his service, his aspirations to help, and his kindheartedness to the brethren and everyone else. He is a true preacher of God who teaches His will. After that, another great blessing came into my life – I’ve had the wonderful opportunity to be with Bro. Eli – a very important event in my life.

During that time, I was overcome with a plethora of emotions:  I was beyond glad, I was shy and I felt a little scared when I first saw Bro. Eli face-to-face. My borrowed life suddenly became more meaningful due to this wondrous experience. I have seen his daily workings; and his Godly teachings extend with everything that he does, even when he is not preaching on television or standing behind the pulpit.  There are a lot of things that one can learn from a God-sent preacher, even the simplest of things like turning the faucet off to conserve water – a simple yet important lesson that I will never forget.  Even without uttering a word, Bro. Eli is still able to teach goodness.

There are many things that Bro. Eli and Bro. Daniel were able to impart in our God-given lives, most especially in the spiritual aspect of a Christian’s life that will lead to our achieving life everlasting.  In the short span of time that I have spent with Bro. Eli and Bro. Daniel, I can say that they are the true preachers of God in this dispensation. They are honest and real servants who wholeheartedly give their lives for the salvation of our souls.

Today in Executive Couture. What better place to present some of the finest couture swim fashions than Miami? In 2010 Mercedes Benz will host their extravagant affair in Miami Beach. You want high-end fashion? Well this is the place to be exposed. Which designers will you or your diva be flaunting? Will you be up on the new styles and trends set forth this year by the elite Mercedes Benz? These are the brands Mercedes would like you to be wearing while driving your new SLS AMG. Image is everything, and like I said in times past; “There’s no second chance at a first impression. Do it big, and do it with class.

Additional Mercedes Benz Swim Designers

TRUE RELIGION SWIMWEAR
FRI. JUL. 17
7 PM
Cabaña Grande

RED CARTER
FRI. JUL. 17
8 PM
Beachway

ED HARDY SWIMWEAR
SAT. JUL. 18
7 PM
Cabaña Grande

CIA.MARÍTIMA
SUN. JUL. 19
8 PM
Beachway

The home that I’m staying in tonight is located in rural southeastern Iowa. It belongs to my aunt and uncle and I’m here with my parents for a family reunion. It’s one of the most beautiful homes I’ve ever had the privilege of staying in. It’s an old farmhouse surrounded by barns and out buildings. Some of those buildings house a few animals – a couple goats, a few ducks, some chickens, dogs and cats. Once it was a working farm with cows and pigs and crops, but my aunt and uncle have retired from farming.

It’s hard for me to describe this home adequately. On the outside it looks regular enough. You enter through a side door into a mud room with a wooden coat hanger and a place for muddy boots. Next is a dining room with a large, well-worn table and brown carpet. The kitchen, a long and narrow room with a few cabinets and some storage, is behind the dining room. The living room has large windows that overlook the beautiful countryside and give my aunt and uncle the ability to watch deer and other wild life as they wander through.

The bedroom I’m staying in tonight is what got me to thinking of the beauty of this home. The bedroom has a linoleum floor, two small beds with colorful, tropical fish themed comforters, and matching curtains. It has an old bureau with a mirror, a lamp clipped to the top of the mirror, and another lamp near the door. There are some hooks hanging from the wall that serve as a closet of sorts. The wall is blonde paneling and above the bed I’m sleeping in is a large wooden cross with praying hands in the center of it.

I brushed my teeth tonight before bed in the tiniest bathroom I’ve ever been in outside of an airplane. It is maybe two inches wider than me on either side and the light is on a pull chain. The electrical outlets won’t allow me to plug anything in because they aren’t three-pronged outlets.

The beauty of this old farmhouse struck me when I walked in the door tonight. Seated at the kitchen table was a young boy, perhaps twelve years old. He wore leg braces and didn’t stand to greet me. When we were introduced, he spoke with difficulty. My uncle was playing a card game with him. For the first thirty minutes I was here, I was able to observe my aunt and uncle interacting with the boy. They understood what he was saying, they treated him with dignity, and they laughed and joked with him. Soon it was time for my uncle to take the boy home.

The bedroom I’m sleeping in tonight was prepared with children in mind. Today the child that my aunt and uncle were caring for went home at the end of the day, but there have been countless children who have not been able to go home because their homes were not safe places for them to be. You see, my aunt and uncle have spent countless years of their lives as foster parents. To the best of my knowledge, they began 28 years ago by taking in a little blue-eyed, blonde girl who’d been neglected by her mother. They fostered her, fell in love with her, and adopted her. Today I know her simply as my cousin Devon.

Devon and Trent Grimes

Devon was the first in a long line of children for whom my aunt and uncle provided a foster home. She is the only one they adopted, but they continued to provide a home for needy children for many years. I’m sure putting a linoleum floor in a bedroom frequented by displaced children was the wisest thing to do. I can just imagine carpet with gum stuck to it and holes from the adventurous things children do.

They were given the most difficult cases over the years because they were able to achieve such tremendous results. I don’t know many details of the children who stayed here and what was accomplished because my aunt and uncle don’t talk about it much. It’s just something they have done.

My aunt and uncle are well into their sixties now and I don’t think they take in foster children any longer. These days they are licensed to work with special needs children. They provide care for children whose families need assistance. That is why my uncle was playing Skip Bo with the young boy I met today. His family needs help and they are providing it.

There’s a wall full of children’s pictures here. It tells the story of the children who have lived under this roof. The beauty of this home is in the love that resides here. The beauty of this home is in the way two people have chosen to give of themselves to help others. The beauty in this home is in the legacy they are leaving their grandchildren. Their oldest grandchild is now in college majoring in social work. They have made such an impact on me that I look forward to the day I can follow in their footsteps and bring hurting children into my home to help them, to show them love, to teach them responsibility, and to be the hands and feet of Christ to them.

My aunt and uncle seem to understand the command of Christ to care for the fatherless better than nearly anyone I know. I know that it has not been easy for them. Their hearts have been broken many times. I have no doubt there have been times of great frustration and personal sacrifice. Yet they have continued to help. This is true religion. This is true beauty. I live near one of the wealthiest areas in the nation and am regularly in mini-mansions that are decorated with all the latest things. They are gorgeous and tasteful. They smell wonderful and have soft music playing in the background. But in an old farmhouse in rural Iowa, I have discovered true beauty. It is the beauty of a life well-spent. It is the beauty of the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.

Robert and Linda Wenger admiring their newest grandson

Thank you, Robert and Linda Wenger, for being the real thing. I am honored to call you family.

James 1:27 (ASV) – Pure religion and undefiled before our God and Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.

Galatians 5:22-23 (NIV) – But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.