I Thessalonians 5:20, 21

Do not despise expounding of scripture, but scrutinize all things. Hold fast that which is right.

Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

- I prefer liberty with danger to peace with slavery.


See also Kerux Replies at Wordpress.com where all future missives will also be posted.

However, because Wordpress charges an outrageous $59.95 a year for a video upload upgrade, videos will only be linked, not embedded.

Friday, December 15, 2006

Holocaust Conference in Iran

Iran just held it's Holocaust Conference December 11 and 12, 2006. Dubbed "Holocaust: A Global Vision,' 67 scholars from 30 countries around the world attended. Both views of the holocaust were represented - the widespread but diminishing historical view - and those who hold a 'revisionist' view based upon the latest evidence available to objective scholars. Those with a revisionist view continue to investigate, research and question certain aspects of the traditional historical view of the Holocaust.

“The aim of this conference is not to deny or confirm the Holocaust,” Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said in a welcome address. “Its main aim is to create an opportunity for thinkers who cannot express their views freely in Europe about the Holocaust.”

Notice where the Holocaust Conference is being held - Iran. Although Iran is not usually held up as a bastion of free speech - those who wish to freely exercise their divgerent thoughts on the Holocaust must do so in Iran, as they certainly can not do so in the European countries of Germany, Austria, Canada, France or even the United States, which tauts itself around the world for its freedoms - including the freedom to express opinions about any topic - even such a controversial topic such as the Holocaust.

In fact, the United States, on the pretext of immigration violations, deported Ernst Zundel to Canada, where he sat for nearly two years in solitary confinement for being an alleged 'national security' risk. On March 1, 2005 Zundel was deported from Canada to Germany to face trial for remarks Zundel allegedly made, according to Mark Weber of the Insitute for Historical research, http://www.ihr.org, on a web site run by his American wife and hosted in the United States, where such are marks are perfectly legal. Zundel has been charged with inciting 'hatred' and for writing or disributing texts that “approve, deny or play down” genocidal actions carried out by Germany’s wartime regime, and which “denigrate the memory of the [Jewish] dead.” The 67 year old Zundel now sits in a prison cell in Mannheim Germany for his thoughts about the Holocaust awaiting the out come of his trial. Zundel has spent three years of his life behind bars for his thoughts, without having been convicted of a crime. So much for freedom of speech in the United States, Canada and Germany.

While a doctorate candidate at the prestigious Max Planck Institute, Germur Rudolf carried out a series of investigations into the alleged gassings at the Auschwich-Birkenau camps, and for a variety of scientific reasons, came to the conclusion that the gassings could not have occurred. After the publication, in 1993, of his findings, again according to Mark Weber at the IHR, Rudolf was dismissed from the institute, and a court in Stuttgart ruled that his report “denies the systematic mass murder of the Jewish population in gas chambers,” and therefore constitutes “popular incitement,” “incitement to racial hatred,” and “defamation.”

Before serving his sentence of 14 months, the youthful Rudulf fled Germany and eventually ended up in the United States. In October 2005, Rudolf was arrested in Chicago and deported to Germany to serve out his original sentence, leaving behind his wife and young daughter in the United States. He is also to be tried in Mannheim, Germany for more 'recent' crimes. His latest trial started in November 2006.

