Believers in the not-God – The Religion of Atheism

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

nofools

There are many religious people in the world. Perhaps the most religious group are those who follow a belief in atheism. Theism regards the creator God as real. The antithesis of theism, a-theism or not-theism, is a belief in the not-God.

God is real enough. Atheists contend that God hides himself and makes himself invisible. However, his creation is apparent for all to see and through his creation, the Creator is plainly visible. The Bible says:

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

[Roman 1: 20-25 (KJV)]

God is not hidden but apparent in everything we see in nature. The very complexity of life itself should sway any mind that this is not a random occurrence.

Those who believe in the not-God also believe in the not-Science of evolution. Evolution has proven to be invalid in that empirical science has never validated it experimentally. Yet these believers in the not-God choose to exchange the truth of God for the lie of evolution.

Science is supposed to be thinking God’s thoughts after him. God created the universe and all that is in it. The Laws of Nature express in mathematical terms how God is governing the physical universe around us. The growth of modern science began from theists who believed in God. It makes sense, then that those who chose not to believe in God believe in something that does not include God.

God is omniscient, scientist are partly ‘scient.’ Science comes from the word ‘scientiae’, which simply means knowledge. God knows all, scientist only know in part. It is a fool who thinks that they know more than God. Or worse yet, it is the fool who thinks they are so smart that they cannot include the reality of God into their thinking.

God does not argue with atheists. God simply calls them ‘fools.’ To argue with an atheist puts them on the throne equal to God or it takes God off the throne to be equal to them. Atheists consider themselves to be gods as they worship themselves and consider themselves to be wiser than God. However, God simply says, “FOOLS.” If they cannot get the hint and repent their judgement is their own.

Please pray this prayer:

God of heaven. I believe you are the Creator and Savior of mankind. I confess that I’m a sinner. I choose to believe in Jesus Christ, your Son, who died for me on the Cross for me that I may be forgiven of my sins. I ask for your forgiveness of my sin and thank you. Please bring me closer to you so that I may know you. By your Holy Spirit, please make in me a clean heart, a renewed spirit, and a right mind that I may do those things that are pleasing to you. Thank you, God, Father of the Lord Jesus Christ, and now my Father in Heaven. Amen!

The Separation of Science and State

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

In Science We Trust

Many people are asked if they believe in science. That is not a question asked by someone who knows what science is about. Science is about the test and not belief. Religion is deep in the heart of humanity, including atheists who believe in the not-God. Scientists have deep religious convictions about the world around them like all of us; they are not without unbiased views. Requiring law be based upon the beliefs of scientist is one extreme example of a violation of the No Establishment clause of the U.S. First Amendment. It’s time to argue for a separation of science and state.

The notion of global warming is unproven. Weather is stochastic and even chaotic at times and science cannot analytically predict the future of short term or long term weather patterns; it can only measure them (gather data) through observation. Recent argument of scientists about science is one that leaves the work of science behind. The work of testing a thesis, gathering data and math from the test (or observation), and the value of science in terms of predictability, causality, and technology, are all lost in the endless diatribe of scientists defending their belief systems. Instead of complaining about science, do the science!

As I’ve outlined in a previous article, Polar Warming, the data of science shows that we are dealing with polar warming and not global warming. The cause of this is nature made CO2 and not manmade CO2. The beliefs of scientists are not well founded without data and the data shows a different story than what is claimed by them and their belief systems.

Scientists are now preparing to march around the world to complain about their beleifs. Spits and spats will flourish over the next few days/weeks as the true believers in the religion of science find a home with those who believe in the ‘good earth.’ Environmentalists have long complained about the ‘good earth’ and ‘bad man’ and when something bad is happening to the earth, it must be ‘bad man.’ So, goes the basic tenant of faith for these global warmers and environ-maniacs. However, it could just be a problem with the earth and not man; why not begin researching that?!

As scientists are in denial about the real problem of polar warming, we are facing an inept ability on the part of science advocates to do the work of science to discover the causality behind the data that shows we’re dealing with polar warming and not global warming. Incorrect analysis of the problem will lead to incorrect solutions and pursuing manmade CO2 from power consumption may lead to a growing problem even if these global warmers succeed in what they seek to accomplish (remove light bulbs, etc.). Treating the wrong cause to the problem will lead to a worse problem than ever before.

Leave the work of legislation to those who know about the rules of order that govern law making decisions. And leave to scientists the work of science to show through observation and experiment the causality of one’s convictions. Otherwise we’ll have a group of sciencrats (akin to theocrats) warming up to the power centers of our country whose sole objective is to rule according to subjective belief and not according to the laws of nature.

The Light of Creation

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

Light of Creation

Argument from Science

20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

1 Timothy 6:19-21 (KJV)

The false science Paul was referring to is philosophical science of the ancient philosophers and not modern empirical science. Experimental (empirical) science began with Galileo in the 17th century when he told us to couple mathematics with experiments to discover the laws of God’s nature. Modern cosmology and cosmogony is largely philosophical and tells us that matter existed at the beginning of the universe. This matter apparently had a Big Bang that then formed all the worlds around us including our own world. However, this may be nothing more than science falsely so called.

