blog archives

19th Oct 2014, 2:23 PM



So I got into a small via email debate with a famous Atheist known as Dan Barker who was once a Pastor. I debunked his book that George, (the famous atheist of Yonge & Dundas) recommended to me. I saw Dan Barker's faith was Lukewarm from the start and that he had false doctrine giving him a bad foundation of faith... Nothing to stand on... As Jesus says in, Luke 6:49. I contacted Dan Barker, to my surprise he replied twice. He attacks God by saying God contradicts Himself... Let's see if this is true...


Losing Faith In Faith: From Preacher To Atheist by Dan Barker - Chapter 23.

1.) Should we kill? Exodus 20:13, Leviticus 24:17 vs. Exodus 32:27, 1 Samuel 6:19, 1 Samuel 15:2-8, Numbers 15:36, Hosea 13:16.

All of these were an act of Self-Defense, which is righteous. Also, I think many of the Israelites took God saying, "They will be put to death," literally, instead of Spiritually put to death.

Best example is the adulterous woman in John 8:1-11 where Jesus stops the Pharisees from stoning her, even though it was the Law of Moses, I trust God's own words, Jesus is God.

2.) Should we tell lies? Exodus 20:16, Proverbs 12:22 vs. 1 Kings 22:23, 2 Thessalonians 2:11

1 Kings 22:23 ~ 20 And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. 21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him. 22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade [him], and prevail also: go forth, and do so."

So it seems a demon stepped forth to be a lying spirit to Ahab, the demon already had legal rights to Ahab's body because he was an evil king (1 Kings 16:30).

Some lying has shown to be justified... Lying to protect like the lie the Hebrew midwives tell Pharaoh seems to result in the Lord’s blessing on them (Exodus 1:15-21), and it probably saved the lives of many Hebrew babies. Another example is Rahab’s lie to protect the Israelite spies in Joshua 2:5. Again it's self-defense to save lives, lying for any other reason is sin.

3.) Should we steal? Exodus 20:15, Leviticus 19:13 vs. Exodus 3:22, Exodus 12:35-36, Luke 19:29-34.

Re: Exodus 3:22, Exodus 12:35... The Egyptians stole from the Israelites and treated them unfairly, they were taking back was theirs. But I do not believe they were "stealing" for it says "Borrow."

To steal is to acquire something of value from its rightful owner without consent; to borrow requires us to ask or beg for something, as the Israelites did.

Re: Luke 19:29... The Owners of the colt were Israelites and since they did not try to stop the Disciples, they let them take the colt thus having permission, not stealing. They were probably honored that their Lord used their colt to come into Jerusalem. To add, who were the people that told the rest of the city to welcome Jesus with palms? Most likely the owners of the colt that were the first to know Jesus was coming into Jerusalem.

4.) Shall we keep the sabbath? Exodus 20:8, Exodus 31:15, Numbers 15:32, 36 vs. Isaiah 1:13, John 5:16, Colossians 2:16

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy... Jesus, God Himself was persecuted for doing work on the Sabbath, His work was holy though. When it says do no work, in those days was to be reserved to be a Holy day. Being lazy, slothful isn't keeping the Sabbath Holy.

Mark 3:4 ~ And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace.

Luke 13:15 ~ The Lord then answered him, and said, Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him away to watering?

Jesus taught that we should do good on Sabbath. As the original commandment commanded to keep Sabbath Holy. If you don't do work to give water to your animals, they will die. Killing. And that's not Holy.

5.) Shall we make graven images? Exodus 20:4, Leviticus 26:1, Deuteronomy 27:15 vs. Exodus 25:18, 1 Kings 7:15-16, 23-25

“You shall not worship them or serve them.” The command of God to not make images concerned objects of worship, not objects used for decorative or educational purposes as Exodus 25:18 and 1 Kings 7:15 was for. Not worship, but decorative and educational.

6.) Are we saved through works? Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:20,28, Galatians 2:16 vs. James 2:24, Matthew 19:16-21

We are not saved by Works, but are saved by Faith. Our Faith must be a Work-based Faith though, if we have True Faith we will do Works out of love for God. If the Holy Spirit dwells in you, you will produce works naturally.

Ephesians 2:10 ~ "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them."

7.) Should good works be seen? Matthew 5:16, I Peter 2:12 vs. Matthew 6:1-4, Matthew 23:3-5

As it says in Matthew 23:5 ~ "But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,"

So do not do works to earn people's approval, but do work to earn God's approval. God sees all works, if doing works in public feeds the ego, it is better to do works in private. That is the teaching. This is to keep people humble.

8.) Should we own slaves? Leviticus 25:45-46, Genesis 9:25, Exodus 21:2-7, Joel 3:8, Luke 12:47-48, Colossians 3:22 vs. Isaiah 58:6, Matthew 23:10

Notice that slavery was okay in the beginning, but then the right to own slaves was taken away because Masters did not treat Slaves with compassion and fairness as God intended. Jeremiah 34:10. This is why in later Scripture slavery is abolished. Luke 12:47 was a parable; Jesus speaking in the Spiritual sense.

Re: Leviticus 25:45... Let's read down a little further down to Leviticus 25:53 ~ "[And] as a yearly hired servant shall he be with him: [and the other] shall not rule with rigour over him in thy sight."

So the first allowance to have slaves was to not treat them with rigour, not to treat them harshly.

9.) Does God change his mind? Malachi 3:6, Numbers 23:19, Ezekiel 24:14, James 1:17 vs. Exodus 32:14, Genesis 6:6-7, Jonah 3:10

Re: Genesis 6:6, Jonah 3:10, Exodus 32:14... These verses speak of the Lord “repenting” of something and seem to contradict the doctrine of God’s immutability. However, close examination of these passages reveals that these are not truly indications that God is capable of changing. In the original language, the word that is translated as “repent” or “relent” is the Hebrew expression “to be sorry for.” Being sorry for something does not mean that a change has occurred; it simply means there is regret for something that has taken place.

Consider Genesis 6:6: “…the LORD was grieved that He had made man on the earth.” This verse even goes on to say “His heart was filled with pain.” This verse declares that God had regret for creating man. However, obviously He did not reverse His decision. Instead, through Noah, He allowed man to continue to exist. The fact that we are alive today is proof that God did not change His mind about creating man. Also, the context of this passage is a description of the sinful state in which man was living, and it is man’s sinfulness that triggered God’s sorrow, not man’s existence. Consider Jonah 3:10: “…He had compassion and did not bring upon them the destruction He had threatened.” Again, the same Hebrew word is used, which translates “to be sorry for.” Why was God sorry for what He had planned for the Ninevites? Because they had a change in heart and as a result changed their ways from disobedience to obedience. God is entirely consistent. God was going to judge Nineveh because of its evil. However, Nineveh repented and changed its ways. As a result, God had mercy on Nineveh, which is entirely consistent with His character. God does not change, Humans change.

10.) Are we punished for our parents' sins?

Exodus 20:5, Exodus 34:6-7, I Corinthians 15:22 vs. Ezekiel 18:20, Deuteronomy 24:16

Keeping Exodus 20:5 in context, we notice right away that God is referring to the sin of idolatry. God considered idolatry to be an extremely treacherous betrayal of a sacred trust. Idolaters were traitors to God’s theocracy. Idolatry had a way of ingraining itself in a culture. Children raised in such an environment would keep the tradition going and practice similar idolatry, thus falling into the established pattern of disobedience. The effect of one disobedient generation was that wickedness would take root so deeply that it took several generations to reverse.

The implication of Exodus 20:5 is that children are akin to their parents. A new generation will tend to repeat the sins of their fathers. Therefore, God “punishing the children” is simply another way of saying that the children are repeating the fathers’ sins. The tendency to repeat the mistakes of history is especially strong in an idolatrous culture.

11.) Is God good or evil? Psalm 145:9, Deuteronomy 32:4 vs. Isaiah 45:7, Lamentations 3:38, Jeremiah 18:11, Ezekiel 20:25-26

"Evil" or "Ra" in Hebrew means, "Misfortune" or a Calamity, this isn't moral evil such as sin, but punishment for human wickedness, reaping what we sow or "Karma" as Eastern Philosophy would put it. If you do good, you have good happen. If you do bad, you have bad happen.

I also find it interesting the Hebrew word for "evil" is "Ra" whom Ra is an Egyptian God who was merged with the god Horus (who sliced off his mother's head, Isis) as Re-Horakhty ("Ra, who is Horus of the Two Horizons"). He was believed to rule in all parts of the created world: the sky, the earth, and the underworld. Take this as you will.

12.) Does God tempt people? James 1:13 vs. Genesis 22:1

In Genesis 22:1 when it says, "Tempt" it is the word, "Nacah" in Hebrew which means to, "Prove, try, test." Therefore, it was a test that God offered to Abraham, not a temptation to sin. God wouldn't have allowed Abraham to sin, God just wanted to see if Abraham was truly loyal.

13.) Is God peaceable? Romans 15:33, Isaiah 2:4 vs. Exodus 15:3, Joel 3:9-10

Yes, He is, but He goes to war against wickedness. If Hitler had not been defeated by World War II, how many more millions would have been killed? If a robber breaks into your home will you allow him to kill you or will you protect yourself and your family? It is obvious that God justifies Self-Defence, as these were the only reasons God was a warrior. He doesn't wish to kill, just as you wouldn't wish to kill... But you will for the sake of wife and children, I presume.

Hebrew word literally means “the intentional, premeditated killing of another person with malice; murder."

14.) Was Jesus peaceable? John 14:27, Acts 10:36, Luke 2:14 vs. Matthew 10:34, Luke 22:36

Refer to my previous response in point 14.) because Jesus is God.

15.) Was Jesus trustworthy? John 8:14 vs. John 5:31

Re: John 5:31... the context is Jesus speaking about how He depends upon the Father and how He is seeking the will of the Father. Jesus, however is the Father, Jesus has the Holy Spirit, but they count as witnesses. Jesus is reflecting on the Old Testament law that didn't allow the testimony of one person to condemn another to death. Two witnesses were needed to establish the fact.

John 8:14... He was speaking of being the light of the word and the Pharisees accused Him of bearing witness of Himself. Jesus was simply telling the truth that if He did, it would be true because He comes from the Father, He is the Father, all knowing. They were questioning God's own authority.

16.) Shall we call people names? Matthew 5:22 vs. Matthew 23:17, Psalm 14:1

When Jesus said in Matthew 5:22 that you should not call anyone a fool, He was speaking of those who were unrighteously angry. That is why Jesus mentions anger in this verse. There is a righteous anger which is not sinful (Ephesians 4:26). As well as unrighteous anger that is sinful (James 1:20).

When God is angry with someone, He is always righteous in His anger. Jesus, being God in flesh, can righteously be angry with people and pronounce upon them the foolishness of their deeds because it was truth. Also, undoubtedly, Jesus knew Psalm 14:1 which says, "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God' . . ." Jesus didn't forget the well-known verse; and God is not wrong for calling someone a fool, the Pharisees because they didn't believe Jesus was God.

As a result, we see that the condemnation by Jesus regarding calling someone a fool is in the context of doing it out of unrighteous anger, which does not fit the later citations of Jesus labeling the hypocritical, cynical Pharisees as fools.

17.) Has anyone seen God? John 1:18, Exodus 33:20, John 6:46, I John 4:12 vs. Genesis 32:30, Exodus 33:11, Isaiah 6:1, Job 42:5

Re: Genesis 32:30... Jacob saw God appearing as an angel; he did not truly see God. Samson’s parents were terrified when they realized they had seen God (Judges 13:22), but they had only seen Him appearing as an angel. Jesus was God in the flesh (John 1:1,14) so when people saw Him, they were seeing God. So, yes, God can be “seen” and many people have “seen” God. At the same time, no one has ever seen God revealed in all His glory. In our fallen human condition, if God were to fully reveal Himself to us, we would be consumed and destroyed because His spiritual frequency is so high for our senses to comprehend. A finite being cannot fully comprehend the presence of a infinite being. Therefore, God veils Himself and appears in forms in which we can “see” Him. So we've seen pieces of God's Spirit, but not His full Spirit. This is different than seeing God with all His glory and holiness displayed. People have seen visions of God, images of God, and appearances of God, but no one on Earth has ever seen God in all His fullness. As it reveals in Exodus 33, Moses seen the back of God, never the face of God or else His power would destroy us.

