Category Archives: Uncategorized

Legalism. What is it?

I am finding myself debating with the street preachers here on face book. The issues are, can we Christians listen to christian music and go to concerts? Can we watch sports, like foot ball or base ball? I believe the vast majority, not all, but most of these street preachers are self righteous hypocrites and it comes down to the issue of legalism. So here is an article on legalism, and its the 3rd point that I feel fits these guys.
 
 
What is legalism?
by Matt Slick
 
In Christianity, legalism is the excessive and improper use of the law (10 commandments, holiness laws, etc). This legalism can take different forms. The first is where a person attempts to keep the Law in order to attain salvation. The second is where a person keeps the law in order to maintain his salvation. The third is when a Christian judges other Christians for not keeping certain codes of conduct that he thinks need to be observed. Let’s examine each one more closely.
 
The first kind of legalism is where the law of God is kept in order to attain salvation. This is a heresy, a completely false doctrine. We are not able to attain salvation by our keeping the law. Rom. 3:28, “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. Rom. 4:5, “But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness.” Gal. 2:21, “I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.” It is simply not possible to keep the Law enough to be saved. Therefore, to try and gain salvation through one’s efforts is a false teaching. It is so bad that those who hold to it cannot be Christians since it would deny salvation by grace through faith.
 
The second kind of legalism is where a person tries to keep or maintain his salvation by keeping the law. This is also a false doctrine. We receive our salvation by faith (Eph. 2:8-9), not by our ability to be good because no one does good (Rom. 3:10-12). As Rom. 3:28, 4:5, and Gal. 2:21 clearly show, we are justified by faith, not by faith and works. Furthermore, there are strict warnings about attempting to keep the law in order to maintain salvation: Gal. 3:10, “For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.” And James 2:10, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.” So, if a person is seeking to be either saved by his works (Law) or maintain his salvation by his works (Law), then he is under obligation to keep all of it, and if he does not then, he is guilty before God. Furthermore, consider Jesus’ words in Matt. 7:22-23, “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’” Jesus condemns them because they were appealing to their salvation based on their faith and doing good. So it should be obvious that we do not keep our salvation by our efforts.
 
The last kind of legalism, where a Christian keeps certain laws and regards other Christians who do not keep his level of holiness with contempt, is a frequent problem in the church. Now, we want to make it clear that all Christians are to abstain from fornication, adultery, pornography, lying, stealing, etc. Christians do have a right to judge the spirituality of other Christians in these areas where the Bible clearly speaks. But, in the debatable areas, we need to be more careful, and this is where legalism is more difficult to define. Rom. 14:1-12 says that we are not to judge our brothers on debatable issues. One person may eat certain kinds of foods where another would not. One person might worship on a particular day where another might not. We are told to let each person be convinced in his own mind (Rom. 14:5). As long as our freedom does not violate the Scriptures, then everything should be okay.

Lying Mormons

Hello everyone.

The two Mormons I have been talking about that I met with and with whom I am friends on Facebook,  lied to me, about me, and are rather deceitful.   Here is a break down of what happened.

I replied to both of them in one letter and posted this on both of their Facebook timelines.

 

Hello Austin Condie and Kael Bowman.
Let me start first by saying that everything I am about to write to you guys will be posted on my website as an “article.”  It will also be posted on my Facebook page “Fighting for Truth,” and I will read it in its entirety on my radio show for all the world to hear.   With this in mind, if you guys want to respond, you are more than welcome to do so.

What is this all about? I feel you two as Mormons are very dishonest and have lied and use deceit.  I will explain why in detail and give quotes.  When the two of you came to my house and we sat down and had a long talk, I told you guys that I feel your church is a bit on the uncaring, unloving side and only want people who will not think for themselves and just blindly believe everything you tell them.   You guys said that is not true.  I also said that after you guys leave, I will never see you again and your “higher ups” will not let you speak with me and they will not speak with me either.

Austin wrote me and sent me a friend request via Facebook and said, and I quote, “Hey Rick! We are able to use Facebook to help answer questions and help teach. We’d love to help you in any way we can.” AND “Hey, we both talked to our mission president and he did not give direction to stop talking to you. I know you have examined everything but that does not scare me. I’m more than willing to go the miles and listen to you as well as learn how to help teach you better.”