The philosophy circulating in the days of the Apostles would lead one to believe in a chaos of matter that preceded the present order of things. Certainly, myth taught this and so too did the ancient Greek philosophers who borrowed from the ideas of ancient myth. But the Bible teaches something clearly different from myth. God spoke light into the darkness to create the universe.

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Genesis 1:1 – 3 (KJV)

Light first entered the darkness, not some primordial mass that had a Big Bang. Matter first is a primary tenant of evolution (materialism) but if we accept the Biblical account of creation one may present an thesis of energy first instead.

If we turn to the world of empirical science, we find the thesis that has been tested, which shows that the square of the speed of light, coupled with matter, equals energy (e=mc2). The idea of matter first is not required except by those who believe in the ideas established by the standard cosmology. Instead of focusing on the materialism of the Big Bang, one could focus on a universe that began with energy first. We can take God’s Word literally and say that light was first spoken by God into the darkness and matter and energy entered into the universe as a result.

Consider that all matter has electrons that move at the speed of light. Atoms, once created by light, are at the foundation of all matter. All atoms have various levels of energy wherein electrons travel around the nucleus of an atom; these levels are called valences. If the energy of an atom increases, electrons move to a higher level or quantum of energy. And if an electron moves to a lower level of energy, it emits a photon of light. Matter is continuously sending and receiving light. As God spoke light into the darkness to create the universe and all that is in it, we can say that we are born from the stuff of light.

Evolutionists believe that due to a Big Bang nucleosynthesis, the lighter elements were formed from original chaotic matter. This idea of matter first becoming hydrogen and helium is a part of the standard cosmology. Afterwards, stellar nucleosynthesis transformed the lighter elements into heavier elements that eventually became you and me. Evolutionists believe that we are formed of the stuff of stars. But a better idea, taken from the truth of the Bible, is that we are made of the stuff of light; the same Light that God spoke into the darkness to create the universe.

Ancient mythical ideas of matter first persisted for thousands of years and eventually the Greek philosophers tried to make rational sense out of the physical universe. Anaxagoras once postulated that the universe was made up of tiny particles and that these particles could be divided infinitely into smaller particles. Leucippus and Democritus, who were later called the Atomists, offered a different explanation that matter could only be divided finitely into one small particle. And when the discovery of the ‘atom’ came along, people began to agree with the atomists philosophy of a limited division of matter into ‘atoms.’

But ‘atoms’ can be divided into smaller ‘subatomic’ particles called electrons, neutrons, and protons. The smallest particle called an ‘atom’ now has smaller particles that are called ‘subatomic.’ Is there really any such thing as an ‘atom’? The term ‘subatomic’ is an oxymoron. While what we call an ‘atom’ definitely does exist, the philosophy behind it may be flawed. Subatomic particles can be further divided into quarks, etc., etc. Physics has proven that there are many more divisions that can be made of matter and Anaxagoras may have been right. Or was he?

As we are finding by experimental science that matter can be divided into smaller and smaller particles, there are levels (quanta) whereby these particles have a stable form. The elusive Higgs Boson is considered the smallest of subatomic particles and its mass is measured at 125 GeV/c2. Expressing mass in terms of energy (eV/c2) is a common practice in particle physics relating mass to energy in terms of e=mc2. Eventually, dividing matter ever smaller may realize a point where it no longer remains matter but energy. Speculations being what they are (often unproven), we may postulate that matter can only be subdivided so far until the smaller quantum of matter reaches a quantum level of energy.

Reversing this may shed some light on how matter began in the first place. An energy first cosmology would provide a mechanism whereby energy first invaded the universe. If energy first invaded the universe of darkness faster than the speed of light, when the speed of light slowed down to a constant velocity as it is at present, then matter would have been derived from this energy as light slowed down. If e=mc2, then energy first will yield matter when light reached its present velocity. And as the quantum of energy began to develop into the quantum of matter, this would lead to larger particles and eventually the creation of what we call atoms.

Even those who still hold to the idea of a Big Bang where matter was the first thing in the universe (where it came from no one knows) say that the universe inflated faster than the speed of light. This fact of the standard cosmology leaves the door open to other ideas of the origins of the universe such as energy first. An energy first cosmology/cosmogony will provide an explanation of the origin of matter and the idea of matter transmitted across the universe faster than the speed of light.

Returning to Genesis chapter 1 we find that God created the universe by His spoken Word. His first word was Light. And through this we have the foundation of the physical universe in which we live. We do not have to subscribe to the standard cosmology to make sense of what we see in the universe. We can continue to rely upon God’s Word to make sense of the universe in which we live.

Argument from the Bible

We read many passages in the Bible about the Creator God. We find many theories about God’s creative work in theology and philosophy. But what does the New Testament have to say about God’s work in creation?

Turning to the book of Hebrews, we read in chapter 11 verse 3:

3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

This verse tells us how to understand Genesis chapter 1 verses 1 – 4:

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

God did not create the universe from preexisting chaotic material. God spoke Light into a great void of nothingness when He said, “Let there be light,” and the light entered into the darkness. This we understand by faith as we take God at His Word.

The usual translation of this passage in Genesis leaves some people thinking that chaos (void) was first created by God or that chaos and matter preceded God and then God gave order to the chaos. This, however, is a false reading of Genesis 1:2, born of ancient myth, as Hebrews 11:3 shows. The things we see are not made by the things that appear but are made by the Word of God.