18.) How many Gods are there? Deuteronomy 6:4 vs. Genesis 1:26, Genesis 3:22, I John 5:7

Okay... One. John 10:30 ~ "I and my Father are one."

Jesus throughout the New Testament reveals Himself to be God, the Father in flesh. "Emmanuel" meaning "God with us."

John 14:8-11 ~ "Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I [am] in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake."

John 8:24 ~ "Thus I told you that you will die in your sins. For unless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sins."

John 1:1-3 ~ "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

John 1:14 ~ "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."

Jesus is the Creator of the Earth.. Colossians 1:16, John 1:3.

The Son is Holy, He has a Spirit that is Holy. The Father is Holy, He has a Spirit that is Holy. So both the Father and the Son are the Holy Spirit. The same Spirit, one Spirit. The Father had a piece of His Spirit go into Mary's womb and Jesus was born, God Himself.

Matthew 1:18 ~ "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost (Father)."

19.) Are we all sinners? Romans 3:23, Romans 3:10, Psalm 14:3 vs. Job 1:1, Genesis 7:1, Luke 1:6

Re: Romans 3:23... Doesn't that reveal the answer right there? Yes, Job was Righteous, many prophets and people in the Bible were described as Righteous because they strive after perfection, picking up their cross, denying their sin daily. Matthew 6:24. They were sinners, we all sin thus falling short of God because He has never sinned. We are called righteous when we give up our sin filled lives, consciously sinning and not caring if we sin... Changing to trying not to sin. The people who strive and try not to sin are called righteous even if they sinned in their past. Romans 6 is the best read on this. We are a new creation. 2 Corinthians 5:17.

20.) How old was Ahaziah? II Kings 8:26 vs. II Chronicles 22:2

He was 22 years old. Ahaziah’s being “a son of 42 years” in his reigning is seen to refer to his being a son of the dynasty of Omri which was in its 42nd year. Putting the two Scriptures together reveals that Ahaziah was 22 years old when he began to reign during the 42nd year of the dynasty of Omri.

21.) Should we swear an oath? Numbers 30:2, Genesis 21:22-24,31, Hebrews 6:13-17, Genesis 22:15-19, Genesis 31:53, Judges 11:30-39 vs. Matthew 5:34-37, James 5:12

When Jesus admonished Believers not to swear at all in Matthew 5, His caution in verse 34-35 can be seen as a warning not to bring condemnation down on one's self by obligation to do something or to perform something that was impossible or improbable for a person to fulfill. People in Jesus' day went about swearing to all sorts of things which they then later failed to fulfill. The same is obviously true today. In addition, when a person swear's "by God" on an issue, what they are saying may be completely outside of what God's will is for a given situation.

The Lord's warning in verse 36 is different then His warning in verse 34-35 however. It is akin to taking what is commonly referred to as a "blood" oath. How do we know? Jesus says do not "swear by thou head." This is the type that occultists swear. It gives a sort of legal right for other humans (and demonic forces alike) to bring harm to you if you fail at keeping whatever it is you swear. More so, the moment you swear an oath, the penalty of which is your own life, you have sinned against God's word and are game for the Enemy's intrusion in your life circumstances. "Blood" oaths give the Devil spiritual authority to operate in a person's life. It is such oaths that have bound and brought deception, spiritual blindness and demonic curses into the lives and homes of Freemasons.

22.) When was Jesus crucified? Mark 15:25 vs. John 19:14-15

First off, John was using the Roman measurement of time when dealing with the crucifixion. Matthew, Mark, and Luke used the Hebrew system of measuring a day: from sundown to sunrise. The Roman system was from midnight to midnight, as we use Today in U.S.A.

So, if the sun comes up at 6am which would be the First Hour, 9am would be the Third Hour as Mark describes. This is when Jesus was crucified, 9am. This is according to Hebrew Time.

John, using Roman time said Jesus was before Pilate at the Sixth Hour, being 6am, add 6 hours from Midnight. So He was before Pilate at Sunrise and crucified at 9am. Remember, He went through floggings before Crucifixion.

23.) Shall we obey the law? I Peter 2:13, Matthew 22:21, Romans 13:1-7, Titus 3:1.
vs. Acts 5:29

Re: 1 Peter 2:13... It clearly reads "for the Lord's sake". If the ordinance is Godly, submit to it.

Re: Mathew 22:21... Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's... What really belongs to Caesar? The idolatry... The Money... The wickedness... Etc. That is not God's, but Caesar's.

Re: Romans 13:1-7... Ordained of God, yes. Not all Politicians/Government is ordained by God, but they come into power because of the demonic. It goes on to say in Verse 9 what to not do as Christians. God's Law is above man's Law, God's Law comes first to follow. We may not transgress that Law.

Re: Titus 3:1... Says right in the verse in question itself... To be ready to every "GOOD WORK". The laws of God... Good works.

God has written His law on our hearts (Romans 2:15) but it is man's self-righteousness that gets in the way and that is what creates unjust, unfair, and sinful laws.

24.) How many animals on the ark? Genesis 6:19, Genesis 7:8-9, Genesis 7:15 vs. Genesis 7:2

Genesis 6:19-20 simply instructs Noah to preserve two of every kind. Genesis 7:2-3 is additional information where seven of the clean animals were to be taken and two of every other kind. The reason for this is that the extra animals were for sacrifice. "Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar." (Gen. 8:20).

Logically, to have seven pairs also means that there are two pairs since the two are included in the seven. If one verse said take only one pair and another verse said seven pairs, that would be a contradiction.

25.) Were women and men created equal? Genesis 1:27 vs. Genesis 2:18-23

First of all, Genesis 2:18... Why is her being a help, make her not his equal? Instead of seeing the Helper as lower class, see her as essential as the Bible teaches.

1 Peter 3:7 ~ "Husbands, in the same way, treat your wives with consideration as the weaker partners and show them honor as fellow heirs of the grace of life. In this way nothing will hinder your prayers."


1 Corinthians 12:22 ~ "On the contrary, those members that seem to be weaker are essential,"

Also, let's not forget, Galatians 3:28 ~ "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Women have a role. Men have a role. A General in an Army has a role, so does a Cadet. One cannot operate without the other, so we are equal. As it teaches in 1 Corinthians 12, to operate with best harmony, you need your eyes, feet, etc. even though they are small, each a small role, they play a big part in our whole body's functioning.

26.) Were trees created before humans? Genesis 1:12-31 vs. Genesis 2:5-9

Genesis 1:12 ~ "And the earth brought forth grass, [and] herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed [was] in itself, after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good."

Genesis 1:27 ~ "So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

So, God created Plants before man.

Genesis 2:5-7... "5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and [there was] not a man to till the ground. 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

So, plants were created before man. God needed somebody to attend to taking care of the plants. Plants before man.

Genesis 2:8-9 ~ "8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil."

Okay, so God created more plants. To conclude, God created Plants, then created Man, then created more Plants. Simple.

27.) Did Michal have children? II Samuel 6:23 vs. II Samuel 21:8

The two phrases, “she bore to” and “she brought up,” are actually the same in the Hebrew (Yalad). When the translators realized the glitch that Michal had no children according to 2 Samual 6:23, they tried to “fix” the issue by translating this as “she brought up,” even though the Hebrew is identical for both italicized sections and in the same Qal tense, which means “bore” or “begat”— and not “brought up.” So Michal had no children of her own, but raised Adrial's children.

2 Samuel 21:8 ~ "But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite:"

Emphasis on, "brought up for Adrial,". Just because she brought up, raised Adrial's children doesn't mean she had children of her own. She didn't give birth to children herself, or that would be contradicting. Hebrew is a Sentence usage dependent language.

28.) How many stalls did Solomon have? I Kings 4:26 vs. II Chronicles 9:25

The two verses do not contradict because they describe different types of stalls. The stalls in 1 Kings 4:26 were "of horses" which were used for chariots and by horsemen. Nothing in this verse says that these stalls were for the chariots. On the other hand, the stalls in 2 Chronicles 9:25 were for "horses and chariots". Such a stall to house both horses and chariots would not have been as numerous as stalls to house just horses because there is always a smaller ratio of chariots to horses.

40,000 Stalls of Horses, 4,000 Stalls for Horses and Chariots. Meaning 10 x 4,000 = 40,000. There's 10 horses pulling 1 Chariot.

29.) Did Paul's men hear a voice? Acts 9:7 vs. Acts 22:9

Paul heard a voice as Jesus communicated directly with him. The men with Paul heard the voice speaking to Paul but, to them, it was just an unintelligible sound. They heard something. But, since they could not understand what the voice said, it was nothing more than a sound—in other words, they couldn’t really “hear” what Jesus' was saying. They heard, but didn't understand.

The Greek word, "akouō" used in both verses means, "to hear," but also means, "to understand". So again, it is a sentence usage issue. This one word can have different meanings. I can hear someone speaking another language, but I cannot understand. I'm sure you understand this with learning Spanish and visiting Mexico.

30.) Is God omnipotent? Jeremiah 32:27, Matthew 19:26 vs. Judges 1:19

Yes, He is. Judges 1:19 is referring to Judah, that Judah couldn't drive out the inhabitants in the Valley. Referring to Judah, not to God.

As for the battle itself, there is no promise in the Bible that the Jews would win every battle. For any number of reasons, Judah was in constant rebellion, the Lord allowed the people of Judah only a limited success at that time and they were unable to conquer the people of the Valley.

31.) Does God live in light? I Timothy 6:15-16, James 1:17, John 12:35, Job 18:18, Daniel 2:22 vs. I Kings 8:12, II Samuel 22:12, Psalm 18:11, Psalm 97:1-2

Bible uses the terms “light” and “darkness” in several ways and in a variety of contexts. God’s dwelling place in the spiritual realm of the heaven of heavens is filled with “unapproachable light” (1 Timothy 6:16), because His unrestrained glory illuminates it (Revelation 21:23). God made light in the physical Universe during the six-day Creation and “called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night” (Genesis 1:5). He made the Sun, Moon, and stars on day four of Creation, thus making Him the “Father of lights” (James 1:17). Jesus was miraculously transfigured before three of His apostles and “His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light” (Matthew 17:2). The psalmist referred to light in the sense of divine instruction: “The entrance of Your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple” (119:130). Conversely, the psalmist referred to those who “do not know, nor...understand,” as those who “walk about in darkness” (82:5). While addressing the subjects of sin and righteousness, the apostle John used the terms light and darkness symbolically: “God is light (i.e., holy) and in Him is no darkness (i.e., sin)” (1 John 1:5). This same apostle referred to Jesus as “the Light” throughout his gospel account (1:4-9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:34-36,46), and Matthew recorded that Jesus spoke of His disciples as “the light of the world” (5:14-16), reflectors of His righteousness.

The passage in 1 Kings 8:12 ("The Lord said that he would dwell in thick darkness”—KJV) is not discussing God’s dwelling place in the heaven of heavens. First Kings 8:12-13, along with 2 Chronicles 5:13-14, discuss God’s presence in the physical temple of God in Jerusalem. Just as “the cloud covered the tabernacle of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle” in the days of Moses (Exodus 40:34), so “the house of the Lord [the temple], was filled with a cloud” (2 Chronicles 5:13). Similarly, the highly poetic wording in Psalm 18 and 1 Samuel 22 (a quotation of Psalm 18) pictures God, not on His majestic, glorious throne in heaven, but as One Who “came down” from heaven (Psalm 18:9), “flew upon the wings of the wind” (18:10), and delivered his servant David from his enemies while making “darkness His secret place” and “His canopy...dark waters” (18:11)

32.) Does God accept human sacrifice? Deuteronomy 12:31 vs.Genesis 22:2, Exodus 22:29, Judges 11:30-39, II Samuel 21:8-14, Hebrews 10:10-12, I Corinthians 5:7

Re: Genesis 22:2... That's Abraham's test, wasn't a Human Sacrifice, an angel stopped Abraham before Isaac was killed.