The Iranian conference was condemned by Israel's prime minister Ehud Olmert as a "sick phenomenon." Arresting and imprisoning professionals who disagree with you Mr. Olmert, isn't a 'sick phenomenon?' Despite the unambiguous statement made by Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki at the outset of the conference, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper stated that the conference hosted by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with the sole purpose of denying the Holocaust is an offence to all Canadians." Denying the holocaust wasn't the sole purpose of the conference Mr. Prime Minister. The sole purpose is to allow freedom of speech on a topic your country doesn't allow. I seriously doubt that the Prime Minister of Canada speaks for 'all Canadians' on most topics, much less one as controversial as the holocaust. British Prime Minister Tony Blair denounced the two-day conference, as "shocking beyond belief" and "a symbol of sectarianism and hatred toward people of another religion." How is it showing 'hatred toward people of another religion' to examine whether what we've been told time-after-time for 60 years is true or not? And since you brought up sectarianism, why is it we get told about the alleged six million Jews killed during WWII, but not about how many Americans were killed, or Russians, or Belgians? Their lives didn't matter? The German parliament's president, Norbert Lammert, protested the conference in a letter to Ahmadinejad and dismissed it as 'anti-Semitic propaganda.' Why is it not anti-Christian, and certainly not a hate crime, to deny that Christ even existed, but automatically 'anti-Semitic propaganda' to question the validity of the claims made by a minority of Zionist Jews as to what happened during WWII? The conference shows an 'utter disregard of historically established facts,' said Franco Frattini, the EU's top justice official. Well, Mr. Frattini, that is what the conference is all about isn't it? examining these 'historically established facts.' If these are indeed facts, those of you who think they are 'established' have nothing to worry about, do you?

Participants of the Iranian international conference on holocaust, agreed to establish a world foundation for holocaust studies and unanimously appointed Mohammad-Ali Ramin as its secretary general. According to the Islamic Republic News Agency, "one of the plans of the foundation is to assign a committee to find out the truth about holocaust. The participants of the conference representing 30 countries also selected five individuals as members of the central council of this foundation to assist the secretary general in executive affairs," added Ramin.

He noted that the main office of the world foundation for holocaust studies will be in Tehran, but once that proper grounds are prepared, the office may eventually be moved to Berlin.

Two sayings one hears quite often and more frequently of late and that I have grown downright weary of enduring are, "If you've got nothing to hide, what's the problem?" And "I've got nothing to hide, so what's the problem?"

If the Zionists and the holocaust propagandists have nothing to hide, what's the problem with a little discussion? I, for one, am looking forward to the outcomes of any future conferences on the holocaust.


Tuesday, December 12, 2006

ADL Says Sea-Tac Decision " wrong and painful and damaging to the Jewish community."

How was Sea-Tac's decision to remove the Christmas trees from the airport terminal after being threatened with legal action by a lone rabbi "wrong and painful....to the Jewish community?" Damaging to the Jewish community perhaps, because it showed how demanding and unreasonable some of their members are, but any wrongness and pain involved was towards those who celebrate Christmas, and not the 'Jewish community.' http://tinyurl.com/y4laaa

The anti-defamation league issued a press release which among other things said this:
"The Anti-Defamation League believes the decision by the Port of Seattle to remove Christmas trees from Seattle-Tacoma International Airport was misguided. The decision should be reversed, and the trees should be restored. The Port of Seattle should also show respect for the Jewish community by allowing Chabad to display their menorah."

The decision by Sea-tac officials was misguided? Who should they have sought guidance from - the ADL? The officials did what they felt they had to do under the current ADL guided thought control of 'tolerance' and 'political correctness.'

"The Port Authority should also show respect for the Jewish Community by allowing Chabad to display their menorah," states ADL. Americans are celebrating Christmas, not Hannakuh. And if we're going to be expected to show respect for the Jewish community, which represents approximately 2% of the American community, by showing a menorah, perhaps Sea-Tac should allow Chabad display a menorah in direct porportion to the Jewish proportion of the American population as a whole - 2%. The size of a Christmas trees, from the pictures shown of the trees removed, looked to be about eight feet or 96" tall. That would allow a menorah 1.9 inches tall.

"The Port of Seattle's decision and the adverse and incorrect publicity that followed has led to a surge of anti-Semitism, including hundreds of hate mail messages directed against the rabbi who sought permission for the menorah display."

Anti-Semitism? Enough already with playing the victim. Complaining about one lone rabbi causing at least 80% of the population to bow to the demands of a lone representative of 2% of the population is not anti-Semitism. It is expressing that many of the rest of us have had enough of this male cow dung and are not going to cave into the demands of such a small minority among us any more, no matter how how many times we are labeled anti-Semitic.