The actual word for “created” in Genesis 1:2 is the Hebrew word “bara,” which means to create only as God can; often this means creation from nothing. God can create something from nothing and he can also create something from something. God, like man, can fashion something from existing materials that He also created. This type of creative work is referred to in the Hebrew text of Genesis chapter 1 as “asah.” Mankind can only fashion something from existing materials whereas God can create with his spoken Word. We are clearly told in Hebrews 11:3 that God spoke the worlds (universe) into existence.

God uniquely created (bara) many things with his Word: Stars, plants, fish, birds, and animals. Each were created complete and whole as God saw that they were “good.” God created by divine acts with his Word in some passages of Genesis chapter 1 but in other passages His creative work used the stuff that was already available that he had created beforehand. Mankind, however, was made from the clay of the earth.

Argument for Salvation

The Word of God is the foundation of God’s creation and Light was the first word spoken. We even see in the New Testament where Jesus is God in the beginning who created all things as the express Word of God. In John chapter 1 verses 1-5 we read:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

As the Word in this passage is Jesus, the first word that was spoken was Light. Jesus is the light of the world and that light shines into the darkness not only of creation but also of the human heart. This is a light that provides mankind with spiritual way through the darkness of life.

Again, we see in this passage the idea that all creation began with the Word of God. Light entered the darkness of the universe, which created the physical stuff we see all around us. In essence, we were physically created by the stuff of light and we are also recreated by faith in the person of Jesus Christ who is our spiritual light. Our darkened hearts are enlightened by His Word in us and as we walk in the Light of Life (Jesus) our lives grow brighter and brighter.

Please pray this prayer:

God of heaven, you are the Light of Life. I believe in Jesus Christ, your Son who died on the Cross for me. I believe that he paid for the penalty of my sin, which I admit I have done. I ask for your forgiveness of my sin and thank you for your love. Please bring me closer to you so that I may know you. Please shine your Light into my heart. By your Holy Spirit, please make in me a clean heart, a renewed spirit, and a right mind that I may do those things that are pleasing to you. Thank you, God, Father of the Lord Jesus Christ, and now my Father in Heaven. Amen!

Presidential Nepotism

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

TrumpNepotism

The President’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and Steve Bannon are two advisors in the Trump administration who are having problems. This is a problem within the administration that few have dared to address. Nepotism is problem where people in power use their power to hire relatives. The problem with this is that family members are not qualified for the positions they take leading to incompetence in office.

Constitution Daily published an insightful article last year outlining the history of Presidential nepotism since the founding of our country. Federal nepotism is nothing new but since 1967 it has been illegal. The Clinton administration tried to use extra-legal arguments to dismiss this practice when Hillary Clinton worked on behalf of the administration to push for government run health care. The practice of Presidential nepotism has since been given a political pass but it may still be illegal; it certainly should be unethical.

The First Lady’s office has now become “The First Family Office” run by Ivanka and Melania Trump. Ivanka will be an unpaid staffer of the White House while her husband, Jared Kushner will be a senior advisor to the President. The role of ‘advisor’ is another legal caveat that allows Trump family members to work within the White House. If anyone has worked in a setting where nepotism or favoritism of any kind was present, they know the problems it creates in trying to do their job professionally.

I can understand having close relatives of the President available and on call. The job of President is stressful, to say the least and having family present is an emotional boost. But having advisors whose role is greater than the sum of their experience is a problem for the nation. Steve Bannon has some experience of one variety or another and has dealt with difficult issues for years in the public’s view. He certainly earned the position as a senior Presidential advisor beyond any favoritism derived from marriage.

The present squabble between two of Trump’s advisors may be nothing more than a tempest in a tea pot but as President Trump told his two advisors to work it out on their own, it appeared to be a move to relieve his son-in-law of a favored status. However, Bannon has been removed from the national security council as a result of this meeting, reinforcing the nepotism that Kushner enjoys.

I’m no advocate for Bannon or Kushner but I am an advocate for competency within the White House. The President is serving in a public role for all American people and his advisors must have the highest qualifications and experience. Nepotism should never be allowed in any public trust, whether a company, a Church, or public office, even if they become an advisor. The role of a son-in-law, daughter, or wife is not sufficient qualification for such important roles.

Attack on Syria – Who Will Govern Next?

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

Democracy

Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad presided over the recent chemical attacks against his own countrymen. President Trump responded with an attack on the Syrian base that launched this war crime, a crime against humanity. Now what? If this brutal dictator was removed from Syria tomorrow, it would not lead to a democratic republic. The consequences of this attack against Syria must lead to a government that serves all people in Syria but it is naïve to think that will happen overnight.

Before the Russians intervened in the Syrian civil war on behalf of the Syrian government two years ago, the Muslim community was aggressively killing Christians and others who did not submit (‘Islam’ means ‘to submit’) to their way of living or believing. There was no burgeoning democracy in Syria just waiting to be released. What is waiting in the shadows was a new dictatorship waiting to govern by sharia law.

Assad was no clean soul but he did provide a safe haven for non-Muslim people in the midst of a predominantly Muslim nation. Dictatorships are not good governments but are a natural result of an unruly country. When people are predisposed to lawlessness, God will allow for the government that is necessary for the people. Government is not man’s idea, it is God’s idea. And when people cannot be governed in any other way, they will have a government that leads to dictatorship and some sense of civil order. Can Assad stay as the political leader of Syria. Definitely not. But once he is gone the civil war will continue as before and militant Muslims will seek to establish a new dictatorship far worse than before.