These are exact quotes as I saved all replies I receive from you guys. It’s nice of you to say to me that you’re willing to listen and help.  Here is the problem.  The very first reply I received from Austin was Oct 5th, and as of this reply being written now, it is Oct 26th. In the days between the 5th and the 26th, I have posted 13 articles on Austin’s timeline,  Here is a break down to be more accurate.   One was a link to my website/radio show; one was an article about the anchors mentioned in the Bible (Acts 27) that were tossed off the boat on which the apostle Paul was sailing.  It was just pointing out as evidence that they were recovered, and now all the world can view them; zero mention of Mormonism mentioned.  Another one was a video of a speaker talking about end times prophecy and the soon rapture of the Church.  Again, zero mention of Mormonism.

One was not exactly an article; it was Austin asking me to watch a video by Mormon Tad R. Callister called, “Gods compelling witness of the Book of Mormon.”  I pretty much broke down everything Tad said and replied to it.  One Article I posted was what I shared with you guys when you came to the house.  It was what I called, the “Bruce McConkie Challenge.”   When you guys came over, I only shared part of it with you; this was the entire thing.  Another thing I posted were some Bible verses and  my thoughts on what they say and asking his thoughts on what he thinks they say.

One thing I posted was taken from the newspaper and it was a church historian looking into the issue of racism in the LDS church; nothing I wrote.  The final remaining few things I posted were quotes and information taken from your LDS scripture, prophets, and presidents.  Then, I posted one last thing explaining why I feel you guys are liars and deceitful.  Basically what happened was I was looking over Austin’s timeline and I noticed it says he has 481 friends, and I am assuming the vast majority are LDS.  I started thinking, it is really strange that not one person has left a comment or liked anything I said or posted.   I was looking over things posted by Austin and noticed there were lots of likes and hearts and other things, indicating people look over his timeline and read things he posts and comments.   So, I asked my son and my daughter to get on Facebook and go to Austin’s timeline and leave a reply or hit like on things I said, in hopes of maybe getting others to do the same.  That was when they told me that nothing I posted was on his timeline and it said I was his one and only friend.  So, I got on my wife’s Facebook account and it said the same exact thing.  That was when I knew his account is set up so it looks active and like lots of people can see what I post, but in reality, only Austin can.  That is very deceitful.

When you guys sent me friends requests, neither of you said that I cannot post anything, or I am limited in what I can post, so that shows you guys are deceitful.   I was honest and listened to what Austin asked me to listen to from Tad R.  Even if Austin felt I posted so much he could not respond to it all, he could have at least replied to one thing; as he said on Oct 14th and I quote, “Hey Rick, I just wanted to let you know I am not ignoring you. I am continuing to research everything you have given to me.”  I have to say, I find this hard to believe due to what I have discovered and the fact that there are zero replies as of yet.

Now moving on to you Kael.   After all this came out with Austin, I posted only two things on your timeline.  One was a link to my website, and one was the “Bruce McConkie Challenge.”  Not even a day had gone by and you removed both, and you never wrote me and told me you did that or gave any reason why.  That it why it seems very dishonest of you to do that.  I replied I felt that was deceitful to do, and this was your entire reply to me and I quote:

“Hey Rick how’s it going? I’m sorry you feel the way you do but I just wanted to let you know some things. The reason we delete your post from our facebooks is because we have people we teach on here and we don’t want them to see your accusations. We really do appreciate all that’s you’ve told us and the reason we don’t come back over because we know WE can’t change your mind, only the spirit can change your mind and heart. And you are so locked down that you won’t let it change you. We really emphasize the Book of Mormon because it is true, and you have to come to know of it for yourself. Please don’t think we are avoiding you because we are “afraid of the truth,” we just don’t want to cause contentions and all you want to do is try to tear down our testimonies. I will tell you over and over again that this church is true and nothing will change my heart or mind.”

So, Kael, I gotta ask.  Did you really think about what you said before you wrote me? Here is why I say that.   You said : “I’m sorry you feel the way you do but I just wanted to let you know some things. The reason we delete your post from our Facebook is because we have people we teach on here and we don’t want them to see your accusations.”

What accusations did I make that you needed to remove? I only posted my website and the Bruce Challenge.  If you honestly did listen to any shows I did, and there is something in a show that is an accusation by me, please tell me what exactly it was.  Otherwise, I am left to believe without evidence that you are lying.   As far as the Bruce Challenge, there is not one single accusation in it; it is taken word for word from your apostle.   I simply ask, “Where is the evidence for things he said?” It seems you’re bearing false witness.