Sunday, December 10, 2006

Sea-Tac Airport Threatened by Rabbi

Let me make it clear from the onset, I don't celebrate Christmas or erect evergreen trees during the 'holiday season.' I do not believe Christ-mass is a legitmate part of Christianity. I only comment on this lone rabbi threatening officials at a major US airport with legal action if his ridiculous demands are not met during the busiest travel season of the year because it reveals so well how upside-down the United States has become. We've got minorities telling the rest of us how it is going to be.

From an article posted on http://www.king5.com/localnews/stories/NW_120906WABxmastreesEL.11b0d0cc.html#

"SEA-TAC Airport - All 15 Christmas trees inside the terminal at Sea-Tac have been removed in response to a complaint by a rabbi.

A local rabbi wanted to install an 8-foot menorah and have a public lighting ceremony. He threatened to sue if the menorah wasn’t put up, and gave a two-day deadline to remove the trees.

Sea-Tac public affairs manager Terri-Ann Betancourt said the trees that adorn the Sea-Tac upper and lower levels may not properly represent all cultures.

She said that since this is their busiest time of year and they don't have time to add a fair representation of all cultures, her department decided to take down all of the decorations, review their policies, and decide if they need to make a change for next year."

The United States of America was founded as a 'Christian' nation as opposed to a Jewish nation or a Hindu nation or a Buddhist nation. Adherents to the Jewish faith make up roughly 2% of the US population, Muslims roughly 2%, atheists less than 1% and Buddhists less than .05%. Given those proportions, why should the officials of Sea Tac feel the need to 'give fair representation to all cultures," ie. faiths, when it comes to celebrating a relgious holiday? Christians make up about 2% of the population of the Jewish state of Israel and yet we don't see the Christians in Israel demanding Jewish officials erect a Christmas tree at Tel-Aviv aiport or the Jewish officials caving in to them either.

Why is it that less than 2% of the population thinks that they have the right to change the cultural religious practices of a majority of the population? Where did they get this right? Is it because this lone rabbi thinks he is superior to the other roughly 85% of the population and that he, as a minority, should not only have the right to display his manorah, but to threaten the rest of the population with legal action if his demands are not met? Let's get real here. Where does this rabbi get this arrogant demanding attitude? Since when does 2% of the population make demands and issue threats to the majority if his demands aren't met?

And what right does this lone rabbi, a member of 2% of the population, get the idea that he has the right to demand display of his Jewish symbol in a predominately Christian nation during their Christian celebrations?

It isn't enough that Americans are paying for a war and losing lives to protect the Jewish state of Israel from the countless enemies they have made in the Middle East, but now some lone Jewish rabbi is telling the rest of us we can't celebrate our holidays in the traditional manner, just like Sea-Tac had done for the last ten years? Perhaps it is actions such as this rabbi's that has made Jewish people so many enemies in so many nations.

May I suggest to that lone rabbi that if he doesn't like our traditional Christian religious celebrations here in the States, that he catch the next plane out of Sea-Tac non-stop to Jerusalem and take his eight foot manorah with him? We'll even give you a two-day deadline.


Wednesday, November 22, 2006

The King of the Judeans - Guilty of Hate Crimes?

Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?" [More accurately, King of the Judeans, w/o regard to race or religion] "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. (Matthew 27:11, Luke 23:3, Mark 15:2 All NIV)

The chief priests of the Pharisees protested to Pilate, "Do not write 'The King of the Judeans,' but that this man claimed to be king of the Judeans." Pilate answered, "What I have written, I have written." (John 19:21, 22 ) All four gospels, with Pilate conferring, state Jesus Christ was, in fact, King of the Judeans. [Jews, as they like to refer to themselves today].

During his public ministry, what did the King of the Judeans have to say about the Phariseeic leaders in Jerusalem?

"You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies." (John 8)

Matthew records the scathing rebuke the King of the Judeans gave the Pharisees.

But do not do what they [the leaders] do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites!
You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to."

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are..