Russia’s Vladimir Putin has appealed to the traditions and morals of the Russian people to win elections over the last 16 years. His challenge in Syria was similar to what he faced in Russia, to prevent the Muslim terrorists from gaining a stronghold in the region. The Russian people are keenly aware of the threats that militant Islam poses, almost as much, and perhaps at times more than the nation of Israel. Russia is an ally in the fight against militant Islam if America wants one.

Iran, however, is not an ally of America and seeks the destruction of both Israel and the U.S.. Iran is a terrorist state that sponsors international Islamic terrorism and destabilizes states like Palestine and Lebanon. Iran’s influence in Syria could lead to further terrorist activity in the region even if ISIL is defeated. Replacing one rogue state with another is foolish; replacing one terrorist regime with another is insane.

This region is filled with failed governments. The Palestinian West Bank and Gaza do not represent governments that put the interest of the people first; instead they put the interest of terrorism against Israel first. These are rogue states along with Lebanon and Syria. The international community cannot expect a democratic republic to succeed where the influence of Islamic terrorism persists. It is in the interest of the international and local communities combined to prevail in these countries with an intervention that removes the influence of international Islamic terrorism before establishing anything similar to a representative republic.

The sword has been drawn and the cruise missiles hit their targets. Now it is time to consider how to put the sword back into the scabbard and build a new government for Syrian. It is time to quit playing ‘patty cake’ with the rogue states and begin sponsoring the overthrow of the Iranian religious dictatorship by the people of Iran. As government is God’s idea, a representative style of government that respects all people without submitting them to the sword is required. This is the type of government that is needed in each of these rogue states. Liberty under the law; liberty and justice for all. That is the call!

Call to Prayer:

God of Heaven, sovereign over the nations, please intervene on behalf of the Syrian people. By your mighty right hand, please defeat the enemies of humanity. Defeat those who kill innocent people in the name of justice or religion. Aid those who seek to establish your justice in the region. And help those of us who are embroiled in a war against international terrorism. We seek your wisdom and guidance without which we are fools. Thank you for your patience with us and help us grow in the knowledge of your righteousness. And thank you for helping our resolve to do what is right. Amen!

The Coexist Cult

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

I was a history major with a minor in religious studies at the University of Texas at Austin. I thoroughly enjoyed my class on the Reformation of Europe as we learned it from a secular Jewish perspective. But as I began to review the curriculum more, I saw that the idea of Coexist was everywhere. I knew then that all religions are not the same; they do not have equal merit. So I decided that I was not going to pursue that major/minor further and changed my major to engineering instead (graduated in 2009). However, I still have a love for the history of ideas, which is the reason I blog.

The idea of Coexist began in Jerusalem in 2000 with a contest for artwork that would describe such an idea. The C in the artwork is the Muslim symbol for Islam, the X is presented as the Star of David that is the symbol for Judaism, and the T represents the Cross, which is the symbol for Christianity. Although the artwork is harmless in appearance it is dangerous in that the religious symbols do not refer to the same God. The attempt to combine all monotheistic religions into one betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of their differences historically and theologically.

coexist 1

Islam does not follow the God of the Bible. Their Quran (9:29) tells Muslims to, “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.“

The People of the Book refers to Christians and Jews. Muslims are not supposed to coexist with them without first subjugating them to Islam. ‘Islam’ means to ‘submit’ and that is what people from other religions are supposed to do. There is no coexistence between those who’s religion requires domination and separation. I whole heartedly applaud those who do coexist without violence in Israel but this symbol tells us that the idea of coexistence can be based upon religion, which it cannot. This is a secular fallacy based upon a misunderstanding of God and those who fight ‘the People of God.’

Aspects of the Christian Bible were later perverted by the Gnostic Gospels and included into the Quran. The notion that Jesus did not die on the Cross came from the Gnostic Gospels and are included in the Quran. Jesus paid for the penalty of our sins on the Cross by his death on the Cross. This denial of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection is an insurmountable obstacle between the religions of the Christians and Muslims.

During the days of the Crusades, Christians drew the sword in the name of Jesus to defend Europe against invading Muslims armies. Later, the same sword was turned against the Jews in a dark chapter of the history of Christianity. There is no justification for the killing of thousands of Jews and modern Jews distrust Christians for the many massacres that occurred 1,000 years ago. The idea of coexistence between these three monotheistic religions is doomed to failure. Coexistence cannot depend upon religion. It must be a work of God.

From the humble beginnings of a monotheistic idea of coexistence came the introduction of a new set of anti-religious and irreligious symbols for coexistence. The nuclear peace symbol replaced the O; The E is sometimes presented as the symbol for science (e=mc2); the I is topped with a satanic pentagram; and the S is in the shape of the yin/yang. Here, we find an odd mixture of irreligious ideas coupled with religious monotheism.

coexist 2

If one were trying to insult all at once those who practice monotheistic religions, this set of symbols would do it. The group this appeals to most are those who have rejected traditional notions of God for some other form of belief. While there are aspects of religious freedom or tolerance presented here, the satanic ritual of killing cats has nothing in common with Christian, Jewish, or Muslim teachings. The symbolism, in fact, is going from bad to worse and the light of truth is dimming rapidly with it.

