Newsmax taking Aim at Obama

I'm not sure if anyone who reads this have read Newsmax but it is always conservative and pro-Republican. I just read an article asserting that the reason why Obama is ahead is because people are to preoccupied dealing with the economy falling all around us to pay attention to Obama's negative aspects. With a title like ACORN could cause Obama's Fall I know you can see how they are trying to spin this. They enumerated the following "negatives":

1. ACORN caught registering fake voters.
2. Association with Jeremiah Wright
3. Association with Bill Ayers
4. Association with Antoin "Tony" Rezco

Let's take these one-at-a-time shall we:
1. Voter fraud and stealing elections is reprehensible but the article only implies and does not prove that Obama has had anything to do with it. Further, the article admits that Obama is so far ahead ACORN's alleged actions would not have made an impact. Finally, do the Republicans really want to talk about stealing elections? I mean with Jeb Bush, the brother of G.W. Bush being governor of the very state that had electoral "issues" in the 2000 election no one could not say that those shenanigans can't be placed at Bush's front door could they?

2. C'mon!!!! Does anyone truly think that Wright hates America and white people and by extension so does Obama? If you do then maybe you need to watch a whole sermon by the man and look up his record and biography. Even if you disagree with the man, you can't ignore his service. He served America in the same war John McCain did.

3. Obama was a child during Ayer's activist days. Since when does "activist" equals "terrorist".
It seems silly to think Obama has anything to do with that. Ayers has moved on. So should everyone else. Ayer's picture is on the left.


4. I had to google this guy (picture on the right) because I hadn't heard of this scandal. Apparently he's in jail because of financial corruption and government contracts in Iraq. So. Considering how Bush, Chaney, and other Republicans are mixed up in all of that too, do they really wanna throw stones because Obama knows a guy who was mixed up in it?

I'm not saying Obama walks on water or turns water into wine or anything. But the Republicans are going to have to better than that to win this thing if winning means scandalizing Obama and his reputation. The arguments they are using do not work because they are silly. If they try to hit him on abortion or same-sex unions they risk alienating some voters, making the Democratic ticket stronger. Stick a fork in this one folks.

Marvel Comics Trailer: Ultimatum

We really have come a long way haven't we? Nowadays, because of the tools the Internet provides, Marvel generates movie-quality trailers for their comic book stories. On November 5, Marvel is releasing a new series. It's called Ultimatum. Here is the trailer as an example:

Got a PS3 or PSP?

I just got a report from G4TV that Sony is releasing updates to the firmware that run PSPs and Ps3s. Firmware is software that is embed in the hardware and tells the device how to function. Here is the Report

Sony's bringing in the latest firmware updates for the PSP tomorrow, according to their officially "unofficial" site, Three Speech. The PSP 5.00 firmware update will feature the Playstation Online store that allows direct downloads of games, trailers and more straight to your PSP

The PS3's latest 2.50 update allows in-game screenshots "supported on a game-by-game basis", improved Trophy interface and more. But, as the unofficial blog states, Flash 9 will be enabled with the system's internal net browser. Sweet! For a demo of the latest PSP firmware update, head to Playstation.Blog.

Decision Time!

Barak Obama has been accused of being a "socialist" because he wants to "spread the wealth around". We all need to realize that we can't have things both ways when it comes to everyone being taking care of or having capitalistic free market. We seem to want have government out of our lives - spending, buying, and running our lives the way we see fit. However when we get mistreated or can't get what we think we deserve we tend to want the government to step in and protect us. We can't always have both. Where do you draw the line? If a white person does not want a black person living in the house next to him, where does his right to live in the neighborhood he wants ends and the black person's rights begin? Without government intervention, black people had no rights to live where they wanted or to vote or to go to school where they wanted. If we went the direction of "leave-it-alone" economics completely people will get left on the wayside. The concept of "pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps" is great. What do you do about the people who don't have shoes? How do they pull themselfs up? The question is: what kind of country do you want to be?