You said, “We really do appreciate all that’s you’ve told us and the reason we don’t come back over because we know WE can’t change your mind, only the spirit can change your mind and heart. And you are so locked down that you won’t let it change you.”  Again, you’re making accusations.  Since I told you I am open to the truth and want to talk about these things, you claim I am not.  So, you’re, in a polite way, calling me a lair with no evidence.  This also means you ignore everything your leaders have said and taught.  Your scriptures teach (maybe you are simply ignorant of what was said and taught), things like this:   D and C  71:5-11 98:14,23-26  says meet your enemy in public.  If I am your enemy, which I don’t feel I am, but if I am, it says meet me in public to talk about this stuff.  Jesus said to love your enemy.   D and C 66:7 68:1,9 says go into the churches, public, or private to discuss this stuff.  D and C 6:9-11 say, “Convince us of our error, if we have any.”  Why do I get accused of being hateful for doing what the scriptures teach?  Let me add this:  would you agree it is good to listen to the Mormon prophets? If so, then I am.

I quote Orsan Pratt, still pg 15.

“We ask from you the same generosity–protect us in the exercise of our religious rights–CONVINCE US of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds”.

 

Kael, you also said, “We really emphasize the Book of Mormon because it is true”, and you have to come to know of it for yourself. If you really believe this, then 1) you would not need to lie and use deceit, and 2) you would be easily able to read the “Bruce McConkie Challenge” and give me the answers I am looking for listed in it, and 3) Doct of Salvation, vol 2, pg 1 of chapter 1 heading says:

SALVATION.
below that it says THE PLAN OF SALVATION.

“TRUTHS of SALVATION EASILY UNDERSTOOD.
Salvation should be a subject uppermost in the minds of all men. It is, without question the most important subject that could possibly be considered, and yet there are so few among the many who pay any attention whatever to this great and important theme, as it may be applied in their lives.”

On pg 9 of Doc of Salvation, vol 2,  J.F.S states what I said.

“What is eternal life? It is to have a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.  No one receives eternal life except those who receive the exaltation.  Eternal life is the greatest gift of God; immortality is not. The Lord says:  “Verily verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. everlasting life in this passage is the same as eternal life”.

Lastly you said:  “Please don’t think we are avoiding you because we are “afraid of the truth,” we just don’t want to cause contentions and all you want to do is try to tear down our testimonies. I will tell you over and over again that this church is true and nothing will change my heart or mind.”

Again, here is what your prophets and leaders taught.

Mormon President George A. Smith said on page 216 in volume 14 of the J.O.D.
“If a faith will not bear to be investigated; if it’s preachers and professors are afraid to have it examined, their foundation must be very weak.”

Seems to me, your faith is very weak since you guys fight tooth and nail to not have what you believe examined. You feel I am being contentious, so I guess you never read the Book of Jude.  It says:

Jude 1:3  “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.”

Notice it says we are to contend for the faith? Do you know what it means to contend for the faith? Do you know why it says we are to contend for the faith? The next verse answers that question.  Jude 1:4 ” For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Also, don’t you find it rather ironic that you said to me, “And you are so locked down that you won’t let it change you”.  But, then, you end by saying to me, “I will tell you over and over again that this church is true and nothing will change my heart or mind.”  You’re basically telling me, you’re doing and acting the way you accuse me of being. Lastly, you feel I am trying to tear down your testimonies.   I never mentioned your testimonies.   I was saying:  let’s examine all the evidence.

Rick Beaudin

Hurricane Harvey in light of Bible prophecy. 

Amir’s commentary on the Hurricane Harvey in light of Bible prophecy. 

Hurricane Harveythe most powerful and devastating hurricane to hit the United States in over a decade, has been nothing short of a catastrophe. Hundreds of thousands have been displaced, homes and lives uprooted and 38 casualties from the storm.

While there is no doubt that Hurricane Harvey is a horrible natural disaster, we must remember that it’s part of a global phenomena of natural disasters and sadly many aren’t getting any media coverage at all. Floods in many parts of Asia, famines in large parts of Africa and Yemen and record number of earthquakes worldwide are hardly getting any attention anymore.

This morning, at least 7 were killed when a building collapsed in Mumbai due to heavy flooding. The coastal city of over 20 million has been the most recent affected by storms during the height of the monsoon season. The floods have killed over 1,200 in India, Bangladesh and Nepal, displacing thousands.

Such intensity of natural disasters is exactly what Romans 8:22-24 is talking about. These are clearly the birth pangs before the soon redemption of our body (the Rapture).

“…22 For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. 24 For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees?…”

In my opinion, associating Harvey with the “peace process” in Israel (which is no longer a “big deal” to anyone in the region anymore) is stretching it to unwanted places.