Now enter into the mix the idea of gay rights and equality for those who deny the morals of monotheism. The E has been modified with the idea of gay equality. The idea of gay marriage may also associated with the ‘e=’ sign.

coexist 3

The more this symbol changes the less it represents a respect for the person of God in any way. One cannot know who God is without knowing first that God is a Holy God. Morality is not a subject of debate but of obedience. Practicing sin is not practicing any relationship with God. Yes, God is Love but God is also Holy. Homosexuality is neither love nor Holy. It is an immoral lifestyle.

Our societal norms are changing rapidly. Children are being exposed to morally corrupt ideas of social equality that have nothing to do with the love or morality of God. Recently, Google held a contest in which school age students were given a chance to show off their artwork online; a noble thing to be sure. But as this idea of Coexist has devolved in less than 2 decades, we are witnessing through their eyes the deterioration of our societal norms.

coexist 4

A High School age student recently won this competition, rearranging the letters of Coexist to spell out the name of Google adding the symbols of gay and transgendered people to it. Here again, the monotheistic religions are present but snubbed as the perverted notions of the LGBT community are coupled with them. This is an example of the influence of the modern educational system on impressionable children. This is what is being taught to them today.

If you grew up in Sunday School as I did, you learned that God loves all the children of the world. That is what I was taught yesterday.

coexist 8

We even sang:

Jesus loves the little children,

All the children of the world.

Red and yellow, black and white,

All are precious in his sight,

Jesus loves the little children of the world.

This song carried the lyrics written by Clare Herbert Woolston that were inspired by a verse in the Bible.

Matthew 19:14 (NKJV)

14 But Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”

The idea of universal love came from Jesus. Yet this idea has been perverted by a modern, godless generation.

One year ago, at a college prep school (Choate, a High School for exceptional students), the idea of diversity was promoted along with the artwork of one of their students (below left). Many colored hands, including the idea of the LGBT rainbow, is depicted in this show of support for diversity. This similar to what has been presented by Christians (below right) for years showing the idea of God’s Love for all people. The colorful hands in the shape of a heart is a symbol reflecting the fact that Jesus Loves the Little Children.

The idea that ‘Jesus loves the little children’ has practical consequences for society. The Civil Rights movements of the 1950s and 1960s were supported within the Christian Church using this idea of diversity based upon the Love of God in Jesus Christ. Without the idea that we’re all created in the image of God, unity among diverse people is impossible.

coexist 9

The unity of mankind can only be based upon the fact that all mankind is created in God’s image. That is why Jesus loves all the little children of the world. We are seeing in modern society a shift from the unity of mankind, based upon a respect for God, to a rejection of God in society based upon the cult of coexistence.

The word ‘cult’ like ‘culture’ is based on the word ‘cultus’, which is Latin for ‘religion.’ At the heart of America’s culture is the Judeo-Christian ethic. The LGBT community, seeking inclusion into American society, rejects the culture of American society and refuses to include people of Biblical faith and morals into their vision of a better society.

We are even seeing the old idea of Jesus loving all the children of the world becoming a Christ-less idea of multi-culturalism. Co-opting the message of Christianity without including the person of Jesus Christ, multi-cultural ideas are slowing eroding the Love of God and replacing it with the love of man. The image below on the left is from the idea that Jesus loves the little children of the world. The image below on the right is of multi-culturalism.

coexist 10

The idea of coexistence should depend upon the human heart responding with compassion to the image of God in all of us. Yet the history of the coexist movement has led to a growing rejection of God and His moral identity. God is Love and God is Righteous. Love without righteousness (morals) is sin. The Coexist movement no longer respects the traditions of monotheistic religion, has added irreligious and non-religious symbols (including satanism), and sponsors the immoral ideas of the LGBT movement. Coexist has become a cult that refuses to coexist with a society that believes in a moral God and traditional moral values that define our culture.

The Death of the Lord Jesus

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

The Via Dolorosa, or painful way, is the path tradition says Jesus took through his trial, torture, and final execution. The Passion of Christ begins at Mount Olives and continues through the Garden of Gethsemane and into the Lion’s Gate of the city of Jerusalem, which is at one end of the Via Dolorosa. Through many stations of the cross, representing the many events in the night between his trial and crucifixion, the path along the Via Dolorosa continues until one reaches the Church of the Holy Sepulcher where tradition says Jesus was crucified on the Cross. Pilgrims follow this path during Easter (Pasch) but there another, more accurate route they may follow.

In a previous article, I explain in some detail where the alternate site for Jesus’ crucifixion could be – outside the eastern wall of Jerusalem on a hill near the old Temple. This site, unexcavated, is likely to be the site where the Lord Jesus fulfilled his mission to save mankind by his death on the Cross.

This site is across the street from the Tomb of the Virgin, along Jericho road (Route 417) just outside the old city wall (see map below).

 Golgotha2

The hill just west of the Jericho road and east of the old wall of Jerusalem, is situated between the Ophel road (derech HaOfel) and the Lion’s Gate road (derech Sha’ar HaArayot). This hill, bounded by these 3 roads is also bounded by the Yeusefiya cemetery that is extends along the old city wall. The Lion’s Gate, also called “Sha’ar Ha’aryot” in Hebrew, also referred to as Saint Stephen’s Gate, is where the Via Dolorosa begins and ends at the old city wall.