Re: Exodus 22:29... This wasn't intended to mean that the Israelites were supposed to sacrifice their firstborn sons to God. Not to kill them. In fact, Exodus 13:13 says, “And all the firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem.” To redeem meant that the Israelites were to give to the Lord five skekels of silver when the firstborn son was one month old (Numbers 18:16). Moses explained that it was a memorial of the process by which God delivered the Israelites from Egyptian bondage (Exodus 13:14-15).

Re: Judges 11:30-39... Again, not a Human sacrifice, not killing. His daughter just remained a virgin and God never asked that of Jephthah.

Re: 2 Samuel 21:8-14... Notice that the text indicates that the ones who were hanged were “men” (2 Samuel 21:6), who would have been old enough to be responsible for their moral decisions. Furthermore, notice that the text indicates that Saul’s “house” or “household” was a bloodthirsty house (2 Samuel 21:1), apparently implying that many of his relatives were involved in his murderous plots. In 2 Samuel 16:5-14, the Bible introduces a wicked man named Shimei who was “from the family of the house of Saul” (2 Samuel 16:5). And Saul’s wickedness is documented throughout the book of 1 Samuel. Could it be that Saul’s descendants who were hanged had followed in the wicked paths of many from the “house of Saul” and deserved the death penalty? Yes. Thus, it is once again impossible to use this passage to “prove” that God accepted human sacrifice.

And... Jesus wasn’t merely human. If He were, then His sacrifice would have also been a temporary one because one human life couldn’t possibly cover the sins of the multitudes who ever existed. Neither could one finite human life atone for sin against an infinite God. The only viable sacrifice must be an infinite one, which means only God Himself could atone for the sins of mankind. Only God Himself, an infinite Being, could pay the penalty owed to Himself. This is why God had to become a Man and dwell among men (John 1:14). No other sacrifice would suffice.

33.) Who was Joseph's father? Matthew 1:16 vs. Luke 3:23

"The second thing is that this genealogy differs in significant ways from the genealogy in Matthew. Why? Most Bible scholars believe that Luke gives the genealogy of Mary (who was also of the royal Davidic line), while Matthew traces the family of Joseph. Thus by both His mother and His earthly father, Jesus had a right to the throne of Israel.

Jacob was Joseph's father. Heli was Mary's father. Since there was no Greek word for “son-in-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter.

19th Oct 2014, 2:22 PM



Now that I've come to debunk (or attack, if you prefer) every single religion thinkable... You must be thinking what is wrong with me, as a Christian to debunk religions outside my own is expected... But exposing Catholicism and Protestantism Christianity as well... Why? Because they are a False Religion like any other. Religion does not save...… Jesus does.

But is it really that simple? To accept Jesus into your heart and bingo you're saved... No, it's not. If you truly accept Jesus into your heart you will be changed... 2 Corinthians 5:17.

Let's do a step-by-step guide to Salvation...


John 3:16 - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Mark 16:16 - "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

Acts 2:21 - "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Isn't that great, just believing in The Lord saves you, but wait...

Matthew 7:21 - "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."

Now don't get angry now and say the Bible contradicts itself, it is not doing so. If you thought for one second that just saying you believe in Jesus saves you, you may have forgotten that even Satan believes in Jesus. James 2:19. Satan knows Jesus is real. So what is Matthew 7:21 talking about? It is alking about Lukewarm Christians...

Revelation 3:16 - "So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I am going to vomit you out of my mouth!"

Just because someone says they are Christian, doesn't mean they are Christian... After all, the Catholic says they are Christian and the Protestant says they are Christian, but are they really? Do their lives line up with Scripture or contradict it? Does their doctrine contradict their Holy Book? This leads me to talk about Lukewarm Christians, who say they are Christian yet their lives and doctrine contradict The Holy Bible... Joel Osteen or the Pope could be good examples of a Lukewarm... A hypocrite... Also known as False Prophets... Matthew 7:15.

The main heretical doctrine of a Lukewarm Christian is... O.S.A.S. (Once Saved Always Saved) and also the "Thou shall not judge" doctrine which is Matthew 7 taken out of context. Let's start with debunking O.S.A.S. though...

Once Saved Always Saved...

This false doctrine teaches that once you accept Jesus into your heart and say that He is your Lord and Savior, all your sins are washed away, no matter what sin you do, you are forgiven because Jesus died on that cross. You can be sexually immoral, but just accept Jesus and you're saved. You can be a drunkard, but just accept Jesus and you're saved. In short, the teaching is... Jesus died for your sins, so that you can sin.

Yet this isn't what the Bible teaches... Yes, we all have sinned. Romans 3:23. And this is why we need Jesus' blood, to be thankful for it... So once we pray the Sinner's Prayer and accept Jesus into our hearts... Then what?

John 8:11 - "She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."

Luke 13:3 - "I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish."

Wow... So even if I believe in Jesus, I can still go to Hell as it says in Matthew 7:21... To be saved you must accept Jesus as Savior and...


Matthew 9:12-13 - "But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

This is preached throughout the entire Bible, all of the Prophets of the Old Testament constantly rebuked Israel, telling the people to repent of their sins. What is repentance? To feel sorry and to turn from sin and dedicate oneself to the amendment of one's life... Meaning keeping God's Law. And this is how we love God which is the greatest commandment in Matthew 22:36-37.

How we love God, show our thankfulness, our gratitude for Him dying for us is by us keeping the commandments, because by keeping the commandments we keep our soul's healthy. Most every Father wants His children healthy. Just like a physical body, we also must keep our spiritual body healthy. We our God's children and He loves us, He wants us to be healthy because if we are not healthy... Satan steals us away from God and it pains God's heart to lose a child to hellfire. So we must love God...

John 14:15 - "If you love me, keep my commandments."

Matthew 19:17 - "He said to him, "Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."

The life a Christian is supposed to live is preached throughout the Bible, but I think Romans 6 teaches on it the most clearly. Read the entire chapter, but let's go into how Baptism plays a role in all this...

Romans 6:4 - "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."

There is a symbolism to your water baptism... You are a sinner, you confess that and repent, then you get baptized... Laying you back into the water, lowering your body like going down into grave to die, washing your sins and then bringing you back up out of the water to be living, Born Again.

John 3:3 - "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

Your baptism in water is symbolic to your commitment to love and obey God. To serve Him, so you can be baptized in water, but if you continue to go on living a life of sin, if you are not dead to sin... Then your water baptism means nothing. You have to be baptized in water and Spirit. The Spirit to serve God has to be there.

Just like a marriage... The wedding band doesn't make the marriage strong, the commitment does with the power of love. Same thing applies... The water baptism doesn't make the relationship with God strong, the commitment does with the power of love, love comes from the Holy Spirit. (John 14:15, 1 John 4:8).

Mark 1:8 - "I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost."

So this is why we must be baptized in water and Spirit... The Spirit baptism making the commitment strong and the water baptism being the symbolism (the wedding ring) to go into the water grave, be cleansed and rise again a new creature in Christ. Born Again. Dying to your own will and being born to do God's will. Dying to sin. Denying temptation.

Matthew 16:24-25 - "Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it."

Now that we understand how to be Saved... Let me expose another False Doctrine of, "Thou shall not Judge"... This is often preached that Christians are not to be judgmental, but this is heavily taken out of context...

This is what most Christians quote, Matthew 7:1 - "Judge not, that ye be not judged."

Now, let's read the entire thing...Matthew 7:1-5 - "1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam [is] in thine own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

To break it down to be understandable... Jesus is talking to the arrogant Pharisees who are sinners themselves, but pointing out other's sins and this is why Jesus says, "You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

So the context is that hypocrites cannot judge. For example, if you are an alcoholic and you tell your friend who is an alcoholic to stop drinking... You are a hypocrite. You have no right to judge when you yourself cannot see your own sin, as Jesus says in Verse 3.

First, you must remove the mote from your eye, see your sin and repent before you can judge, remove the mote from your friend's eye. So... If you are an alcoholic and you tell your alcoholic to stop drinking... This is unrighteous judgment. But if you have quit drinking, repented of this sin and out of concern are telling your friend to stop drinking... This is righteous judgement. You have the moral high ground, but you must judge without arrogance, for you were once a sinner yourself. We cannot become like the arrogant, hypocritical Pharisees.

Christians are to live a sinless life, to be repentant and have a hatred for sin. Proverbs 8:13, Proverbs 9:10. We must be righteous so we can judge as the Prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel did, as well as the Apostles judged. They judged by people's fruit...

Matthew 7:16-19 - "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire."

They did righteous judgement... Out of love for concern for people's physical and/or spiritual health...

John 7:24 - "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment."

This leads me to my next point when it comes to saved by Grace versus Works... Let me mention that when the Prophets and Apostles were judging Israel, they were Evangelizing, which Christians today are also called to do...

Ezekiel 23:45 - "And the righteous men, they shall judge them after the manner of adulteresses, and after the manner of women that shed blood; because they [are] adulteresses, and blood [is] in their hands."

Righteous men shall judge...

We see in Ezekiel 3 and 33 that if we do not judge righteously and warn other's about their sin that we have their blood on our hands, this is figurative, meaning it is our fault they will go to Hell because we didn't tell them the Gospel, tell them about repentance, Jesus their Savior who offers the free gift to salvation.

Ezekiel 3:18-19 - "18 When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked [man] shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. 19 Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul."

Jesus is God and He has commanded us to preach the Gospel, if we don't we are in sin because we go against a commandment of God...

Matthew 10:7-9 - "And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give. Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses."

Acts 10:42 - "He commanded us to preach to the people and to warn them that he is the one appointed by God as judge of the living and the dead."

As Christians we are not called to be part-time Lukewarms, we are called by God to be full-time servants of God, to help in saving other's souls... Sounds like too much work? You say that you don't need to work because you are saved by grace, your faith alone?

Ephesians 2:8 - "8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast."

Let's read on a little more...

Ephesians 2:10 - "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them."

Well, would you look at that... Workmanship, onto good works. So, yes, we are saved by God's grace, our faith in Him alone, but... If you have true faith you will love your God. John 14:15.

Even the Old Testament people were saved by FAITH. Hebrews 11.

Revelation 13:8 - "And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."

Matthew 5:13-16 - "13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. 14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."

Salt irritates and preserves, Light exposes and gets rid of darkness. As Christians this is what we are called to do. People are irritated when you expose their darkness, their sin, but it is what must be done to make them realize they need Jesus, our Savior. So as Christians, we are commanded to spread the Word of God. We are to do good works as Verse 16 reads.

Evangelize, Fast, Pray, Bible Study, Feed the homeless, Volunteer, Make a difference in your community. These are good works and they need to and should fill up your week. To always be promoting the Gospel through our words and actions.

Of course you still have to do your regular work, for our housework, material and financial needs to be met as humans. But we must not get greedy and chase after money. Matthew 6:24-34, 1 Timothy 6:10, Mark 10:21-2, Hebrews 13:5.

We must only provide what is needed not wanted. 1 Timothy 5:8. The rest of our time is for God and bettering ourselves and this World. And your financial income work does not earn you salvation, the Bible is speaking of Godly works, God ordained works. Many Catholic sects, especially Opus Dei Catholics promote this False Doctrine of saved by your job if you offer it up to God. There is no Biblical basis for this doctrine.

Also to point out really quick the Seventh-Day Adventists cult, who tell us we cannot work on the Sabbath... We cannot do our job work or God's work which is heresy. Some will say you're in sin for earning money on the Sabbath... Heresy, you sometimes have to, to be able to provide food for your family. And evangelizing, doing God's work on Sabbath is fine... Jesus worked on the Sabbath... Matthew 12. Don't be a Pharisee.

We are not saved by Works, but are saved by Faith. Our Faith, if we have True Faith we will do Works out of love for God. If the Holy Spirit dwells in you, you will produce works naturally.