The association of every devastating natural disaster in America to Israel not only isn’t accurate, but can indirectly promote a very wrong picture of God and His Word. As if Israel is more important to Him than the unborn etc. Think of the lay Christian who can’t bear anymore, the unrighteousness all around him, yet is being told that God acts in judgment only when the future of the land of Israel is at stake?

Being familiar with the negotiating process in the Middle East, Trump’s Administration is the friendliest we have ever had since Nixon. The two-state solution is an old idea offered by the UN in the 1940’s. Since 1967, Israel itself has been offering the Palestinians land for peace. Way before we had even one single settlement in Judea, Samaria, Gaza or the Golan Heights, the Arabs refused to any solution that would allow a vibrant Jewish state to remain standing.

As an insider, I can tell you that Prime Minister Netanyahu is getting what he wants from the current American team. The ideas being presented to the Palestinians today by Kushner are ideas that were promoted by Netanyahu himself. No one in Israel- or in the whole region- seriously believes that the Palestinians will ever accept those ideas anyway. As long as we don’t agree on Jerusalem, borders or refugees, nothing will ever move forward.

Last December, the UN Security Council adopted a landmark resolution demanding a halt to all Israeli settlement in “the occupied territories” after Barack Obama’s Administration refused to veto the resolution. The vote didn’t exclude Jerusalem’s Old City as part of the “occupied territories” thus suggesting that the Western Wall, the Jewish Quarter and the Temple Mount aren’t Israel’s legal territory. The vote that was no doubt Obama’s last revenge on Israel was far more “punishment worthy” than anything Trump has ever done.

So why does Hurricane Harvey happen now and not then?

If anything, I believe that America as a nation may one day be judged by God, but surely not for Jared Kushner’s visit to Israel. It’s about much more important things that America has been doing against God and His Word such as the heavy promotion of killing the unborn, sexual immorality, redefining marriage and family, divorce, idolatry, worship of mammon, allowing Satan worship, mocking Jesus while protecting Allah, etc.

Isaiah 5:20

“…Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!..”

Awaiting His Return,

Amir

Gods handy work in plants.

I was looking over my garden and saw that my cucumber plants had little vines (Called tendrils), that would attach themselves to whatever they were able to grab. The tendrils were using the rails and fence surrounding the garden to support themselves. After looking at them, I started thinking, according to atheists and people who believe in evolution and deny God, this just all happened because plants have brains and they know that they needed to do this. Yea right! I believe God created them this way. If you want to believe they evolved this way, all apart from a creator, please feel free to tell me how they just managed to figure this out over time. I am listening.

 

Atheism

I would like to talk about atheism and atheists. Before I do, let me briefly say tht I was a hardcore, God-hating atheist for the first 21-22 years of my life. I will not go into any great detail or claim my life is what all atheists are like. I will say, for me, and speaking only of me, that I was so rotten and evil, I was taken to see a physiologist by my mother at the age of 5. I had a restraining order put on me by a pastor of a church at 16,and my dad kicked me out of the house at 16 because I had the police, sheriff, and state troopers over to my house so often that my dad had had enough.

Atheists make the claim that Christians like to say that only people of faith, or Christians, have morals. I am not the type of person to claim things like this or to argue just one side. I, unlike many Christians and atheists, like to look at both sides and be fair to both sides.
If anyone agrees or disagrees, feel free to share your thoughts. At the end of the day, so to speak, everyone sins. We’re all fallen people and we all sin. Now, I know many atheists will say, “I am not a sinner” or “I do not believe in sin,” and that’s fine. If you don’t feel like you sin or are a sinner, then please explain why you as a human, have at one time in your life or another lied, stolen something, have gotten mad to the point you said or thought that you wish someone were dead, etc. Simply put, are you perfect to the point you have never made a mistake? If you are not perfect, can you explain why you are not?

As Christians who believes the Bible, many, but not all, believe in original sin and believe that since Adam and Eve rebelled against God, sin was brought into the human race, and brought a curse upon the land. This is why we have weeds, we suffer pain in child birth, sweat and suffer aches and pains and work by the sweat of our brow, as the Bible says. But for atheists who do not believe in creation, I am only aware of three views as to how we got here on earth. View 1: I don’t know how we got here; I just know its not from God creating us. View 2: Evolution. View 3: Aliens planted us here on the earth. If there are any other views, I honestly have not heard of them, so please fill me in on them. Thanks.