"Woe to you, blind guides! You say, 'If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath." (v.16)

You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? (v.18)

You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred? (v.19)

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.

You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean. Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness. (v.25-28)

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. (v.29)

You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? (v.33)

The King of the Judeans judges the Pharisees of his day four times as hypocrites, twice as blind guides, as blind men and blind fools, sons of hell, snakes and a brood of vipers, full of hypocrisy and wickedness and full of everything unclean. And that they were 'of' or 'from' their father, the devil.

Anti-Semitism is commonly defined exclusively as hostility or prejudice against Jews or Judaism, [although people of Arab descent are also Semites]. The King of the Judeans was certainly hostile against the Pharisees of his day, as the historical accounts in all four gospels clearly document.

The Encyclopædia Britannica defines a "hate crime" as "harassment, intimidation, or physical violence that is motivated by a bias against characteristics of the victim considered integral to his social identity, such as his race, ethnicity, or religion."

The King of the Judeans certainly intimidated the Pharisees of his day, as they sought to kill him for his words - "out of envy." (Matthew 27:18)

Today, the King of the Judeans would be considered anti-Semitic and guilty of multiple hate crimes in several countries, among those countries are Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Belgium, France, and Britain. The existing hate crime laws in these countries would get the King of the Judeans arrested and prosecuted and undoubtedly result in the King of the Judeans being incarcerated.

Momentum for the passage of hate crimes laws in the United States is growing. In California, according to Senate Bill 1234, passed in September 2004, any speech or public expression that makes others feel 'unwelcome' or 'intimidated' is considered 'hate speech' and a crime. Anyone found guilty of such speech could face six-months prison time and a $25,000 fine. Several states, such as Pennsylvania, which arrested 11 Christians in October 2004 for preaching from the Bible against homosexuality, already have hate crime laws on the books.

Doesn't matter if the speech uttered is truthful. The truth of what is spoken can not be used as a defense. All that matters is if the alleged victim's 'feelings' are hurt.

It appears to this writer that if the King of the Judeans were here on the scene today, that unless He kept his criticism of Zionism and the Zionist's leaders to Himself, he would be liable for hate crime prosecution, fines and imprisonment in several countries of the world and several states within the United States.

The state of affairs has reached ludicrous lows when the King of the Judeans and the Leader of Christianity would be considered a criminal and an antiSemite for His opinion and for publically criticizing the Pharisees when He Himself is, in fact, their King, and in spite of the fact that everything He says is Truth.

Based upon the above, this follower is led to the conclusion that criticising Zionist Jewish leaders for their evil deeds is a good thing.


Saturday, November 11, 2006

The First Experiment

The first recorded scientific experiment is found in Genesis 3. Two hypothesis are presented, one of God’s, and the other, of the most subtle beast of the field that the Lord God had made, the serpent’s.

A scientific experiment can be defined as -
“a set of actions and observations performed in the context of solving a particular problem or question, to support or falsify a hypothesis… concerning phenomena. [The] experiment is a cornerstone in the empirical approach to acquiring deeper knowledge about the physical world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_experiment

A hypothesis is a “suggested explanation of a phenomenon.” The two hypothesis to be tested facing Adam and Eve were:The Lord God’s:“… you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” Genesis 2:17 NIV and the Serpent’s:"You will not surely die…..for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." Genesis 3:4,5

Adam and Eve, at this point, had only empirical knowledge of good. They possessed no ‘scientific’ or experimental knowledge of evil. They had to simply take God at His word to be spared any experimental knowledge of evil. They had to believe God’s explanation regarding the, as of yet, unobserved consequences of the phenomenon – the ‘seeable event’ of evil - that is, that they would “die [spiritually immediately and eventually physically] if they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.”

The subtle serpent planted the seed of doubt into Eve regarding God’s explanation as to what would happen if she was to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The serpent called God a liar, and the serpent lied in saying that not only would they ‘not surely die,” but that "in the day they ate of the tree, their eyes would be opened and they would become as God, knowing good and evil."