Providing for our family. 1 Timothy 5:8. Taking care of the home. Titus 2:5, 1 Timothy 2:15. And of course, spreading the Gospel through our words and actions, through good works. Matthew 10:7-9. This is our faith displayed. Evangelizing, Prayer, Bible Study, Fasting, Volunteering, etc. This type of faith, saves us.

James 2:26 - "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."

The verses I want to underline here are...

John 3:16 - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Revelation 3:16 - "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."

Matthew 7:21 - "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."

Don't be a Lukewarm Christian... Obey the greatest commandment, Love The Lord thy God. Matthew 22:36-37.

John 14:15 - "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

Do you love God? He died for you, after all. Don't let His sacrifice me in vain, repent of your sin and stop hurting your Savior's heart.

2 Peter 3:9 - "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

Ezekiel 33:11 - "Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?"

God sacrificed Himself, He died for you so that you can be saved, wiping clean all your sins. Why do you deny His help, His gift of eternal life, eternal happiness and peace? Why are you ungrateful to the One who died so that you may live? Don't be an ingrate. So I ask again...

Do you love your Savior, your God?

Hebrews 11:6 - "But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."

19th Oct 2014, 2:22 PM



Let’s be reasonable… Let’s say, “We cannot prove or disprove there is a God.” Let’s both be agnostic here and ask yourself this question…

What is better?

Option A.) Live your entire life believing in science, doing what you want to do. No basis for morality. There is no God, you die and that’s it.

But what if there is a God… Here is the God theory…

Option B.) Live your entire life believing in science, doing what you want to do. No basis for morality. There is a God, and you get dragged to Hell by demons because your soul is not pure enough to be in Heaven.

Is it worth taking a chance, believing in Option A.) IF Option B.) MIGHT be true? Is it worth spending 60-80 years on average doing what you want, but then spending an eternity being tortured in Hell? I think it’s best to take the safe-side and believe in Jesus Christ. If He’s not real you got no soul to lose, if He is real… You made stupid choice by not accepting Him as Lord and Savior. This Philosophy is called Pascal's Wager, by the way that states... That humans all bet with their lives either that God exists or not. Given the possibility that God actually does exist and assuming an infinite gain or loss associated with belief or unbelief in said God (as represented by an eternity in heaven or hell), a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.)

Atheists put their faith in Science; evolution which all can be disproven if you look into it. Look into Creation Science if you’re so open-minded, think critically and do your research before you decide and have so much confidence in what is real and what is not real. Your Religion is Evolution and you are indoctrinated in it.

1 Samuel 2:3 - “Talk no more so very proudly, let not arrogance come from your mouth; for the Lord is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed”

God can be proven though, by many testimonies of many people, science can even prove God if you look for the proof. Kent Hovind, a former High School science teacher for 16 years, his Creation seminars are wonderful and can disprove science theories today and prove there is a God along with many other Christians. I recommend doing your research… It will save your soul.

Hosea 4:6 - “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me. And since you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children.”

Let's look at the proof now... Starting from the Beginning...

Genesis 1:1 - “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

Now let's get a grasp on who God is... God is Spirit, a Holy Spirit, completely righteous and positive. John 4:24. God is love. 1 John 4:8. Now what is love... An emotion... Energy... A spirit is made up of energy, our emotion, our consciousness. You can look into this concept of energy within Science, Quantum Physics by people such as Albert Einstein, Dr. Emoto and Dr. Robert Lanza.

There is a principle in Science, Physics to be specific called, Conservation of Energy... Stating that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant irrespective of whatever internal changes may take place with energy disappearing in one form reappearing in another... In short, energy cannot be created or destroyed. Let's compare now...

Hebrews 7:3 - "Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually."

So God is a conscious spirit, a spirit is energy and energy has no end. That's Conservation of Energy, but this Scientific Principle wasn't discovered until 1853... Hebrews was written in 64AD... Hmmmm... Well, God obviously knows who He is and He cannot be mocked. Galatians 6:7.

So in the beginning God created the Earth... Plants, animals, humans... Let's compare to what Science says how the Earth was created... The Big Bang Theory...

A fireball of radiation at very high temperature and density, but occupying a tiny volume, is believed to have formed around 13.7 billion years ago. This expanded and cooled, extremely fast at first, but more slowly as subatomic particles condensed into matter that later accumulated to form galaxies and stars. The galaxies are still currently retreating from one another. What was left of the original radiation continued to cool and has been detected as a uniform background of weak microwave radiation.

Now to debunk this theory... Just from a Scientific perspective, not even bringing God into the picture... Let's just look at this theory from a complete Scientific secular standpoint...

Problem #1... Since when has creation come out of destruction? It also violates the first law of thermodynamics, which says you can't create or destroy matter or energy. Critics claim that the big bang theory suggests the universe began out of nothing. Proponents of the big bang theory say that such criticism is unwarranted for two reasons. The first is that the big bang doesn't address the creation of the universe, but rather the evolution of it. The other reason is that since the laws of science break down as you approach the creation of the universe, there's no reason to believe the first law of thermodynamics would apply.

Problem #2... The rotation of the planets... Some planets are rotating clockwise some are rotating counter-clockwise... Every planet in our solar system except for Venus and Uranus rotates counter-clockwise. But if the Big Bang was true and that this fireball is rotating in one direction accumulating matter... then bang... the matter and planets/stars came flying off of this fireball... We'd have all the stars and planets rotating in the same direction... All clockwise or counterclockwise. This Scientific Principle is called, Angular Momentum.

Problem #3... Some critics say that the formation of stars and galaxies violates the law of entropy, which suggests systems of change become less organized over time. But if you view the early universe as completely homogeneous and isotropic, then the current universe shows signs of obeying the law of entropy.

So if we have proven Big Bang wrong, that it is not Scientific, then we could just stop right here and not even have to move onto debunk Theory of Evolution... Because if Big Bang didn't happen and no Earth came out of the Big Bang then there is no Earth and if there is no Earth there is no animal or human life to be able to evolve... But we know there is Earth and there is animal and human life... So let's go ahead and debunk evolution anyway...

Before I get ahead of myself, a little History lesson...

In 1859, Charles Darwin wrote in his book, Origin of the Species, “Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?” This is from Chapter 6, entitled Difficulties on the Theory. Even Darwin himself questioned his own theory... Within his book he is always using terms such as, "maybe," "probably," and "could be," showing that he seen the flaws within his own theory. Scientists who believe Evolution have been searching for transitional forms ever since... To go as far as to forging fossils to prove the theory. I'm debunking Atheism last, because I notice majority of Atheist come about because of lies of religion... The failed mainline churches who are teaching false doctrine fail in teaching their congregation... Lack of knowledge. Hosea 4:6. These churches, Catholicism, Evangelical, Calvinism, Pentecostal, Mormonism, Jehovah's Witness, etc. If false doctrine is being taught and the Pastor cannot answer opposing questions... Faith is lost... Jesus told us of this. Luke 6:46-49. Matthew 15:14.

Now before I get to debunking the fraudulent fossil record... I would like to start with Ernst Haeckel's drawings of Evolution of Embryos. The saddest thing is that these drawings are still printed in some of todays school science text books with full knowledge that they are wrong for nearly the last 100 years; why are we teaching outdated material to our youth to only blindly accept something false as fact. Whatever the School System teaches to a child, they will accept it as fact with no question. This is wrong.

The Haeckel embryo sequence shown purported to show, left to right... a hog, calf, rabbit and human embryo. This has long been said to demonstrate that humans share a common ancestry with these animals and thus proving the Theory of Evolution. If you take a minute and go and compare these embryos, you will see a difference and be able to identify them by their differences.

The dog embryo and human embryo, shown in Haeckel's book and even some textbooks today are completely identical. Haeckel maintained that he faithfully copied the dog embryo from Bischoff 4th Week. A professor named, L. Rutimeyer then reprinted the original picture of the embryos at 4 Weeks, and Haeckel's drawings of the embryos at 4 Weeks. The originals were very much different.

L. Rutimeyer, was a professor of zoology and comparative anatomy at the University of Basel. There was an article debunking these drawings of Haeckel's by Rutimeyer in 1868 titled, "Referate," in Archiv fur Anthropologie, Pages 301-302. This is why peer review is important, but... The Scientific Community today, emotionally clingy to the beloved Theory of Evolution... They don't want it to be proven true, so they teach ignorance to the youth to blindly accept. You could consider this propaganda. There needs to be honest peer review in the Scientific Community, in the name of Science which is supposed to be defined by study of the natural world based on facts learned through experiments and observation. Obviously not observing here, since these frauds are still being taught... At Jena University where Haeckel taught, he was charged with fraud by five professors and convicted by a university court. We need to take fraud seriously.

And there is peer review, a more recent one as well, but it is deliberately IGNORED by the Scientific Community and most Science teachers all together. In 1997, The Times of London had an interview with Dr. Michael Richardson, an embryologist at St. George’s Medical School in London. He stated, "This is one of the worst cases of scientific fraud. It’s shocking to find that somebody once thought was a great scientist was deliberately misleading. It makes me angry... What Haeckel did was to take a human embryo and copy it, pretending that the salamander and the pig and all the others looked the same at the same stage of development. They don’t... These are fakes.”

Yet... These fake drawings are appearing in many High School and College textbooks. Such as... "Evolutionary Biology, Third Edition” by Douglas J. Futuyma, Sinauer Associates... And... “Molecular Biology of the Cell, Third Edition” by Dr. Bruce Alberts, president of the National Academy of Sciences. The Science Community really needs to give up this pet theory... One must question how such scientists can continue to support evolution being taught as “fact,” knowing that much of what we believe to be true today will have to be “self-corrected” in the future. Why not allow students to “examine the controversy” and discuss possible problems with evolutionary theory? How many students have accepted these fraud teachings as fact? Thousands!

Jeremiah 2:27 - "Saying to a stock, Thou art my father; and to a stone, Thou hast brought me forth: for they have turned their back unto me, and not their face: but in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise, and save us."

Now... Let's move onto the "fossils" of our common ancestor... And allow me to elaborate what the Theory of Evolution is...

Came from rocks to this to that... So now there is a Common Ancestor between Apes and Humans, supposedly... So Scientists have tried to search out these fossils of the Common Ancestor, but have come out empty handed... To their dismay, they decided to create their own fossils to support the beloved theory...

Piltdown Man...

Piltdown Man was known as the discovery of the earliest Englishman. A laborer was supposedly digging in a gravel pit near the village of Piltdown in Sussex, southern England when he found a piece of bone. He passed it to the local archaeologist of the district, Charles Dawson, who verified its antiquity and pronounced that it was part of a skull which was possibly human. Dawson began to search for the rest of the skull.

In 1912, a jawbone was discovered. Sir Arthur Smith Woodward of the British Museum verified that the skull had human features and the jaw was ape-like. The fossils became known as Piltdown Man and were called Eoanthropus dawsoni which means, ‘Dawson’s Dawn Man’.

In 1915, another Dawn Man was found a couple of miles away from the site of the first find. Fossil remains of animals that lived with Piltdown Man, together with the tools that he used, were also found at the two sites. At last, here was "proof" that apes had evolved into humans in England. In 1953, Piltdown Man was exposed as a forgery, mainly through the work of Dr. Kenneth Oakley. He showed that the skull was from a modern human and that the jawbone and teeth were from an orangutan. The teeth had been filed down to make them look human. The bones and teeth had been chemically treated to give them the appearance of being ancient.

The desire to find the earliest Englishman had blinded the scientists of that day, so they uncritically accepted Piltdown Man as being legit. We cannot be a Scientific seeker of truth if we deny what the truth is and cling to some sort evolutionist parochial prejudice. We need to stay neutral... If Evolution is not 100% proven or any theory for that matter, including Intellectual Design... Then it need not to be taught as fact within our School System, but be presented as a possibility. Until we are 100% certain how the Earth was created, until that point we should only teach the theories, the possibilities. This includes teaching Evolution and Intellectual Design, along with any other theory and have an open-mind that thinks critically.

Nebraska Man...

This one is the funniest, saddest and most pathetic "proof" for the Common Ancestor... If you Google the drawing of Nebraska Man you will see what you imagine an ancient man to look like, but this drawing was made from looking at a single tooth. That is all it took for Evolutionists to come up with the drawing you will see. This, is obviously just active imagination because you cannot make such assumptions what a man looked like just by the look of his tooth. It is not fact, at all. And to their further embarrassment...