Now, I mention these other views because if you cannot explain how we got here, and just simply refuse to believe in God, that tells me you don’t want to honestly look into the truth. If aliens planted us here, you have faith; faith in aliens, and no evidence. Then that again means, you cannot explain why you are not perfect? In evolution, you have faith in something, with no evidence. Now, I know many, many, atheists that claim there is tons of evidence. That’s a lie. Everyone I know that believes in evolution feels it is science. Even people who deny evolution, will call it science. When it comes to evolution, I understand atheists claim there is tons of evidence, but in reality, there is zero evidence. First of all, how can anyone really prove the “Big Bang” happened? They cannot. Scientists claim, without evidence, that it simply happened. They cannot reproduce anything even remotely close to it. No one can take nothing and create life from it, but God. Scientists cannot take a bunch of gases and add some sparks and create life. There are many scientists who all claim to believe in evolution, yet cannot agree on the exact details, since its all just a guess and hope that it is true. Some scientists claim millions of years, some claim billion of years, some claim evolution happened so fast that it is now over and that’s why we don’t see monkeys or other animals still evolving. Others claim it is still happening, but so slowly, we wont see it play out in our lifetime. Some scientists are now, and have been for a while, starting to question to the point that they think aliens planted us here and helped build the pyramids and other things. Think that’s a joke? Watch the science channel shows like, “Ancient Aliens,” for example. I saw one video on the internet claiming the “Big Bang” did not really happen, and what happened was that we simply always existed. That was from people who teach and believe in evolution. If you believe we evolved, then did we evolve to lie, cheat, steal, murder, have anger issues, and other things? If so, why? What is the purpose in evolving to do these things? Otherwise, did we evolve into a perfect man and women? And if we evolved perfect, then we “fell” at some point, like it or not. Even atheists use laws and law enforcement trying to fight corruption, stop people from killing other people, or putting people behind bars if they try and rape their family members or steal from them. We know, all people, no matter what faith you claim, commit these sins. Yes, even Christians; we don’t claim to be perfect, just forgiven.

For some good info on this subject, go watch the movie by Ben Stein, “No intelligence Required”. As far as that movie goes, Ben is not a bible believing Christian, so he is not making the movie to side with us Christians. In that movie, all the scientists and people who believe in evolution spoke for themselves and they looked like bumbling idiots. One guy claimed we came from crystals on the backs of turtles. I commented that maybe they only crystals was the Crystal Meth he was smoking. Now, I know from talking with atheists about that movie after many watched it, and read various atheists’ blogs and websites, the vast majority of people claimed Ben edited the movie in such a way to make them look like idiots. But my reply to them was and still is, “Not one of the people interviewed ever made a rebuttal movie adding all the information that claim Ben purposely left out. So why is that? I maintain it’s because they are wrong and they have no honest answers.

As far as atheists go, can you explain why your not perfect, and must make, and use laws? We know atheists over the years have committed horrifying atrocities. I know atheists love to pull the religion card on Christians, and claim we do all these horrible things, but ignore all the horrible things other atheists have done and do. According to the Bible, God gave us laws, and we still have those laws and many more humans created. God gave us laws like: do not murder, do not lie, cheat, or steal; but we humans made many more laws God did not give, such as: you must be a certain age to drink, drive, vote, cannot drive past a set speed, or stop at stop signs. Atheists can claim they don’t believe in God and the Bible, but you do follow and use His laws? At least some do. For example, we know many an atheist has killed people, or raped people, or lied, etc. So if you believe in evolution, then explain a few things to me. 1. Why did we not all simply evolve perfect and loving and kind? 2. If you claim we did, then can you explain why we have so much violence in the world? 3. If you claim, its all due to religion; then can you explain all the atheists that don’t follow or believe religion who do horrific acts of murder and violence?

 

Lets just mention a few atheists who have committed horrific acts of violence upon fellow man; and it cannot be blamed upon religion.
(Google “top 10 Atheists” for the following information)

Napoleon Bonaparte, heavily involved in the anti-clerical French Revolution, was an atheist – he claimed that “all religions have been made by men”. He was one of the best ever military commanders, and conquered much of Europe. He staged a coup and declared himself Emperor. While he ended anarchy in post-Revolution France, many considered him a tyrant and usurper. He ignored treaties and conventions, seeking undisputed rule throughout Europe. He plundered conquered territories. His 17 years of rule resulted in the bankruptcy of France, loss of many of her territories, six million dead Europeans and economic setback in just one generation.

 

Kim Jong-Il is the de facto leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and responsible for the deaths of four million of his fellow Koreans.

Jeffrey Dahmer, an infamous serial killer and atheist, sentenced to 900 years in prison, said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” He brutally killed seventeen men and boys, dismembering them, storing their body parts and indulging in cannibalism and necrophilia. In 1991, he was caught by the police after one of his would-be victims escaped. Despite pleading not guilty on the basis on insanity, the court found him sane and fully accountable. He later expressed remorse.