For more than a millennium, pilgrims have been following the Via Dolorosa along the path described above with the believing that the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus occurred at the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and not as presented here above. Helena, mother of Constantine, had been told by locals when she visited Jerusalem in the 4th century C.E. of this site northwest of the Temple and pilgrimages have followed her path ever since.

As I have explained in a previous article, this and other sites lack merit for the place of Jesus’ crucifixion and burial. One fact that is missing in two traditional sites for Jesus’ death is the fact that while He was dying, the crowd witnessing His death also witnessed the veil of the Temple being torn. This could not have been seen from sites west of the Temple but it could have been seen by those on top of the hill just outside the Lion’s Gate at the end of the Via Dolorosa.

Josephus speaks of the temple veil:

…before these doors there was a veil of equal largeness with the doors. It was a Babylonian curtain, embroidered with blue, and fine linen, and scarlet, and purple, and of a contexture that was truly wonderful. Nor was this mixture of colors without its mystical interpretation, but was a kind of image of the universe; for by the scarlet there seemed to be enigmatically signified fire, by the fine flax the earth, by the blue the air, and by the purple the sea; two of them having their colors the foundation of this resemblance; but the fine flax and the purple have their own origin for that foundation, the earth producing the one, and the sea the other. This curtain had also embroidered upon it all that was mystical in the heavens, excepting that of the [twelve] signs, representing living creatures. (Wars 5.5.4)

The Jewish Encyclopedia online also speaks of the temple veil:

At the entrance to the outer Temple hung a veil embroidered in blue, white (byssus), scarlet, and purple; the outer Temple was separated from the Holy of Holies by a similar curtain. The outer curtain was folded back on the south side, and the inner one on the north side, so that a priest in entering the Holy of Holies traversed the outer Temple diagonally.

It is clear that there were two veils that were a part of Herod’s Temple in Jesus’ day. Three passages in the Bible refer to the veil being torn in two.

Matthew 27:51-53 (NKJV)

51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom;

Mark 15:38 (NKJV)

38 Then the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.

Luke 23:45 (NKJV)

45 Then the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was torn in two.

Just which of the two veils was torn in two is made clear from Matthew’s account where he said “behold”. One could not behold the inner veil being torn in two but one could behold the outer veil from outside the Temple if they were to the east of the Temple as it faced the east. And the site of Golgotha suggested as being on the hill at the end of the Via Dolorosa is a perfect site from which the Temple veil could be seen being torn in two. The other two sites for Jesus’ crucifixion west of the Temple cannot account for this event.

On Palm Sunday, we celebrate the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem through the Golden Gate and then on Friday we commemorate his passage through the Via Dolorosa to Golgotha where he was crucified. The capture of Jesus at the Garden of Gethsemane, where he and his disciples often gathered, began Passion of Christ. He was taken into the city of Jerusalem either by the Golden Gate or the Lion’s Gate and was escorted through a series of civil (3) and religious (3) trials before being crucified at Golgotha. It should be clear that the final path of the Via Dolorosa led to this hill just outside the Lion’s Gate in a direction opposite what is being followed by pilgrims today. Excavations are needed to confirm this as the actual site of Jesus’ crucifixion.

Jesus was likely buried at the Mount of Olives in a garden tomb following his death. The Mount of Olives is the likely place where Joseph of Arimathea, a rich man, owned his tomb. Jewish tradition tells us of people from antiquity who wanted to be buried there as interpretations of Zechariah 14:4 suggest that this is where the first resurrection of the dead will occur when the Messiah comes.

Zechariah 14:4 (NKJV)

4 And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, Which faces Jerusalem on the east.

This prophecy was fulfilled and recorded in Matthew 27.

Matthew 27:51-53 (NKJV)

51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split,

52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised;

53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Jesus understood throughout His ministry the significance of His travels between Jerusalem and the Garden through the Lion’s Gate as the path He would later take for His crucifixion as His Father told Him. And while Jesus hung on the Cross for the sins of mankind, on the eastern side of the Temple, the Temple was at His right hand and the Garden of Gethsemane, at the foot of the Mount of Olives, was at His left hand. He was situated in between the Temple and His Resurrection as He was being torn apart for the sins of mankind.

The death of the Lord Jesus is significant, even if we don’t know the exact details of history. The message of the Bible is not one of history, per se, but of divine instruction. The events in which these teachings are presented are true and finding their historic setting is important but not critical. The path Jesus took through His Passion along the Via Dolorosa will continue to be a focus of historians and pilgrims for a long time to come. But the path that Jesus takes to your heart is focus of concern right now. God wants to share His Passion with you!

Please pray this prayer:

God of heaven, I believe in Jesus Christ who died on the Cross for me. I believe that he paid for the penalty of my sin, which I admit I have done. I ask for your forgiveness of my sin and thank you for your love. Please bring me closer to you so that I may know you. By your Holy Spirit, please make in me a clean heart, a renewed spirit, and a right mind that I may do those things that are pleasing to you. Thank you, God, Father of the Lord Jesus Christ, and now my Father in Heaven. Amen!