In 1922 Paleontologist Harald Cook found a single tooth in Western Nebraska, USA. Pliocene deposits that were alleged to be 6 Million Years Old. This Nebraska man's tooth was the reason that evolution started to be taught in schools. Before Nebraska man, evolution had a hard time getting taught in schools but, this success only lasted a few years before it was found out as a mistake... The tooth belonged to a thought-to-be extinct pig. A species of pig called “Prosthennops serus”, this pig was found still alive in Paraguay in 1972.

Java Man...

In 1891 Java Man was found by Eugene Dubois who was the first person to deliberately search for human ancestors. Dubois was a former student of Ernst Haeckel who became intent on discovering the missing link that his mentor believed had evolved somewhere in Africa or East Asia, and which Haeckel had already named without any physical evidence – Pithecanthropus alalus or man without speech. Dubois signed up as a doctor with the Dutch medical corps in the Dutch East Indies with the intention of hunting for fossils during his spare time.

After years of excavations, they dug up a tooth and skullcap on the banks of the Solo River on Java island of Indonesia. The skullcap was ape-like having a low forehead and large eyebrow ridges. The following year, the workmen uncovered a thigh bone that was clearly human forty feet away from where the tooth was found. Due to the close proximity of the find, Dubois assumed they belonged to the same creature. Dubois then named the find, Pithecanthropus erectus or erect ape-man. Rudolph Virchow, who had been Haeckel’s professor and is considered the father of modern Pathology remarked, “In my opinion this creature was an animal, a giant gibbon, in fact. The thigh bone has not the slightest connection with the skull.”

And I would like to point out that just because the brow line is large, it only proves that this man was very old. As people in pre-flood times lived hundreds of years old and the brow line never stops growing.

Neanderthal Man...

After discovering the first Neanderthal skullcap in 1856 in the Neander Valley near Dusseldorf, Germany, German anatomist Ruldolph Virchow said in essence that the fossil was the remains of a modern man afflicted with rickets and osteoporosis. In 1958, at the International Congress of Zoology, A.J.E. Cave stated that his examination of the famous Neanderthal skeleton established that it was simply an old man who had suffered from arthritis.

Professor Reiner Protsch was invited to date the famous skull, which he later pronounced to be the vital missing link between Neanderthals and modern humans. He dated the skull at 36,000 years old, allowing it to fall neatly into the evolutionists’ timeline between Neanderthals and modern man. Finally, thanks to Protsch, the gap had been filled. All the pieces were in place.

On February 18, 2005, Protsch was forced to retire in disgrace after a Frankfurt University panel ruled he had “fabricated data and plagiarized the work of his colleagues." — “Anthropologist Resigns in ‘Dating Disaster,’ 2005." Once believed to be a world-renowned expert on carbon dating, Protsch’s entire professional career is now being questioned. The university noted, “The commission finds that Prof. Protsch has forged and manipulated scientific facts over the past 30 years.” — “Anthropologist Resigns…” you can read this for yourself on World Net Daily. Other reads of interest are Luke Harding, 2005, “Another Day, Another ‘Science’ Fraud,” MedKB. Apologetics Press... Articles/491 by Brad Harrub PH.D.

The Neanderthal skull was not the only forgery scientists at Oxford discovered. Protsch also had paraded “Binshof-Speyer” woman before the public, stating that she was 21,300 years old. Yet the new Oxford date puts this woman living at 1,300 B.C. Protsch also claimed that “Paderborn-Sande Man” walked the Earth 27,400 B.C., and yet the corrected figure reveals that he died only a couple hundred years ago in 1750.

Taung Child...

A fossil skull discovered by Raymond Dart in South Africa in 1924 was initially depicted as a supposed ancestor of man. However, contemporary evolutionists can no longer maintain that it represents such an ancestor—because it subsequently transpired that the skull belonged to a young gorilla! The famous anatomist Bernard Wood stated that this fossil constitutes no evidence in favor of evolution in an article published in New Scientist magazine.

Ocre Man...

On May 14, 1984, the Daily Telegraph, an Australian newspaper, carried the story of the latest hoax, “Ass Taken For Man!" was its witty headline.

A skull found in Spain and promoted as the oldest example of man in Eurasia. A 3 Day scientific symposium had been scheduled, so that the experts could examine and discuss the bone which had already been named, Orce Man, for the southern Spanish town near which it had been found. Scientists from Paris showed that Orce Man was a skull fragment of a four-month-old donkey. The embarrassed Spanish officials sent out 500 letters canceling the symposium.


Donald Johanson found Lucy at Dar Valley, Ethiopia in 1974; it was 40% of the skeleton, even though a depiction of her shows her complete body and the assumption of what she looked like. Very creatively designed sculptures of Lucy appear in tax-funded museums, and these sculptures are hoaxes, not following the obvious ape-like bone structures, but rather dishonestly presenting Lucy as if she had human-like bone structures. They show her arms and legs as looking human-like when no arm or leg bones were found.

Donald Johanson found her bones when his grant money was about to run out and the knee joint that he found a mile and a half away from the rest of the skeleton. Lucy was widely esteemed by evolutionists and was the subject of some of the most intensive speculation. However, it has been revealed that Lucy had an anatomy ideally suited to climbing trees and was no different from other apes we are familiar with. The French scientific journal Science et Vie covered the story in 1999 under the headline, “Adieu, Lucy.”

In 2000, a study discovered a locking system in Lucy’s forearms enabling it to walk using the knuckles, in the same way as modern-day chimps. In a recent study, Tel Aviv University anthropologists determined that Lucy’s lower jaw bone is some kind of ape jaw bone. Other parts of the skeleton are just like the bones of knuckle-dragging, tree-climbing gorillas. Yet Lucy has been Evolutionism's poster child. I believe her to be an ancestor of the Orangutan due to her size and the anatomy of her bones. We can see from the original bones of Lucy that she was a knuckle walker and a tree dweller. Frank Brown, a evolutionist and geologist of the University of Utah said this, “We’ve always assumed Lucy was our ancestor, and now we need to re-evaluate that idea,”

If you believe in Evolution that is your choice, but don't pass it off as fact when it is no more than a belief that relies on faith. If you wish to prove your belief, do it with truth and not lies. If you are unsure, say you are unsure... We need more humble people in this world, not more arrogant ones.

There's many more frauds within mainline Science Textbooks... Another fossil fraud known as Archaeoraptor, and frauds such as Horse Evolution Fraud, Peppered Moth and the Age of the Earth. Dating the fossils by the rocks and the rocks by the fossils... It's circular reasoning! And that's just not Scientific... I don't have time to debunk every single fraud, and you my readers would get tired of reading down such a long list, but if you'd like to present me with a certain fossil or scientific principle I would be happy to answer, for now... Let's move on to debunk...

Natural Selection...

Natural selection is the gradual process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of the effect of inherited traits on the differential reproductive success of organisms interacting with their environment.

Natural selection is an observable process that falls into the category of operational science. This is Scientific. We have observed mosquitoes, birds, and many microorganisms and many species undergoing change in relatively short periods of time. New species have been observed to arise. This is completely undeniable, it is Scientific, it has been observed. Where this idea that Natural Selection leads to molecules-to-man evolution... Is where the theory goes wrong. This is the belief that one kind of animal turns into another kind of animal. Speciation. Lions, (Panthera leo) and Tigers (Panthera tigris) are both members of the cat kind, but they are considered different species primarily due to their geographic isolation. However, it is possible to mate the two. Ligers (male lion and female tiger) and tigons (male tigers and female lions) are produced. These two species came from the original cat kind that would have been present on Noah’s Ark. The same things goes for any kind; a wolf and chihuahua are part of the same dog kind. An eagle and a pigeon are apart of the same bird kind.

A Lion and a Tiger certainly had a common ancestor with more genetic variety. As the two populations became separated, certain genes were lost and two new species eventually formed. The formation of new species as a result of loss of information is the opposite type of change required to demonstrate molecules-to-man evolution. This, and other examples found in the textbooks, confirms the biblical creationist model of variation within a kind is scientific.

Evolutionary biologists assume, based on geologic interpretations that are wrong, that there have been billions of years for this process to occur. If the Earth is thousands of years old instead of billions, the hypothesis falls apart.

The other requirement, a mechanism for change, is also assumed to exist—even though it has never been observed. We mentioned earlier that natural selection tends to delete information from the population. If natural selection is the mechanism that explains the successive adaptations, it must provide new genetic information. To produce the new bones in the fins requires an elaborate orchestration of biologic processes. The bones don’t just have to be present; they must develop at the right time in the embryo, have their shape and size predetermined by the DNA sequence, be attached to the correct tendons, ligaments, and blood vessels, attach to the bones of the pectoral girdle, and so on. The amount of information required for this seemingly simple transformation cannot be provided by a process that generally deletes information from the genome. A female while in her mother's womb already has all of her eggs while she is a fetus... So how can women be involved in such a drastic evolution... We cannot.

Let's compare the varies different dog breeds, the Canis lupus familiaris. Darwin thought they might come from multiple sources, including the wolf, jackal and coyote, thereby in part explaining their diversity. The DNA evidence, however, shows that they are all derived from the wolf. DNA from all dogs is over 99% identical to that of a wolf, while the wolf and coyote DNAs, for example, are over 4% different from each other. This means, surprisingly, that all of the diversity of dog types in the world today came from a single source, the wolf... But a house cat hasn't come out of a wolf, a fish or bird hasn't come out of a wolf. And if ever certain breeders stop breeding a certain time of dog, the chihuahua for example (since they seem pretty useless... Kidding.) If you slowly stop breeding the chihuahua the breed would slowly become extinct, but the other breeds that chihuahua's helped create would remain, characteristics, information of this breed. We're all mutts, so it seems. Observational science supports this type of subtle change within a kind but not molecules-to-man evolution... Not monkey to man...

We have observed the change in dogs over time, many different breeds within the kind. You can breed wolves to get to chihuahuas, but you can’t breed chihuahuas to get wolves, variation in the genetic information has been lost. Darwin used this type of change as evidence without an understanding of the limits of genetic change that are known today. So you can breed wolves to get a chihuahua, but you cannot get that chihuahua to become a cat or human or any separate species as Evolution Theory states. This type of evolution from one kind of animal into another animal has not been observed and is not Scientific. There is only changes in the kind, not changes into another kind.

Let's look at birds since Darwin used finches to prove his Evolution Theory... Birds spread out into the lush new world growing in the newly deposited soil, they produce offspring of woodpecker that contain both long-beak and short-beak genes. Areas populated by trees with thick, soft bark would tend to select for birds with longer beaks. Areas where the bark was thinner and harder would tend to be populated by woodpeckers with shorter beaks. The long-beaked woodpeckers would still have the ability to produce short-beaked offspring, but they would be less able to compete, and those genes would tend to decrease in frequency in the population, no to very little short-beak woodpecker. Due to their isolation, two new species of woodpecker would develop, but within their kind. This is Natural Selection! But to say this bird will evolve into a human is absurd. And speaking of woodpeckers... Animals that prove Intellectual Design...

The woodpecker catches its food with its tongue which has barbs and a bit of glue on the end, this glue doesn't make their beak stick together either but their saliva allows them to eat the bug that they can pick up hiding in their little tunnels inside a tree. The tongue circles around behind the head and neck under the loose skin gives the tongue enough extra length so it can shoot out about six inches into the burrow inside a tree trunk.

Their tongue is long, but instead of dangling down and getting tangled around branches when it flies, the slack is kept under the loose skin behind its neck. Back there, the tiny bones divide into essentially two tongues, coming back together before entering the beak. Not to mention the sponge behind their beak that protects their brain when they are banging their head against the tree. Their glue mechanism, their saliva, their long tongue and their sponge in their brain protecting them from head trauma are all unique attributes to this bird.