 

Jim Jones drew people into atheism through the People’s Temple, largely based in California. He said that he “took the church and used the church to bring people to atheism”. In 1978, 909 people at the restricted communist “sanctuary” he presided over in Jonestown, Guyana, committed “revolutionary suicide” at his command. This occurred after the arrival of an American delegation, which he claimed was conspiring against the People’s Temple. Men, women and children took a vial of cyanide and died within five minutes. Only a few people escaped. This event was the largest single loss of American civilian life, in a non-natural disaster, up until 9/11.

 

Mussolini is notorious for his war crimes as a Fascist dictator during World War II. As a young man he openly declared his atheism, and in his early career as a politician was openly anti-clerical. He was the Italian leader of the National Fascist Party, became Prime Minister in 1922 and was eventually a dictator who severely restricted freedom of speech. Mussolini supported Hitler’s conquest of Austria. In 1935, he invaded Ethiopia, using poison gas, bombing Red Cross hospitals and concentration camps to kill civilians and destroy “inferior” cultures. He ordered the execution of prisoners without trial and the shooting of “witch-doctors”. Italian troops used public executions, hostage taking and burning of villages to crush the Slavic population of Yugoslavia. These acts are now widely considered an attempt at genocide. However, later he tried to associate Fascism with Catholicism in order to garner dwindling support (however his widow made it clear that he was still staunchly atheist). Mussolini was also deeply anti-Semitic.

 

Mao Zedong led the Communist Party of China to victory in the Chinese Civil War, helping to establish the People’s Republic of China. He had ambitions for a strong China, but his programs largely failed altogether. He has been blamed for the death of between 20 and 67 million of his “comrades”. He also targeted anyone with links to the Chinese Nationalist Party as well as anyone who posed a threat to him. Five million were executed in death camps. 36 million were persecuted and tortured. There were even instances of cannibalism.

 

Pol Pot was the leader of the Khmer Rouge and Prime Minister of Cambodia from 1976 to 1979, having been de facto leader since mid-1975. During his time in power Pol Pot imposed an extreme version of agrarian communism, where all city dwellers were relocated to the countryside to work in collective farms and forced labour projects. The combined effect of slave labour, malnutrition, poor medical care and executions is estimated to have killed around 2 million Cambodians (approximately one third of the population). His regime achieved special notoriety by singling out all intellectuals, and other “bourgeois enemies”, for murder. The Khmer Rouge committed mass executions in sites known as the Killing Fields, and the executed were buried in mass graves. In order to save ammunition, executions were often carried out using hammers, axe handles, spades or sharpened bamboo sticks. His attempts to “cleanse” the country resulted in the deaths of 1.7 to 2.5 million people. He also had an intense dislike of anyone with the semblance of being intelligent, such as those who wore glasses or who spoke another language.1

 

Joseph Stalin
Stalin-4Stalin was General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union’s Central Committee, from 1922 until his death in 1953. Under Stalin’s leadership, the Ukraine suffered a famine (Holodomor) so great it is considered by many to be an act of genocide on the part of Stalin’s government. Estimates of the number of deaths range from 2.5 million to 10 million. The famine was caused by direct political and administrative decisions. In addition to the famine, Stalin ordered purges within the Soviet Union of any person deemed to be an enemy of the state (i.e. capitalists, theists). In total, estimates of the total number murdered under Stalin’s reign, range from 10 million to 60 million. His government promoted atheism with mass propaganda in school, and held a terror campaign against the religious. He crushed the Russian Orthodox Church, leveling thousands of churches and shooting more than 100,000 priests, monks and nuns between 1937 and 1938.N.B.

We’re looking at the low end just from a few of these men in the range of 100 million dead. This is from atheists.
I know many atheists will complain and say that when it comes to religion, people kill in the name of their God, or there leaders; atheists don’t have a leader that they follow and do not answer to a god that they claim told them to kill. I would say, that’s not true. All the dictators I named did not kill millions of people all by themselves. They had people who worked for them and answered to them following orders, so it was lots of atheists, following orders of a leading atheist dictator. Now just like atheists, there are religions who have done evil things. I, for one, am not denying this or claiming it never happened. But I am saying: 1. I get tired of atheists acting like they never do these things and its only Christians who do. 2. All these religions who kill in the name of their gods – Mormonism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and many, many other religions are not Christians. Stop acting like its only Christians, and all other religions do not do these things. Also, true, bible believing, God-fearing Christians do not go out and kill in the name of Jesus.