Adam, and particularly Eve, did not believe God's explanation, but instead believed the serpent's. To find out for herself whose explanation was valid - God’s or the serpent’s - Eve decided to conduct an experiment, the first human experiment, with Adam assisting

Eve “took of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and ate and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.” Genesis 3:6

The results of their experiment were immediate:

“Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden." Genesis 3:7,8 NIV

The five immediate results of their experiment were:

1. Their eyes were opened for the first time to see evil
2. They came to the knowledge - 'they realized' - they were without clothes.
3. They worked, for the first time, making clothes - fig leaves.
4. They went into hiding.
5. They were afraid. (Genesis 3:10)

Adam and Eve proved, for themselves, and for all those that came after them, that God’s hypothesis was correct and that the serpent’s explanation was not only incorrect, but a lie meant to purposely deceive and cause man to doubt God’s goodness towards man.

Mankind has been living with the results of this first experiment ever since it was conducted. We now have scientific knowledge of evil. “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned…” Romans 5:12 Man is born spiritually dead to God and eventually experiences physical death.

All as the practical result of the First Experiment.


Friday, November 10, 2006

No Impeachment - No Matter What?

Future Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi decrees "Impeachment is off the table.....it's a pledge ....a waste of time." Likely next chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Rep. John Conyers declares "Impeachment is off the table." [Even though Conyers last December laid out the grounds for impeachment in a 350 page long report called "The Constitution in Crisis: The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution and Cover-ups in the Iraq War" and later updated to add "illegal domestic surveillance."] http://www.infowars.net/

No impeachment? Even if 'we the people' demand it?

Even if Bush/Cheney were behind 9/11 and killed nearly 3000 innocent Americans?

Even if Bush has torn up the Bill of Rights?

Even if Bush/Cheney have been conducting "illegal domestic surveillance?"

Even if Bush has done away with the 800 year old right of the writ of habeas corpus?

Even if Bush/Cheney have overruled the Posse Comitatus Act and can now use the US military for law enforcement purposes against Americans?

Even if Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) overrules the State's rights to control their own State militias?

Even if Bush/Cheney have encouraged and condoned torture?

Even if Bush/Cheney's department of Homeland Security has contracted with Halliburton for $385 million to build "temporary detention and processing capabilities" to support the "rapid development of new programs?"

Even if Bush/Cheney have been involved in "Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution and Cover-ups in the Iraq War?"

Even if Bush/Cheney et al, are setting up a Authoritarian Facist Police State?

No impeachment, no matter what?


Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Christianity is Not a Religion

Consult any reputable encyclopedia and it will define Christianity as a religion. For example the online Wikipedia - "Christianity is a monotheistic religion centered on Jesus of Nazareth, and on his life and teachings as presented in the New Testament." Or Answers.com - "Christianity - Religion stemming from the teachings of Jesus in the 1st century AD."

However, when ones goes to the Word of God, the Bible - the founding document of Christianity - for the definition of Christianity, one will discover that Christianity is not a religion.

Let's first define religion and then Christianity and then explain why Christianity is not a religion.


* man's attempt to work his way into favor with God.
* man's way of working to appease God.
* man basing his salvation on his own works.
* man seeking fulfillment or inner peace or a state of enlightenment within himself or to the exclusion of God.

Man's attempt to work his way into favor with God.

The first example of religion mentioned in the Bible is the religion of Cain, also referred to as the 'way of Cain' in Jude 11, found in Genesis 4:

3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. 4 But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast. 6 Then the Lord said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."

Abel brought "fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering." God was pleased with Able's offering which looked forward to God's offering - His only begotten Son. But God did not look with favor on Cain's offering, "some of the fruit of the soil." Evidently, God had taught Adam and Eve what kind of an offering would be acceptable in God's sight. And that offering involved the shedding of blood, not the efforts from working the soil as Cain's offering was. Able approached God in the way God instructed, and Cain attempted to please God in his own way. If Cain would only do what God asked, he would be accepted. Cain refused to worship God in the way God instructed.