Bombardier Beetle...
This creature, in its body has two sacks of chemicals that explode when added together, but are benign when kept separately. Thus, the first capability is that this beetle has two separate sacks that keep the chemicals separate until the beetle needs the chemical to protect itself. The second capability is that the beetle has an asbestos type lining in his "firebox" in which the chemicals are added. This "firebox" lining keeps the chemical explosion from destroying the body of the beetle when it explodes outward.

However, a third capability is needed to keep the explosion that occurs right outside the body of the beetle from blowing the beetle away when the stream of explosive chemical erupts out of the body. If the stream were continuous, the beetle would be blown away from the chemical coming out its body; however, the beetle pulsates his stream in tiny, continuous droplet pulsation. Thus, the stream of explosive material is not continuous, so the beetle is not killed by his own protective mechanism! Three very complicated, but cooperating capabilities had to come together at once in this beetle, no evidence of it evolving from another creature, truly unique and designed the way it is now. Thus, the Bombardier Beetle by itself utterly disproves Evolution.

Because the neck of the Giraffe extends so high into the air, the heart must contain an extraordinarily strong pump to force the blood from the lower body to the highest reaches of the brain. Thus, the first capability unique to the giraffe is a heart that is also a most powerful pump. However, when the giraffe lowers its neck to drink, the blood that is circulating in its neck will suddenly come rushing down by the force of gravity. This sudden rush of blood is so strong, it would quickly cause the giraffe to suffer a brain aneurysm, killing the animal instantly. Therefore, the second capability is that spigots are built into his neck arteries that instantly close down whenever the animal lowers its neck to drink water.

However, when the giraffe abruptly raises its head after drinking, the blood would flow so rapidly downward through the force of gravity that the animal would suffer a sudden loss of blood to the brain, thus causing him to pass out cold. However, God has built a third capability that prevents this from occurring. The brain has a sponge-like material just behind the brain that has gradually been absorbing blood all the time the giraffe has been drinking. When the giraffe suddenly raises his head, that blood very slowly drains out of the brain, thus keeping the giraffe from passing out, while the spigots open up and the blood begins to flow naturally.

Three very complicated, but cooperating capabilities had to come together at once in the giraffe. If you take any of these capabilities away, the animal dies. If any one of these capabilities arrived on the scene later than the others, the animals would die. Dead animals do not evolve. Even the most ardent Evolutionist has no answer as to how these individual animals could possess two or three independent capabilities that uniquely work together, and must have been present in the animal at a single moment of time... In the beginning... Genesis 1.

Australian Incubator Bird...
The Megapode or "incubator bird" is unique among birds. All birds use body heat to incubate their eggs except the incubator bird. So, if they evolved, from what did they evolve?

The female is responsible for two activities. First, she must test the nest to be sure it is adequate for incubating her eggs. A nest that is dug by the male bird and must be dug 3 feet into the ground and extend 10 or more feet above ground and up to 50 feet across. And what would motivate a little 4 pound male bird to get busy constructing this monstrous nest number two, should the hen reject the father's first effort? After accepting the nest, the mother lays 20 to 35 eggs at the rate of one egg every 3 Days for up to 7 Months. Each egg weighs about a half a pound and is as large as an ostrich egg. That is a tremendous amount of work for a 3 pound hen. No wonder that upon completion of her laying task, she leaves the nest, never to return. She takes no part in the incubation and raising of her chicks.

At this point the father begins to perform his job of managing the incubation of the deeply buried eggs. For incubator bird chicks to survive they demand a precise temperature of 91°F. Yes, exactly 91°F. If the male bird wants the chicks to survive, he will not let the temperature vary more then one degree on either side of 91°F! Very impressive bird... Talk about a deadbeat dad? I think not!

The Chicken Egg...
The shell itself is highly specialized. Each egg has a shell made from mainly calcium form around the egg, fertilized or not. Each chicken egg shell has about 10,000 tiny pores. You can prove this in a little home-school science lesson... Put a raw egg in warm water and soon you will see tiny bubbles floating up. These bubbles are escaping through the pores in the shell. The developing chick needs these pores to breathe. Evolution basically says that when a need arises in an organism, mindless, random chance processes provide exactly, precisely and specifically what the organism needs to alter and improve it so that it will survive. The chick does not know it needs the holes in the shell to breathe until it dies for lack of air. Of course, dead chicks cannot evolve, and how can a chick be aware of this in the first place when fetuses are considered not conscious in this day and age thanks to the Pro-Choice Movement?

Within the first few days after the egg is laid, blood vessels begin to grow out of the developing chick. Two of these attach to the membrane under the egg shell and two attach to the yolk. By the fifth day, the tiny heart is pumping blood through the vessels. The chick feeds from the yolk with the yolk vessels and breathes through the membrane vessels. If any of these vessels do not grow out of the chick or attach to the correct place, the chick will die. The chick gives off carbon dioxide and water vapor as it metabolizes the yolk. If it does not get rid of the carbon dioxide and water vapor, it will die of gaseous poisoning or drown in its own waste. These waste products are picked up by the blood vessels and leave through the pores in the eggshell.

By the nineteenth day, the chick is too big to get enough oxygen through the pores in the shell. By this time, a small tooth called the “egg-tooth” has grown on its beak. It uses this little tooth to peck a hole into the air sack at the flat end of the egg. When you peel a hard-boiled egg you notice the thin membrane under the shell and the flattened end of the egg. This flattened end, which looks like the hen did not quite fill up her egg shell, is the air sack. The air sack provides only six hours of air for the chick to breathe. Instead of relaxing and breathing deeply, with this new-found supply of air, the chick keeps pecking... The twentieth day the chick breaks out into the world.

The bill of the platypus is like a duck’s bill. On each foot there are not only five toes, but webbing which makes it a cross between a duck and an animal which has to scratch and dig. Unlike most mammals, the limbs of the platypus are short and parallel to the ground. The external ear is only a hole without the ear lobe which mammals usually have. The eyes are small. The platypus is nocturnal. It catches its food under water and stores the worms, snails, grubs, etc, in cheek pouches like those of a rodent.

Platypus fossils are exactly the same as modern forms. The complex structures of the egg and milk glands are always fully developed and offer no solution as to the origin and development of the womb or the milk. The more typical mammals are found in much lower strata that the egg-laying platypus. Thus, the duck-billed platypus appears to be a distinct kind of animal in of itself that has been specifically designed to include a mixture of traits.

Black and Yellow Garden Spider... I have these at my home in N.C. and as much as I love them for defying evolution... They creep me out, look so gross. They defy evolution mainly by their webs and their way of travel, other animals that defy evolution are Gecko and Chuckwalla Lizards, Human Eye and Ear Drums, Lampsylis Mussel, Horses, Ostriches, Hummingbirds, Manatees, Penguins and many more of God's creatures. There is a good series called, The Incredible Creatures That Defy Evolution by former evolutionist, Dr. Joe Martin. I recommend it. Even the lower human rib bone is the only bone that will grow back, Adam's rib bone is the one God took to make Eve and women have one more pair of ribs then men. It all lines up with Scripture... There could only be the explanation of an Intellectual Designer... Our God, our Creator, Lord Jesus Christ our Savior.


There are many misunderstandings about God... Don’t let misunderstandings, mistranslation, the school system, the organized church system and other unrighteous Christians form your opinion about Christ Himself. He and His word is good. Don't allow lack of knowledge or willful ignorance get in the way of a relationship with your Creator Jesus Christ...

Psalm 14:1 - "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good."

Mark 16:16 - "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

19th Oct 2014, 2:21 PM



This religion just creeps me out, this has to be Satan's worse deception yet... Honestly, even when I was a Non-believer... This is just un-natural, cowardly... At least the average Atheist accepts death, but Tran-Humanists wish to escape death and be immortal. It's like New Age and Atheism on steroids... But all personal opinion aside, let's just compare their beliefs with The Bible...

Trans-humanism is a movement that supports the use of all forms of technology to improve human beings. It is a highly organized and well financed movement that is extremely focused on subverting and replacing every aspect of what we are as human beings, that includes... Our physical biology and individual thinking...

What is the history of this belief? In 1957, Julian Huxley introduced it to the populace. Julian Huxley was the brother of Aldous Huxley, who was the author of the book, Brave New World... I suggest you read it. In this book a vision of the future was given that depicts the coming of The New World Order... A police-state world in which a One World Government uses advanced technology, surveillance cameras, psychological warfare or propaganda and brutal military and police forces to control everyone and everything in this dystopian, fictional world.

The Übermensch, German for "Overman, Overhuman, Above-Human, Superman, Super-human, Ultrahuman" is a concept in the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche had his character Zarathustra posit the Übermensch as a goal for humanity to set for itself in his 1883 novel.

The founders of Transhumanism, were highly educated and wealthy individuals, the Illuminati elite, their views being Luciferian and Totalitarian/Fascist in nature. Speaking of Totalitarianism, let's bring up the Nazis... Eugenics was widely popular in the early decades of the 20th Century, but has been held in low esteem after being associated with Nazi Germany. Since the postwar period, both the public and the scientific communities have associated Eugenics with Nazi abuses, such as enforced racial hygiene, human experimentation, and the extermination of undesirable population groups... Such as certain races and mentally or physically disabled people.

Modern Trans-humanism claims to only support voluntary Eugenics, which sounds much more benevolent than mandatory sterilization and euthanasia of undesirable humans... Sounds, but in truth is it indeed "voluntary"? With propaganda, of course... But that in itself no longer makes it voluntary, but only gives the mere appearance of being voluntary. “Voluntary Eugenics” will not be voluntary anymore, if and when the people who believe in these radical ideas get political and financial power which they already have, and are working very hard to impose Trans-humanist ideals on the world, whether we like it or not.

One of Trans-humanists goals is the ideal of the Hive Mind... Sir Charles Galton Darwin, a Trans-humanist and the grandson of Charles Darwin, who founded the Theory of Evolution. Charles Galton once quoted, "There might be a drug, which, without other harmful effects, removed the urgency of sexual desire, and so, reproduced in humanity the status of workers in a beehive.”

The Human Beehive concept has been envisioned by the ruling elite class throughout history as the ideal society, a Utopia. The ultimate slave race, scientifically designed to conform, obey and serve the needs of the elite with no rebellion. This Hive Mind mentality is possible when all people across the world can link their minds together using technology, creating a symbiotic existence through the new super-intelligence of this collective Hive Mind.

To achieve this, to technologically link everyone's mind together is being done by the Mind Upload Research Group. They are working toward a technology that will allow humans to “upload their minds” to an artificial memory device, a sort of global hard drive, the internet... So that the combined intelligence of all our minds will create this new super-intelligence that is the Hive Mind. And with uploading our mind, our consciousness to the internet we give ourselves immortality. No need for God, we as humans are our own gods. Forget about the needs of the individual, it’s all about the Hive as a whole. They refer to this collective, super-intelligence as the Singularity... To help establish this Hive Mind is the One World Government structure, no more arguing over politics and same goes for religion as there will be a One World Religion.

This is the goals of the Cult of Trans-humanism, they believe gods are merely fictional and that we should seek to become gods ourselves. The body is weak, but the mind is can last forever with the help of technology. They seek to make Heaven on Earth, to escape death and the Judgment they deny exists. They believe they can do this with the guidance of reason, logic and empowered by technology, bending reality to their will, and make the impossible possible. Trans-humanist ideals of becoming gods is certainly nothing new, but is the first lie Satan told man...

Genesis 3:5 - "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

Having eternal life through technology certainly display an extreme level of vanity and insanity. To think they are more powerful than the Creator of the Universe is pretty ignorant, to deny God when the World is obviously by Intellectual Design. To strive to be gods, rejecting and replacing Lord Jesus our Savior and Creator, entirely... This is the Lucifarian doctrine from the deepest pits of Hell.

Trans-humanists also have a perverted sense of morality similar to the Wicca and New Ager, that there is no good or evil. They call this idea, Pragmatic Morality, is simply a recycled and renamed version of Moral Relativism, which I already have debunked. When you remove a certain standard of what is right and what is wrong you leave room for a society with no standards to base laws on and keep peace.