Terrence Howard will need to find another job

At first I did not believe it, but I have seen it confirmed from 3 sources: Terrence Howard will not be playing James Rhodes/War Machine in Iron Man 2. After I picked myself off the floor, I heard that he was let go because financial negotiations fell through. We know what that means: Howard asked for more money than Marvel and Paramount wanted to pay him. Who can blame him? Iron Man made over $500 million dollars. He may have asked for a salary comparablele to Robert Downey Jr's is what I think. I think he deserves it because James Rhodes is very popular in the comic books and one of my favorite characters whether he is standing on his own or supporting Iron man. Well that's the bad news. The good news is that he is being replaced by a great actor. Don Cheadle, whom I also like to watch. So I think that this may not be a bad thing for the movie after all but I will miss Howard because I was looking forward to seeing him in that role. I'm glad that Don will be filling the role too because had they picked a white actor I would have gone off. cry of "racism" would have been leveled for sure and brought to bear on the studios.

Gerard Butler-After Dark: Obama's Economic Rescue Plan

Gerard Butler-After Dark: Obama's Economic Rescue Plan

Yes, Virginia, there is still Racism in 2008

Ok, While I would like to chalk up this video to pure and simple ignorance, I don't think I can. I mean given the man's age, he's gotta know that he is offending black people everywhere and does not care! The fact that I have never heard of any kind of denunciation from either McCain or Palin says to me that maybe they endorse this sentiment as long as it means this man votes for them!

The look on their faces reminds me of the photo above of a bunch of "good" white people at a "picnic" cheesing at the camera around a tree with 2 black men hanging from it. They are brutally beaten with the nooses still around their neck. The white guy in the front kinda look like Hitler. Look at the following video and see the parallel.

More Finger Pointing

The financial meltdown has been blamed on the banks loaning money to people who could not pay for the loans - the mortgage fiasco that has lead to a multitude of foreclosures. Of course some have found a way to blame this on Obama. They are asserting that Community Organizers in general (ACORN in particular) strong-armed banks to make bad home loans. Here is a video making this connection. Even going as far as taking a statement Obama made in 2007 saying that the he wanted this group to help him make presidential policy. As if Obama would allow them to make his mind on how he would run the government.



Here are blogs of people trying to make case that community organizes caused the economic downturn. I find it laughable because everyone knows that the banks made those loans to make a quick buck! GREED is the cause of the housing bubble and now that Bubble has burst and it's going to take God to make sure we don't burst with it.

Awesome Web Publishing Tool.

I have just found out about a new publishing tool for the web. It's called Issuu. It's free to use and to join. It allows you to generate and build your own online books and magazines! I really like it!! You can make and share your own content and have access to the magazines and book created by people from all over the world for free. Some of the content is very good! You can even post content from the site on your blog or website! You can even print pages that you want.

Now the bad news: This service is meant to be free and cannot be used in and of itself to generate income...not like the tool I shared in a previous post. And I can see no way to put video or audio into your publication. But If you just want to share some content that would have been deployed in a printed format on a global platform, Issuu is your tool.

I have an example I'd like to share. I did not make this but it led to me finding out about Issuu. I mentioned that I attended Wondercon earlier this year. The organization behind it, called ComicCon, publishes a magazine and in it's latest issue they summarize the event I attended. I had a great time.

Get your own - Open publication

By the way, you can click on it to open another larger window so it's easier to read!

Leave James T. Harris Alone

I don't know why it took 3 days for me to hear about it but a black man on October 9, 2008 at a rally in Milwaukee, WI spoke out publicly against Obama and endorsed McCain. His name is James T Harris and while I don't agree with his comments I think he has the right to make those comments.



Since this has aired on CNN, Mr. Harris has been ridiculed and his life threatened. If you haven't thought about it but the way the Black community treats black Americans who are conservative and/or Republican are marginalized and looked down upon. It's like to be black enough you must be a Democrat. When did it start? I'd say in the 1930's when Black folks were voting from F.D.R. What about before. Well from 1865 - 1878 during Reconstruction black folks voted Republican because Abraham Lincoln was a Republican and the Republican party allowed Black men to be voted into Congress and southern state leadership. It all ended in 1878 because between that and the 193o's there weren't many black people voting. We seem to have forgotten that you can be black and a Republican! There is a great video I saw that talks about this:



I'm not going to speculate on whether Harris was paid or genuine in his comments. But I saw an interview with him on tonight on CNN. He brought up an interesting question: If it had been a white man who said exactly the same thing he did would it be handled differently in the media? They did not allow him to answer this question. But I know what the answer is: YES!!! I've seen video of two white men say the same thing to McCain that Harris said! It didn't even raise an eyebrow. We don't even know what their names are. Why? Because we expect white men to say that. Instead of demonizing Harris, I'm far more interested to know why he holds the views on Obama and McCain that he does. That and I'm curious if his wife is white or black. That would explain a lot. It is good to remember many famous black people have been Republicans including Martin Luther King, Jr.