Cain's efforts in approaching God was based upon his own work, the work of his hands. Abel's approach was not based upon his own efforts but upon the first fruit of his flock, no doubt an innocent lamb.

The point being, man has avoided God's way and devised his own way from the beginning.

Man's way of working to appease God.

Men quite often perceive God [or the gods of their own making] as a God [or gods] to be feared. They view God [or gods] as an angry God. A God to be appeased in an effort to stave off His wrath. To appease God, man has invented sacrifices of their own creation. From the beginning man has sacrificed to idols in his effort at appeasment.

Exodus 20:

"4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;"

Man has so feared the wrath of gods that he has created idols of those gods to which he bows down to and serves. Since antiquity, man has constucted many gods - gods of the rain, river gods, crop gods, gods of life and death. While Moses was on Mount Sinai, Aaron, Moses' right-hand man and Israel's high priest, was persuaded by the Israelites to construct a golden calf to which the young Jewish nation, just delivered from Eygpt's God pharoah, bowed down to. The Mayan's constructed great pyramids and temples around which they sacrificed their young virgin women in an effort to appease their obviously demanding gods, and which undoubtedly help lead to the downfall of their civilization, for how can a civilzation that kills off their young women survive?

Today, examples exist of modern day religions that use sacrifice in their appeasment attempts. The Roman Catholic Church daily offers at their altars what they refer to as the 'bloodless sacrifice' to God through their celebate paedophile priests. Adherents to Islam believe prayer - Salah - is an obligation, sacrificing their time five times daily, rising as early as 4 a.m. while facing east, in an effort to please their god, ask for forgiveness and mercy "You have bestowed Your grace, those whose lot is not wrath," from a god they perceive as angry and vengeful, a god to be feared. In many personal conversations with devote Muslims, they expressed their concept of God as an angry God, a God to be feared, a God that expects the straight path to be walked upon. They fear the reprimand of God should they stray off the path, hence the need for prayer five times daily, to help keep them on the path.

Prayer is the first duty imposed by Allah upon mankind after that of belief in the oneness of Allah. Prayers are also an act to be accounted for on the Day of Judgement among other deeds carried out by servants of Allah. The Prophet (pbuh) said: “The first thing of the slave to be reckoned on the Day of Judgement will be his Prayer. If it is good, the rest of his deeds will be (accounted as) good. And if it is rotten, the rest of his deeds will be rotten”. (Tabarani)

Prayer constitutes one pillar of Islam and is considered the foundation of religion. Any Muslim who fails to do his prayers and has no reasonable excuse is committing a grave offense and a heinous sin.


We see in Islam, like many other religions, a fear, not in the sense of reverential trust, but a fear as in afraid, of God. Therefore, many actions of adherents of Islam, when living out their faith, such in the daily prayer ritual, are done, not so much as a voluntary act of worship, but one of obligation based upon fear.

Man basing his salvation on his own works.

Similar to man attempting to work his way into favor with God, man tries to have his work accepted by God for his salvation. By doing so, man rejects God's work, and replaces it with his own works.

But God's Word plainly states that man can not be saved by his own works:

Ephesians 4: 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.

Romans 9: 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about--but not before God. 3 What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." 4 Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5 However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: 7 "Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him."

[still under construction]


Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Is Evolution Science?

Many evolutionists would like others to believe evolution is science, scientific or a science. It's not. Evolution is a theory that attempts to EXPLAIN science from a materialistic naturalistic worldview or paradigm.

Evolution is the theory that all forms of life found on earth descended from a common ancestor, evolving from a lower form to a higher form, from less complex to more complex, from single celled living organisms to multi-celled organisms over vast periods of time. A commonly accepted hypothesis within the theory of evolution is that natural selection is involved in a extremely gradual evolutionary process in which the most fit or strongest specimen or most vital aspect of a life form survives and those surviving characteristics are passed on from one generation to the next generation through reproduction over billions of years allowing the species [or essential trait] in question to best adapt and survive in its environment.