The line between bad and good is no longer able to be seen and this leaves room for chaos. There is no standard for morality... Killing can be perfectly okay, we see this in Pro-Abortion groups. Sexual immorality is perfectly okay... Pro-Homosexual groups, Pro-Nudist groups and Pro-Pedophilia groups... What used to be defined as immoral is being passed off as okay because there is no good or evil anymore, there are only individual choices.

There is no Good and Evil... Just efficiency and inefficiency; intelligence and stupidity; winners and losers. This type of mindset leads to a society with no moral standard to stand on... Everything whether good or bad falls into a gray area category.

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!"

Obviously, the Patron Saint of Trans-Humanism is Satan, as the Illuminati elite believe he is. ‘Lucifer’ is the Latin term originally used by the Romans to refer to the planet Venus when that planet was west of the sun and hence rose before the sun in the morning, thereby being the morning star. According to Luciferians, Lucifer is the embodiment of reason, of intelligence, of critical thought. He stands against the dogma of God and all other dogmas. He stands for the exploration of new ideas and new perspectives in the pursuit of truth.

The word ‘Satan’ is from a Hebrew word, ‘Sathane’, meaning adversary. Lucifer was his name when he was in Heaven, but this star fell and became an adversary to mankind, leading us to sin. He wishes to lead people— God's children away from God as a type of revenge on God, because God hates nothing more than His children being deceived and taken away by Satan, being tricked to harm their own souls so that they are so negative they cannot even be near a such Holy God. Repent if you love God, your Creator.

Ezekiel 33:11 - "Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?"

2 Peter 3:9 - "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

John 14:15 - "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

If you as a finite being can rebel and win against a infinite God... You are out of your mind. God is all-knowing, He and His true Christian servants have seen your plan. Trans-humanism is revealed in Scripture 3,000 years ago... King David wrote about the hearts of men just prior to the Glorious Appearing of Jesus Christ, as men prepared to, "free themselves from God's slavery" meanings free themselves from Spiritual Law so they can do what they want all while escaping damnation by making their consciousness live on eternally with the help of technology. They attempt to escape, but God scoffs in disgust at their stupidity with their self-righteous rebellion.

Psalm 2:1-4 - "1 Why do the nations rebel? Why are the countries devising plots that will fail? 2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, 3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. 4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision."

Matthew 24:22 - "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened."

This is all my personal perception... But it is interesting how the other Bible versions say, "No person shall survive." I may be looking to deep into this, but I wonder if Lord Jesus met exactly what He said... No flesh... Literally... Unless those days are shortened, so what would happen if Jesus' Second Coming is prolonged... The closer and closer man comes to no longer having flesh, but having a robotic body becoming a Post-Human... These words of our Lord take on an entirely new meaning, don't they?

It could be referring to the physical body becoming obsolete in the New World Order end times of Jesus could have been referring to that if the dates are not shortened everyone would lose faith and not be saved... Either way, we see the enemy's ideals. The elite, the kings of the Earth are Luficarian, Trans-Humanist who will make Lucifer's side and war against The Lord of Lords, the Universe's Creator...

Revelation 19:19 - "And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army."

Another theory is these RFID Chips... Could this very well be what will be the Mark of the Beast?

Revelation 13:17 - "And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name."

This mark could be a spiritual mark on our souls, as we become Satan's property when we worship him or... It could be a physical mark; a 666 tattoo, could be on our files, social security cards or use retina scanning, could be this RFID Chip in our hand... It's in our pets for crying out loud... This technology exists NOW. RFID Chips are in our credit cards now, we don't even have to swipe our card anymore it is a simple tap by passing the machine.

Soon paper money will be obsolete, useless, no value to it. Then, we will be forced to use just electronic money, and everything... Medical information, Personal information, Car keys, Passport, Drivers License, Credit Card... Will all be in this chip that is in your hand, won't be able to buy or sell without this mark and to get it you must deny Christ...

Are you ready for that? Repent before it is too late. Lord Jesus wins in the end, you better double-check that you're on His side... God bless.

19th Oct 2014, 2:20 PM



First off, I want to testify I was studying and practicing Wicca on and off for 5 years. I say on and off because I would go back and forth between Eastern Philosophy and Wicca, always compromising with Shintoism. Wicca is a common and much older name for Witchcraft also known as The Craft, which can be considered sorcery or magick. Magic spelt with a 'k' symbolizes it is real and not pretend spells.

Witchcraft is NOT directly connected with Satanism. This is a common misconception. Not all Wiccans worship Satan, even though all False Religions are created by him... Wiccans do not worship him directly. It is indirectly. If the individual Witch believes in Satan, they usually believe that he is just another Christian deity, usually a Witch will not worship him, when they start to do this is, it is no longer Wicca but Satanism.

Some Wicca claim that Satan is a Biblical myth, and a slander on the true god of light, Lucifer. Wiccans will deny Satan direct worship, either believing he doesn't exist or that he is a spirit to not contact. Truth of the matter is though, if you are NOT serving the Lord Jesus Christ, you are serving Satan whether you realize it or not. All these false religions, including atheism are Satan's creation. To state what they think they believe though is...

Depending on the Witch. They worship Pagan gods from various pantheons, fairies, dragons and many different mythological spirits and creatures. Some Witches just worship nature itself, as I did along with the Japanese, Greek and Celtic pantheons. I was a Witch that believed in the Christian deities as well. Wicca witchcraft calls itself, "white witchcraft." There is black magick and there is white magick. Most Wiccans say they only do, "good" witchcraft, only practicing positive spells for the benefit of humanity and Mother Earth. Yes, this is a good intention and yes, black magick is much worse than white magick, but, but, but... White magick isn't exactly completely good.

Deuteronomy 18:10-12 - "10 There shall not be found among you [any one] that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, [or] that useth divination, [or] an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, 11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. 12 For all that do these things [are] an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee."

End of verse ten... Or a witch, hmmm... Doesn't say, "or a black magick witch," it just says, "witch." Period. No ifs, ands or buts. Practicing The Craft at all is bad for our Spiritual Health. Doesn't matter if it is white or black magick, they're both a sin. And here is the contradiction...

Much like the New Age Movement, most Wiccans do not believe good and evil are separate things, on the contrary that they need each other. Like the concept of Yin and Yang. Good and evil is just energy that needs to be balanced by Spiritual people, referring to themselves of course. Evil is just a necessary part of good and the evil/negative energy can be transmuted into the good/positive energy and vise versa to balance Mother Earth. Good and evil are both needed to develop a soul properly. It is apart of the natural human existence, is their belief.

There is no absolute truth. What's true for you may not be true for me, so everything is true, just pick one. If you are Christian you must follow your Holy Book to get into Heaven, if you are Muslim you must follow your Holy Book to get into Heaven, if you are Wicca you must follow the Wicca Reed, etc. etc. etc. If you follow your god and are a good person in your god's standards, you will go to your respected Heaven, the Christian Heaven, the Muslim Heaven or the Buddhist Nirvana. Each soul will be held to their own perspective of truth and go to their respective Heaven.

There is no headquarter organization with a stated creed or dogma. Wicca is a, "Do your own thing" morality, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone. This is the extent of Wiccas "rules". Let's quote the Wicca Rede:

Bide within the Law you must, in perfect Love and perfect Trust.
Live you must and let to live, fairly take and fairly give.
For tread the Circle thrice about to keep unwelcome spirits out.
To bind the spell well every time, let the spell be said in rhyme.
Light of eye and soft of touch, speak you little, listen much.
Honor the Old Ones in deed and name,
let love and light be our guides again.
Deosil go by the waxing moon, chanting out the joyful tune.
Widdershins go when the moon doth wane,
and the werewolf howls by the dread wolfsbane.
When the Lady's moon is new, kiss the hand to Her times two.
When the moon rides at Her peak then your heart's desire seek.
Heed the North winds mighty gale, lock the door and trim the sail.
When the Wind blows from the East, expect the new and set the feast.
When the wind comes from the South, love will kiss you on the mouth.
When the wind whispers from the West, all hearts will find peace and rest.
Nine woods in the Cauldron go, burn them fast and burn them slow.
Birch in the fire goes to represent what the Lady knows.
Oak in the forest towers with might, in the fire it brings the God's
insight. Rowan is a tree of power causing life and magick to flower.
Willows at the waterside stand ready to help us to the Summerland.
Hawthorn is burned to purify and to draw faerie to your eye.
Hazel-the tree of wisdom and learning adds its strength to the bright fire burning.
White are the flowers of Apple tree that brings us fruits of fertility.
Grapes grow upon the vine giving us both joy and wine.
Fir does mark the evergreen to represent immortality seen.
Elder is the Lady's tree burn it not or cursed you'll be.
Four times the Major Sabbats mark in the light and in the dark.
As the old year starts to wane the new begins, it's now Samhain.
When the time for Imbolc shows watch for flowers through the snows.
When the wheel begins to turn soon the Beltane fires will burn.
As the wheel turns to Lamas night power is brought to magick rite.
Four times the Minor Sabbats fall use the Sun to mark them all.
When the wheel has turned to Yule light the log the Horned One rules.
In the spring, when night equals day time for Ostara to come our way.
When the Sun has reached it's height time for Oak and Holly to fight.
Harvesting comes to one and all when the Autumn Equinox does fall.
Heed the flower, bush, and tree by the Lady blessed you'll be.
Where the rippling waters go cast a stone, the truth you'll know.
When you have and hold a need, harken not to others greed.
With a fool no season spend or be counted as his friend.
Merry Meet and Merry Part bright the cheeks and warm the heart.
Mind the Three-fold Laws you should three times bad and three times good.
When misfortune is enow wear the star upon your brow.
Be true in love this you must do unless your love is false to you.
These Eight words the Rede fulfill: "An Ye Harm None, Do What Ye Will"

This lack of structure and loads of freedom is what draws many to these groups. These pagan faiths attract very intellectual people who feel different or special, those who have had bad experiences with mainstream religions, those who feel abandoned by God, free spirits who dislike structure, rejected by family or society, rebels, and those attracted to occult or mystical experiences. Some witches do not call themselves witches, but refer to themselves as Wiccans, white witches, or neo-pagans. In Wicca, Everyone has his or her own spiritual path to follow. Some are solitary witches, some prefer joining a coven.

Rituals and celebrations are linked to the seasons and moon phases. Qujia boards... Stay AWAY from Oujia boards... They are dangerous and they actually sell them in toy stores, this is a spiritual tool, not a game, Wiccas use it to contact spirits and it is NOT for children, technically not for anyone. Heed this warning. Meditation, visualization, invocation or seances, chanting, incense, burning candles, runes, crystals, tarot cards and special rituals trigger a sense of the mystical excitement, and fulfilling ones need to feel needed.

All of this is all customized to what you like... You pick your goddesses, you pick candles and/crystals, you pick how you like your altar set up, etc. Witches or Neo-pagans claim they practice white magic, using their power and abilities to bring about positive energy. They revere nature, support peace, and believe society cannot be at peace if we are out of harmony with nature or are mistreating our Mother Earth. Obviously focus on the creation and not the Creator, wrong mindset.

I believe many Wiccas, or I can at least speak for myself, many tired of organized religion. I think God is also disgusted with religion, it is man's legalistic corruption of faith and spirituality, especially in the Christian belief. This is why I hate when someone calls me religious, because I hate religion for the stereotype it has given, it is a lie. Leave your church if it doesn't know Jesus Christ by following His Word, just because a "Christian" Church is awful, doesn't mean Jesus is. Leave the Church, but don't leave Jesus, He loves you. He wants what's best for you and He would insist you leave the Organized Church System as well, any church that does not teach righteous doctrine, but cling to doctrine of devils. 1 Timothy 4:1. Salvation is not found in a religion, but is only found in Jesus Christ.

Let's move back on to exposing this religion... Wicca believes in the Divine Masculine and the Divine Feminine... Though, this tends to be a female dominated religion and strongly supports women's rights... Many Wiccans tend to distance themselves from Christianity and Islam because of what they claim is the proliferation of a patriarchal male-dominated religion that has historically silenced women in the church and taken their rights away in society to reduce them to no more than a Broodmare. I will debunk Feminism in a future article, how it doesn't support equality but strives for female supremacy, matriarchy. Ironically and historically, Wicca used to be a more male dominated religion, there being more male witches/sorcerers than female in many Pagan Circles or Covenants, a good example are The Druids.