A Cinder-Ella Story

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

Cindy

Once upon a time, there was a beautiful young girl named Ella who was abused by her step-sisters. She had great potential but could not realize it due to their constant intervention. She had to work like a slave girl cleaning the house and doing menial tasks. When ready to rest for the day, she slept by the fireplace whereupon she became covered in ashes and cinders. Such a sight she was, this little girl covered in black soot. Her sisters changed her name to Cinder-Ella.

The Story of Cinderella is very old and can be traced to ancient mythology. The origin of our recent version of this story came in the late 17th century in France. Cinderella’s story is timeless in that people all over the world suffer needless cruelty at the hands of others who are jealous of the beauty (inward or outward) that others possess.

Ella as a name means beautiful (Daniella, Eleanor, etc.). Cinder is a name refers to the burnt pieces of wood that come from a fireplace. Nigger is a bad word that comes from the Spanish term Negro and means Black. When Ella was given her nickname, Cinder-Ella, they were calling this young girl Nigger Ella. Calling people derogatory names is as old as the 1600s and even older.

I recall the time I met a young Black woman who told me her story. She grew up in a part of a city that was predominantly Black and poor. She didn’t know she was poor until she went to a school across town due to forced school bussing. After going to predominantly White schools, she saw how much people focused on her color. She said that over time she learned to consider the looks people gave her as being a matter of perception rather than of fact.

This attractive young Black lady said that if she wore a fine dress and went into a room with a number of White women and they looked her up and down from head to toe and then turned their noses up, she said she would consider these women to be racist. But if she went into the same room wearing the same dress with the same number of Black women and they too looked her up and down from head to toe and then turned their noses up, she said she would consider these women to be jealous. What’s to keep White women from being jealous of Black women?!

I met another young Black woman who was very attractive and extremely smart. She had only recently graduated from college with an earned degree in Chemical Engineering and was preparing for a job interview with 3M. She went to her interview and afterwards I asked how she did. She said that she didn’t think she was going to get the job and complained bitterly that they didn’t like her because they were racist. I didn’t have the heart to tell her that she was so arrogant due to her obvious good looks and smarts that the people who interviewed her probably reacted to her extreme self-pride.

Perception of racism is one thing; yet there is a reality still to account for. Bigotry will always be with us. And I’ve learned over the years that bigotry is color blind. It is a human emotional/mental virus that can affect anyone of any color and cause them to dislike another person of a different color. It is a spiritual problem as much as otherwise yet through prayer we can conquer this disease of mankind.

Rev. Dr. King Jr. told us to look past color to the character of another. Sidney Poitier said that he didn’t want to be treated any better or worse than anyone else because of his color; he just wanted to be treated like any other person. Treating people as fellow human beings is what it is all about. The Golden Rule, treating others like you want to be treated, is the rule to follow. Treating people like people, regardless of color is what it is all about. It’s all about peeps; and all peeps are peeps.

The hero of the Cinderella story was of course Prince Charming. To many Dr. King is this Prince. However, the true Prince of Peace is the Lord Jesus Christ. He puts a robe of righteousness on us by faith in Him; and through Him we grow in His goodness and grace. He can rescue the soul from the abuses put upon it by others; and from being an abuser of others ourselves. Grace upon grace and mercy upon mercy is His judgement for those who will receive it.

The hidden saga of abuse of a little girl called a Nigger by her step sisters has been lost to time. Cinder-Ella is a story of many women who are abused for any number of reasons and hope for a way out. Your Cinderella story may be different from others but one thing is timeless, God rescues the broken hearted, restores them to their rightful place, and pursues them as a Holy lover for eternity. Receive your Prince Charming – Jesus; and live happily ever after.

Please pray this prayer:

God of heaven, I believe in Jesus Christ who died on the Cross for me. I believe that he paid for the penalty of my sin, which I admit I have done. I ask for your forgiveness of my sin and thank you for your love. Please bring me closer to you so that I may know you. By your Holy Spirit, please make in me a clean heart, a renewed spirit, and a right mind that I may do those things that are pleasing to you. Thank you God, Father of the Lord Jesus Christ, and now my Father in Heaven. Amen!

Putin’s Russia

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

OrthoPutin

Russian President Vladimir Putin is scheduled for another election cycle this year as Russia will elect their next President in March 2018. His drive to power over the past 2 decades is apparent. His approach to religion is less apparent. With a new election comes challenges for the Russian people and Republic. Perhaps the greatest challenge Russia is facing is answering the question, “Is it time to vote for a new Premier?”

Putin’s rise to power came following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in Russia. He followed in the wake of President Boris Yeltsin working with him in 1997. In 1998, Putin became the head of the FSB (Federal Security Service), which was the old KGB. His rise to power included a review of the various branches of government in Russia. As the head of a Commission, Putin was supposed to recommend various limits to the government but did not make any and cancelled those made by his predecessor when he became President. Notable in Putin’s career is the increase not decrease in centralized power.

Putin became Prime Minister in 1999 under President Yeltsin. Just before the new millennium, President Yeltsin resigned office (31 December 1999), recommending Putin take his place. While Prime Minister, Putin led Russian forces into Chechnya. His fight against the Islamic Republic gained Putin incredible support with the people of Russia. After Putin became President in 1999, he won the subsequent election a few months later in 2000 by a slim majority. No doubt his popularity with the Russian people came from his fight against an Islamic/terrorist state.