Click on image to englarge

[Evolution is described here in it's basic simplest form. Neo-Darwinism attempts to expand on this rudimentary definition based upon the latest understanding of science. However, evolution remains a theory, not fact. Although,more frequently, some dishonest evolutionists are asserting as fact what is indeed theory. If one observes closely the language used within the more honest Neo-Darwinist's descriptions, one will notice such words as infer, traditionally thought, may constitute, are believed to be, etc., are commonly used. Furthermore, descriptions of the evidence is not to be confused with conclusions about the evidence].

Evolution is weak in the area of origins eg, the origin of life, and as such avoids directly addressing origin issues, and instead relies on hypothetical chemical [organic compounds] reactions or otherwise self-generating synthesis of already existing chemicals or living organisms to explain the origin of life on earth.

Arthur S. Lodge points out that the "Main Open Questions of Evolution" are:

1. The origin of life.
2. Common ancestry.
3. Macroevolution.
4. The mechanism for generating substantially new genetic material.
5. Differentiation.
6. Origin of convergent evolution.

Evolutionists often proclaim, and rightly so, that evolution does not address the issue of origins. And while so doing, will often state creationists are somehow confused when it comes to exactly what evolution is. But what evolutionists are doing when they make these kinds of critical statements is admitting that evolution can not offer a good explanation for the origin of life. Evolutionists start out with life as a given and then attempt to explain how life evolved from that point, all the while conveniently passing over and ignoring completely the vitally important 'origin of life' issue. In short, evolution offers, at best, a weak explantion of how, what science calls life, came into existence. The miracle of life, to the evolutionist, is a given - Life just was. "In the beginning was life..."

That's what Creationists say about God. So, what's the difference? both views are taken by faith. If evolution takes life as a given, then that is not science, its faith.

[still under construction]


Monday, October 23, 2006

Quotes - About the Bible


"There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history." .... "I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily."

Sir Isaac Newton

“All human discoveries seem to be made only for the purpose of confirming more and more the Truths contained in the Sacred Scriptures.”

Sir William Herschel [1738-1822]
Astronomist. Discovered Uranus, several nebulae, and binary stars. First to accurately describe the Milky Way Galaxy

"The secret of my success? It is simple. It is found in the Bible."

George Washington Carver

"What hath God wrought?"

Found in the Bible; Numbers 23:23
First message sent by the electric telegraph

Samuel Morse

"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people...so great is my veneration of the Bible that the earlier my children begin to read, the more confident will be my hope that they will prove useful citizens in their country and respectful members of society."

John Adams

"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible."

George Washington

"A nation of well-informed men who have been taught to know the price of rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved."

Benjamin Franklin

“Our citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament.”

Noah Webster

"The Bible is worth all other books which have ever been printed."

Patrick Henry

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ”.

Patrick Henry

"That Book (the Bible) is the rock on which our Republic rests."

Andrew Jackson

"I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man."

Abraham Lincoln

"At this time I both read and studied all kinds of literature: cosmography, histories, chronicles, and philosophy and other arts , to which our Lord opened my mind unmistakably to the fact that it was possible to navigate from here to the Indies, and He evoked in me the will for the execution of it; and with this fire I came to Your Highnesses. All those who heard of my plan disregarded it mockingly and with laughter. All the sciences of which I spoke were of no profit to me nor the authorities in them; only in Your Highnesses my faith, and my stay. Who would doubt that this light did not come from the Holy Spirit, anyway as far as I am concerned, which comforted with rays of marvelous clarity and with its Holy and Sacred Scriptures."

Christopher Columbus

"The New Testament is the very best book that ever was or ever will be known in the world."

Charles Dickens

"The existence of the Bible is a book for the people. It's the greatest benefit the human race has ever experienced. Every attempt to belittle it is a crime against humanity."

Immanuel Kant

"It is impossible to enslave mentally or socially a Bible-reading people. The principles of the Bible are the groundwork of human freedom."

Horace Greeley