In Christianity there is no need to sacrifice animals...God is a God of mercy, not of sacrifice. YOU are supposed to be the sacrifice, you are supposed to stop sinning if you wish to be called Christian. Romans 6.

Matthew 9:13 - "But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

Isaiah 1:11 - "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full (sick) of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats."

Hosea 6:6 - "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings."

Sexual freedoms is very much supported in Wicca, these sexual acts including heterosexuality, homosexuality, polygamy, sadism and/or machoism... Because they believe love is love and that love is a positive emotion that helps balance the world. I will state that this is false, I used to believe this and I was Pro-Gay when I was a Wicca... Now after my own Spiritual research I can state I am currently Anti-Gay. God is love and since homosexuality is a sin along with many other sexual practices it is confirmed it is not true love but a counterfeit. I will also discuss homosexuality and sexual immoralities in a future article.

And speaking of sexual immorality, let's speak about cheating on God, committing adultery to your Creator. When you worship other gods as we are commanded NOT to do... Exodus 20:3...

1.) Damages your soul.
2.) Hurts God when He sees His children harming themselves, their own spiritual bodies by being unfaithful to Him all while He warns us we are harming ourselves and we don't listen to His advice.

I think the Creator of our body and soul knows what harms are body and soul more than we do. If you've ever been cheated on... How do you like it? How do you like it when someone withholds love from you when you've done nothing but be good to them? Hurts, huh? Imagine how God feels, He DIED for every single one of us and many are still cheating on Him and being ungrateful.

Wicca is pure idolatry and an abomination to the True and Living God, Jesus Christ. Being unfaithful to Him, the God that died for us and faithful to gods that have done NOTHING for us. There is only One God that we are to serve according to Deuteronomy 6:4 and this God is the only God that can save you...

Isaiah 44:6-8 - "6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. 7 And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them shew unto them. 8 Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."

So there is no God, capital 'G' meaning, no other Supreme God besides Him, Lord Jesus. So Holy Mother Earth is NOT the supreme Goddess, nor is Sun or Moon.

Isaiah 45:20 - "20 Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations: they have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save."

To sum this up, you're damned to Hell if you do not repent and serve the Supreme God Jesus Christ.

Jeremiah 2:11 - "11 Hath a nation changed their gods, which [are] yet no gods? but my people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit."

No profit... So... What's the point in worshipping these gods? Lord Jesus says they're not even gods... So they must be demons...

Jeremiah 10:11 - "11 Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens."

So... "In Goddess We Trust..." will end you up in Hellfire along with your gods and goddesses...

Jeremiah 13:10 - "10 This evil people, which refuse to hear my words, which walk in the imagination of their heart, and walk after other gods, to serve them, and to worship them, shall even be as this girdle, which is good for nothing."

Imaginations... Hmm... This brings me to my point how all these pantheons and varies gods came to be. Sorry history lesson is a little late, but let's learn...

Nimrod was the founder of the first world empire at Babel, later known as Babylon. Genesis 10:8-12; 11:1-9. Nimrod met a woman named Semiramis at an inn/brothel in the city of Erech... For the King to have a prostitute as a Queen though would be scandalous, so Nimrod passed her off as a goddess that appeared to him, that she was a virgin that sprung up from the sea at Nimrod's ship landing, a perfect bride for the Babylon King. And thus Semiramis' name... The name Semiramis is the Hellenized form of the Sumerian name, Sammur-amat, or "gift of the sea." This is what established the varies Pagan religions today, Satan using Semiramis and Nimrod to create the idea of the first polytheistic religion.

Semiramis was the instigator of this false religion aimed at supporting her and Nimrod's rule. The religion she invented was a corrupted version of using the constellations to tell varies stories about World Creation, God, Satan and the End Times. In her corrupt depiction, Lucifer is rightful lord of the universe whose throne has been temporarily usurped by One whom we can recognize as the God of the Bible. Though the main element of this religion was Nimrod and Semiramis receiving more worship than Satan, emperor-worship... Which Satan is fine with as long as people are deceived and not worshipping Lord Jesus. This religion was promoted by the high priests and priestesses of Babylon, once the priests and priestesses were convinced of Semiramis' divinity, they went forth to the civilians of Babylon.

Semiramis retained full control over the religions hierarchy, having the minds and hearts of the people in the palm of her hand... So that when Nimrod found her pregnant with an illegitimate child, he became furious with his wife. King Nimrod threatened her with both dethronement and exposure of her true, whorish origin. She would not allow this and plotted against her husband.

During the New Year's festival at which Nimrod's rule was celebrated, there was a certain feast exclusively for the royal family and the upper echelons of the priesthood. During this feast, which included taking psychedelic and hallucinogenic drugs, a year-old ram was traditionally sacrificed by being torn limb-from-limb while still alive, and it's flesh eaten raw. This ram symbolized the old year passing into the heavens to allow room for the new year. Then a new-born lamb was presented, symbolizing the new year to be kept and fattened for the next new year's ceremonies. Semiramis, as the head of the religious hierarchy, directed the drug-crazed high priests, when the time came for the ram to be slaughtered, it was King Nimrod who would be torn to pieces. They did as their "goddess" queen demanded.

After Nimrod's death, circa 2167 BC, Semiramis promoted the belief that he was a god. She claimed that she saw a full-grown evergreen tree spring out of the roots of a dead tree stump, symbolizing the springing forth of new life for Nimrod as the Sun god. On the anniversary of his birth, she said, Nimrod would visit the evergreen tree and leave gifts under it. His birthday fell on the winter solstice at the end of December. Does Christmas come to mind? Christmas is not Christian, it is a Pagan holiday. Catholics are not Christian, either... It is a Pagan hybrid, as I've already explained back in my Catholic Article. The Bible rebukes the Christmas tree...

Jeremiah 10:3-4 - "3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. 4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."

When her son was born, she named him, Damu from the Sumerian "Dam," meaning blood, which in the later Babylonian language became Dammuzi, in Hebrew Tammuz, and in Greek Adonis. Semiramis and Damu were worshipped as "Madonna and child." Damu was also worshipped as a god because only a goddess can beget another god. As the generations passed, they were worshipped under other names in different countries and languages. Many of these are recognizable: Fortuna and Jupiter in Rome; Aphrodite and Adonis in Greece, Ashtoreth and Astarte, Molech and Baal in Canaan. Oh and statues in Rome of, "Mary and baby Jesus" that are in truth, not sculptures of them at all, but are Roman gods.

Semiramis remained in reign for her infant son, and ruled as absolute monarch for 42 more years. In order to avoid having to kill her son with the tradition she started by killing her husband on New Year's Day, she instituted an annual nation-wide sports competition, the winner of which would have the honor to become a god. Sound like the Olympics? The military of Babylon was divided into two camps, for her and against her, and a war that ended shortly with the priesthood manipulating the Babylonian people to oppose these rebels against Queen goddess Semiramis. Queen Semiramis was forced to build a system of walls, towers, and gates around Babylon to defend herself though. She was thus the first to build fortifications and her crown afterwards was in the form of the turreted walls of Babylon.

She regained the respect of her people back by reminding them she was not just a mere woman, but a goddess, a moon goddess, Queen of Heaven... Sound familiar Catholic Church? Jeremiah 7:18. As she raised her son, she bestowed upon him with a sense of divinity in the eyes of the priests and people as the means of retaining control as the divine mother without seeming to aggrandize herself. When Damu reached maturity, he demanded of his mother that she install him as king, she refused him and plotted a scheme to kill her son that threatened her reign. Damu found out though, and pre-empted by slaying his mother himself by the sword. He purged the priesthood of any who protest his action as well. Semiramis died after reigning as Queen of Babylon for 102 years. She is the Whore of Babylon, who established Paganism and whose spirit lives on in the Roman Catholic Church, the Roman Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon. Revelation 17. This is the historical roots of all the pagan religions of the past and the ones that remain today, every pantheon. Semiramis, was the model and original of every goddess and female cult figure in the ancient and modern worlds either directly or by derivation.

Before I became a Christian I was a Wicca, going by a name of Black Rose, as many Wiccas choose nature-based names... I'm stating here and now, as of July 2012 Jesus and my husband who He has given me has turned my black rose red... He is love. 1 John 4:8. There's the explanation for the drawing of the rose I have. So now I’d like to testify, Wicca was a religion that only stressed me out. I got attacked by incubuses many times during sleep, one attack that clearly stays in my mind to this very day. This religion also created some bloodlust... Which is strange since I was always the quiet/outcast, pacifist/gentle, shy girl growing up which attracted me to The Craft and the nature worship of the religion. The love and gentleness appealed to me, supporting animals and women... Even though I entered Wicca with gentle, nature loving intentions... This religion made me sadistic, especially sexually I will confess and Jesus is still cleaning up this spiritual mess for me. James 5:16. Thank you, Lord.

This religion or the demons rather... Made me love gory, surreal, creepy things, dark masculine clothes and heavy music. I now love mercy, truly tranquil things (not the Eastern Philosophy counterfeit), light-colored/earthy-colored feminine clothes, and Gospel Music. Only Jesus can make such a change and I feel so much happier. 2 Corinthians 5:17.

The goddesses I worshipped were far from perfect; I mainly stayed with the Japanese pantheon; my favorite goddesses were Amaterasu, Aphrodite, Brigid and I even tried to contact "Christian" deities such as Lilith, Mother Mary (since I thought it was okay to worship her because of my Catholic grandmother who I loved dearly,) and then I loved trying to contact Mary Magdalene, since I thought she was the wife of Christ. I loved Kitsune spirits, as well, and there were other spirits which I now know are demons... Mesberelle or Rosa who I was close to, who I later found out was a demon connected with another demon named Orphea in the same faction of demons who love to attack the heart of the soul, to only seduce and then cause emotional pain and numbness. These particular demons wish to destroy both love and hate, they cause most people to fall in love with logic and hate emotion, causing Trans-humanist ideals which I will debunk in my next article.

I didn’t like the bloodlust and materialism within The Craft. And love spells always turned out to work, to then only backfire... After doing a voodoo spell on a man I didn't like, making him sick, I feared I would kill him with the voodoo I did, so I'd always run back to Christ when a spell went wrong. The man lived, thank The Lord. Though, I always gave a half-baked repentance, of course. I got tired of Wicca and became Spiritual Non-Religious and looking back on it... Jesus was always there for me even if I wasn't fully faithful to Him and He answered my prayers by giving me a very good friend, my now husband, who, when I was debating what religion I should try next... My boyfriend at that time, (now husband) convinced me to try Christianity, telling me I didn't have to be apart of the organized church to be Christian.

You could say we helped save each other, thank God for putting him into my life and God putting me into his life... He who was fresh out of an abusive relationship, leading him to abandon Christ and do Occultic practices on his heart chakra, that I convinced him not to do because I recognized the demons and what the ritual would do, binding these demons to his soul... I knew I had to stay away and keep others away from the Occult, but... I hated Christianity or rather I hated Lukewarm Christianity and the people telling me I couldn't be Christian if I didn't attend a church, this was the main reason I strayed away from Christ to begin with. But Lord Jesus has drew me back to the faith that I really never had... Jesus has made me feel at peace, feel whole, meaning to life, Jesus is the best God to worship hands down compared to any pantheon god or goddess.

Why do you focus your worship on multiple gods and goddesses? Who have both negative and positive emotions, when Jesus only has positive emotions. Jesus does not ask for a blood sacrifice, for you to sign your name in blood, for he died for your sins unlike any other god or goddess.

Matthew 9:13 - “But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

I am aware that there are many other sects in Wicca; fairy worship, nature worship, dragon worship, etc. etc. etc... And they are all wrong, or at least not worth taking the chance for. All I can say is worship the Creator not the creation. It is no good to worship Jesus and other gods as well for the negative emotions of the god you worship only interfere and God wants your heart completely. 100%. No idolatry.

1 Corinthians 3:4 - "Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry."

Colossians 2:8 - “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”