This proves people who claim Christians do kill, have either never read the Bible, or they claim they read the Bible and ignore what it says. The Bible tells us, we are not to hate anyone, and not to commit murder. Jesus even said, not everyone who says, Lord , Lord will enter heaven, and Jesus said, you are of your father the devil, and Jesus and the Bible tells us, we are not of God if we hate a brother, or we do evil things. I have meet many Christians who hate it when I say this, but they hate it because they really dont care what the Bible says, they dont care about truth, and they simply want to blame Christians. So if people claim Christians killed people in the crusades or maybe someone claiming to kill an abortion doctor because they are a christian, or God told them to do it, they are liars and not true, bible believing Christians.

Why is it, if someone claims to be a christian, and they kill someone, atheists claim he must be a christian, because he said he was, and therefore, I am standing by what he said, he is a Christian? But, if someone dresses up on Halloween as a cop and robs someone, no one claims they were really a cop; they know they were using it as a ruse. Take John Wayne Gacy. He dressed up as a clown and murdered many people, yet no one says, “Well, I guess he was a clown,” so he gives clowns a bad name. People know better. They just keep it on people claiming to be Christians, but everyone else is just faking.

We can also look at people who were/are atheists who did not kill people, but still did/do sick twisted things such as molest kids, or rape women, or rob banks, etc. Here is one example: Alfred Kinsey was an infamous American biologist and professor of entomology and zoology, who made groundbreaking research on human sexuality. Undoubtedly, he helped to progress social values – but, nevertheless, he took sadistic pleasure out of his research, and did some very weird stuff, including exploiting children for sex.

 

How does someone like Alfred Kinsey evolve into a person who does such vile things? Since Atheists deny morals come from God, then who decided what was right and what was wrong? Who was it that said, “Rape is wrong and we will make laws saying so?” Who decided it was wrong? How come the rapists did not say, “No, its good and don’t judge me and tell me what I can and cannot do?” Or we could say the same about murder, lying, stealing, etc. Who decided? Did they vote upon it and the majority ruled? It seems if we look around, the prisons are overflowing and keep being built, and the courts keep making more laws, and more cops are being added. When will it start getting better? Why does it seem to get worse? Look around the world. It’s getting worse and worse. Let’s not forget: we had 2 world wars, plus civil wars, and all the minor wars throughout the world. How is this explained apart from sin? If you resort to blaming religion, then I must repeat, what about all the atheists who kill and mass murder.

Now here are some quotes from former scientists; some might be dead now, but scientists non the less.

The Conventional Picture of human evolution is a completely Human Invention created after the fact, shaped to accord with human prejudices. To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a linage IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESIS THAT CAN BE TESTED, But an assertion that carries the SAME VALIDITY AS A BEDTIME STORY- amusing, perhaps even instructive, BUT NOT SCIENTIFIC. Henry Gee, “In search of deep time, beyond the fossil Record to a new History of life”, Nature Magazine 1999

Another quote by Mr Henry:

“The Intervals of time that separate fossils are so huge that we cannot say anything definite about their possible connection through ancestry and descent. Each fossil is an isolated point, with no knowable connection to any other given fossil, and all float around in overwhelming sea of gaps. All the fossil evidence for human evolution between ten and five million years ago- several thousand generations of living creatures-can be fitted into a small Box” Henry Gee, “In search of deep time, beyond the fossil Record to a new History of life”, Nature Magazine 1999

At least he is honest, the evidence is pretty much next to zero.

This scientist, George Wald who is/was a Harvard Professor Emeritus of Biology, and a 1971 Nobel prize winner in Biology said this:
There are only two possible explanations as to how life arose: Spontaneous Generation arising to evolution or a supernatural creative act of God…
There is no other possibility.

Spontaneous generation was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others, But that leaves us with only one other possibility…
that life came as a supernatural act of creation of God, but I can’t accept that philosophy because I do not want to believe in God.

Therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation leading to evolution.
George Wald “Origin, life and evolution,” Scientific American (1978).

I have said many time over and over, evolution, and believing in evolution, is a religion. Since everyone tries to tell me I am wrong, then think about what this guy says.

Michael Ruse considers himself both an atheist and agnostic, but believes that “new atheism” is a disservice to science and loathes the term “Humanist”.