Bible Basics: The Personhood of the Holy Spirit

I was sitting in Sunday School class this morning and the subject was talking about the church as a community. The subject was Growing Community from Acts 6:1-15. Verses 9 and 10 jumped up at me. Look at what I mean from the NIV:

Opposition arose, however, from members of the Synagogue of the Freedmen (as it was called)—Jews of Cyrene and Alexandria as well as the provinces of Cilicia and Asia. These men began to argue with Stephen, but they could not stand up against his wisdom or the Spirit by whom he spoke.

What jumped up at me was in verse 1o "the Spirit by whom he spoke" because it says that the Spirit is a "whom". Only objects that have person hood are referred to as a "whom" in English. I checked the KJV and the New American Standard Version and the way they are worded the point is obscured by the translation. I checked my Interlinear Greek text and found that it matched the New American Standard version the closest. Here is the New American Standard version:

But some men from what was called the Synagogue of the Freedmen, including both Cyrenians and Alexandrians, and some from Cilicia and Asia, rose up and argued with Stephen. But they were unable to cope with the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking.

See how verse 10 conveys the same point that Stephen's wisdom and power came from the Holy Spirit. Since the New American Standard Version more closely matches the Interlinear Greek I think that maybe trying to convey the person hood of the Holy Spirit was not something that Luke was trying to convey in that verse. He does make the point elsewhere in the book of Acts so that the doctrine of the Trinity is not depended on Acts 6:10.

A Kinder Gentler McCain?

Yesterday, McCain tried to put the genie back in the bottle. After weeks of some of the meanest political mudslinging I have seen against anyone leveled at Barak Obama, McCain was booed at his own rally when he made positive remarks about Obama. What would you expect after weeks of poisoning people's minds against Obama? As a whole the human race is not very bright. Jesus said that we are like "sheep without a shepherd" (myself included). After several weeks of telling people what a boogie man he is and that we should be afraid of him, there are going to be some people who will believe it. People who already don't trust black people. Some people who are reasonable intelligent may believe the hype. Here is a video clip from YouTube from that speech yesterday:



Did you get a load of that woman at the end who said that she has researched Obama and then said that he was an "Arab". That was the reason she doesn't trust him. Obama's father was not from from Saudi Arabia or from any Middle Eastern nation! Anyone who has done the miniumum of research knows that. There is real anger being directed to Obama by some McCain supporters. I think they are really afraid that Obama may win. Some people are getting nasty and calling Obama a socialist. Check out a video from October 9, 2009:



I think its fear of Obama's race coming to the surface. It was okay when they thought that he had no real chance of winning the White House, but now it is too close to reality.

A stupid Argument

Have you seen the John McCain Ad that tries to link Obama with an American Terrorist. See what I mean:


So what if Bill Ayers was a terrorist. Let me explain what I mean: It is a thin line between a patriot and a terrorist. In the end, it only matter what side you are on. If you were a British citizen in the 1770's and 1780's then George Washington would have been considered a terrorist. I know that some people might construe those words to mean that I sympathize with the Muslims who attacked America on September 11, 2001. I don't. What I am saying that Osama Bin Laden and all who have worked with him must be caught and executed because they will attack us again. Just like if the British had gotten hold of the signers of the Declaration of Independence the British would have executed them. Does anyone really think that Ayers and his compatriots thought of themselves as terrorists when they were blowing up stuff in protest over the Vietnam war? I imagine that they thought of themselves as patriots. Ayers was tried 40 years ago and found "not guilty" of any crime. He is now an upstanding member of American Society in Chicago...not in Guatalamo Bay!!! He seems like a different person than he was back in the 60's. When Ayers was acting as terrorist in the 60's, Obama was 7 or 8 years old!!!!! How can he be blamed or implicated in anything Ayer's group was doing?