Putin’s continued use of military power against Islamic extremism was seen in Syria. Russia’s long history involves many episodes of invasion from Muslims trying to take over the country. Russia is second only to Israel in being surrounded by Muslim states; their concern about Islamic terrorism is not without merit.

Historically, Russia has supported the Orthodox Christian Church amidst Muslim threats of invasion and terrorism. Putin also appears to be sincere in his religious commitment to the Orthodox Church. While he has supported the traditional Church, Putin has recently used his power to end religious freedom in Russia for evangelical Protestant Churches. Historically, there is much in common between Protestant and Orthodox Christians but Putin has decided to favor the former State Church of Russia.

It is clear that the Russian people and President Putin are on the same page when it comes to certain moral issues – homosexuality. The Russian people are not subject to the rationalizations of the American media in favor of this perverted lifestyle. There is no ambiguity in Russia; homosexuality is not allowed. This clear position of morality, connected to Russia’s long history with the Orthodox Church, is supported by Vladimir Putin.

Putin has won elections for four consecutive terms with his nationalist policies that favor a country defined by its own values and not those of the West. It would be hard to call Putin a Christian moral crusader after so many of his political opponents have died mysteriously. Putin worked hard to obtain his power and it appears he is not likely to give it up quickly.

Limits to power are not a tradition in Russia. And the expectations of a Democratic Republic have been lost due to abuses of the same under Yeltsin. Putin may can run for office once again as term limits are not a part of the Russian Constitution. Term limits began in America after FDR’s four terms and our Constitution was amended to limit them. The next election cycle should have been in 2016, but was delayed and will begin in 2018. It is up to the people of the East to determine what the people in the West will see.

In the West, Putin is seen as a threat but at home in the East, he’s seen by many as a national hero. We’ll see what the people of Russia decide over the next year. News makers in America will no doubt try and sway the outcome of the elections as they favor progressive views and not traditional ones. Whether or not Putin is sincere in the religious and political views the Russian people share, it is clear he is their apparent champion.

Pray for the Russian Elections

My prayer for Russia is that they will choose a leader who will establish religious, political, and economic freedoms for all Russians to enjoy. And that with freedom, equal justice for all Russians will be available according to the rule of law. May God truly bless Russia with good leaders. Amen!

The Russians are Coming & They’re Here!

© Original content written by James R. Carlson

Reagan2

June 2004

Do you recall the days when communists attempted to take over the world? Attacks on democracy witnessed an infiltration of communist activists into democratic states. This was a very real problem throughout the world led mostly by the Soviet Union of Russia. However, we were told during the days of the ‘cold war’ that communists never infiltrated their number one enemy, the United States. Most especially, they never bothered to influence or infiltrate the American Media!

That is of course foolish. Communists not only infiltrated the media, they determined to influence the outcome of elections in America. The business of the media has always involved influencing the political circus we call government. So it is more than possible that Russia’s communist infiltrators entered the ranks of the media to do the same. Communists, socialists, liberals, progressives are nearly synonymous. It would not be hard for communists to find a home in the liberal media. Ronald Reagan even worked to expose them in the entertainment media institutions. There is no chance that there was no chance that communist (Russian) operatives did not enter into the U.S. media! (triple negative)

Reagan

Reagan Testifies Before House un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) October 1947

Now, with the end of the ‘cold war’, we should not expect that the media includes former communist agents (unless they’re past retirement age). Communism is no longer the mission of the Russian Bear. What we still have, though, is the manipulative efforts of the media to influence the outcome of elections with or without their former communist friends. Liberals learned their lessons well.

The media now claims that the Russians are influencing elections from the outside of the media while the media is still trying to influence the outcome of elections each and every election cycle. And given the frustration that the media is going through, having supported Hillary Clinton only to lose, her campaign was apparently exposed by the Russians to her defeat. How dare the Russians influence elections without the approval of their former comrades in the media.

Is this the end of the socialist leading to communist (excuse me – liberal) activity of the media? Can we expect liberalism to suddenly become conservative? Should the media look out for Russian hackers peering into the shadowy world of liberal politics? Are they going to have hearings on the un-American Activities of Russian spies? (What a turn of historical irony!) The power-hungry media never lost their appetite for power before, during, or after the communist influence. They’re not worried about the influence of the Russians as much as they’re worried about losing their own power.

The media is power mad and now they’re mad about losing their power. How dare anyone influence the outcome of the election when their liberal agenda was so close to being fulfilled with a new left wing operative closely linked with the liberal media agenda. Don’t people know the rules? When the liberal media tells you who they will support for political office, you are not allowed to disagree. That’s what freedom means; at least that’s what they want their freedom to mean. Freedom for them and not for others.

Get a grip. The American People said no to the liberal agenda, the liberal Democrats, and the liberal media. You lost for a good reason. You were leading us in the wrong direction. The American People are so used to the manipulation of the vote by the media that they simply rejected the same old tired tactics of the past. Be angry media! Stay angry! The freedom of the Press has always belonged to the People and the People decided to take it and our country back from you. Complain all you want about Russia; we know who is really trying to pull the strings behind the scenes during the campaigns for public office. The Russians aren’t coming, they’re already here, in the media.