In his book “The Evolution-creation struggle” Michael Ruse interprets the last 200 years of conflict between biology and religion as a struggle between evolutionism and Creationism. Evolutionism is not merely an endorsement of the scientific theory of evolution. It consists of “the whole metaphysical or ideological picture built around or on evolution.” As such, it constitutes a “Secular Religion.” Thus for Ruse (a philosopher of science at Florida State University), the debate over Creationism and Evolutionism is more a conflict between Two Religions than one between Religion and Science. The Journal of Science July 22, 2005

 

So, we have an atheist and agnostic who teaches in school that evolution is a religion. He claims to hate God and denies God, yet claims evolution and creation are two religions competing.

 

There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter. Werner Gitt, Professor, German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology, (Quoted June 2000)

 

Lets look at the “Scientific method.” It goes like this.

1. State the problem

2. Formulate the problem

3. Make observations

4. Design the experiment

5. Interpret data

6. Draw conclusions

7. Report results

Now many atheists have stated this method to me when I say I don’t agree with certain points in science.

I never said I don’t agree with science period. I do. I am a professional chef and baker with 30 plus years experience, and baking is really science.

Now apply these points to the Big Bang.

 

1. State the problem (How did we get here?) Or where did human life come from?

2. Formulate the problem It was either God who created us, Or we simply don’t know how we got here and can only ASSUME we came via the Big Bang, or maybe aliens, or as one guy stated, or crystals on the backs of turtles.

3. Make observations (We cannot do this)

4. Design the experiment (We cannot do this)

5. Interpret data (We cannot do this)

6. Draw conclusions (We can only do this by faith with out evidence)

7. Report results (We have no results to report)

So, I’m not opposed to science. I’m simply saying evolution, like belief in God, is a FAITH. You cannot prove evolution in a lab by the “Scientific Method.”

Since you cannot, you must simply believe it took place; that is called faith.

 

If evolution is true and can and has been proved, then please explain these quotes?

The Anthropic Principle, simply stated, is the fine tuning of the physical universe to allow life to exist on this planet. In order to reach this mind boggling degree of fine tuning with so many different parameters, smacks of some form of intelligent Design. According to Penrose, it had to have been accurate to with in one part in 10 to 10(123), and this is a number so vast that it cannot be written on apiece of paper the size of the entire visible Universe!. Michael A. Corey (The God Hypothesis).

 

That’s a pretty big chance that we arrived by the “Big Bang” or random chance.

How about this:
The occurrence of any event where the chances are beyond 1 in 10 followed by 50 zeros is an event which we CAN STATE WITH CERTAINTY WILL NEVER HAPPEN, no matter how much time is alloted and no matter how many conceivable opportunities could exist for the event to take place. Emile Borel Probabilities and life, 1962.

Now, that’s two Scientists who don’t think life just arose, yet you won’t care because they disagree with you.

Here is a third:
The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 zeros after it…
It is big enough bury Darwin and the whole theory of Evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence. Fred Hoyle PH.D Hoyle on Evolution, Nature November 1981.

 

A team of Australian Scientists led by theoretical physicists Paul Davis has proposed that the speed of light may not be a constant, a revolutionary idea that could unseat one of the most cherished laws of modern physics- Einstein’s theory of relativity. If so, physicists will have to rethink many of their basic ideas about the laws of the universe. When one of the cornerstones of physics collapses. It is not obvious what you hang onto and what you discard, Davis said. Scientific journal Nature, August 8 2002

The cosmos contains roughly 10(90) bits of information. By factoring in the available energy and the speed of light, Lloyd estimates the universe could have performed at most 10(120) logical operations since the big bang. Lloyd says, “If we wanted to simulate the universe on a computer, such a computer would have to be as powerful as the universe it’s self. In reality, we can only make crude approximations, because all the computer that ever existed on earth have carried out just 10(31) operations.

 

Now let me end the issue of Science with this:
There is a pretty big name professor in evolution; his name is Jerry Allen Coyne. There is info about him; you can simply google his name and this all will come up.

He is an American professor of biology, known for his work on speciation and his commentary on intelligent design. A prolific scientist and author, he has published dozens of papers elucidating the theory of evolution. I mention this guy because he is a Ph.D. Professor Department of Ecology and Evolution Biological Sciences in Chicago, and around a year or so ago I reached out to him and ask him if he would be willing to come on my radio show and talk to me about evolution vs creation. Without hesitation, he wrote back and said, “No way.” We went back and forth with a few emails, and he was adamant that he wanted nothing to do with me. I did mention him on my radio show, as I told him I would. Then, I posted an article on my website with our emails proving our exchange. I must say, “Wow, a professor with a PH.D and pretty serious credentials won’t talk with me on my radio show.”