Is Obama Psychic?

On July 30, 2008 Barack Obama predicted that the Republican campaign in general and McCain in particular would turn ugly in terms of personal attacks on him. Was he psychic? Nope. Just a black man who is more aware than I've actually thought about the pervasive Racism in this country. I found a great video on YouTube that does a great job in taken that Obama's speech from July and intercut it with current speeches and ads by McCain and Palin. You will see that everything that he said they would say is being said. I knew Obama was right in his prediction. He's black and of course they are going to try to "lynch" him.

I don't even know how to title this one

I just heard that Fox News Ran a news story criticizing Newsweek for running a magazine cover featuring Sarah Palin in close-up without re-touching the photo. There were two female commentators going back and forth about whether or not this was an insult to Palin.



The assertion of it being insult was because you can see all the imperfections of her face. Imperfections that everyone has, but most of time are "photoshopped" out of the picture so that the portrait looks more flawless. At first I thought the accusation was groundless because I doubt that I would have noticed any of those things had I been looking at her in person. That I thought until the point about the headline for the article on the cover was brought up: "She's one of the folks (and that's the problem)."
This close to the election, such a statement is certainly trying to say something unflattering about Palin. And taken with the picture I can see how people could be offended. What do you think?

Mugen Character Development Part 1 - Black Panther

Disclaimer - I thought I would start posting the development process for making my first development character. If you are not interested in mugen or video games please feel free to ignore these.

Still here? OK, good. One of the first things you need to make mugen characters is what are called "sprites" the art of the characters. They are typically several pictures of the character is various poses and positions that can be animated together. This for me is the hardest part because I'm not much of an artist. Sometimes sprites are posted by people that can be used. I thought that I could use some of those to make my own characters and save the hard part of art later. Much of these completed sprite sets are of characters that are already complete. I have been thinking about what the Black Panther character should be able to do. The suits claws on his costume is made of vibranium so when he blocks he should be able to cancel out energy based attacks I'm thinking about a few special moves right now:

1. Double -strike Claw to his opponent - high
2. Double -strike Claw to his opponent - low
3. He runs up to his opponent and throws multiple combinations of punches and kicks for several seconds causing maximum damage.
4. He flips backwards over his opponent striking high with the claws
5. He flips forwards over his opponent striking high with the claws

As of yet. I have been able to find only one Black Panther sprite. It is pictured above and I found it at the Scrollboss website.

Oprah's Anti-Christ Agenda

I use Google's RSS feed reader to keep up-to-date on what the new videos on GodTube are. I found one called Oprah's Anti-Christ Agenda and it is very interesting. Take a look:



The video draws a link between Oprah's endorsing and teaching New Age Spirituality and the coming Anti-Christ. I liked the video. It contains a lot of truth. I'm not sure if I agree with all the conclusions. The fact is that Course in Miracles is lie. For every single quote the video uses to show how the Course contradicts the Bible there is a verse that says opposite what the Course says. No kidding! If the author of Course in Miracles is truly channeling a spirit its not Jesus. It has to be a demon because it flies in the face of what Jesus has already said. That part of the video is 100% true. I know because i have read the book it is a far-off as a 2 sided triangle! It's also could be true that Oprah is intending to get a high-level cabinet position if Obama wins. She has surely pumped so much influence and money into his campaign that he is going to owe her. In my opinion, a new cabinet position dedicated to peace is not going to be too much to ask for. Most people are not going to see a problem with that. If the video's producers are correct and the goal is to establish peace based on New Age Spirituality then we have more than a problem. There will be no real peace and it will provide the perfect climate for someone like the Anti-Christ to come up. I say this because it's happened before...in the the 1930's with the rise of Hitler and the Nazis. This would be profoundly worse because this would be at a global level given our economic situation and the speed at which we can now travel and communicate.

Let me be clear: I am not suggesting that Oprah is the Anti-Christ or is voluntarily and consciously laying the ground work for his emergence. I am merely saying that things look "fishy". I would not try to make as a strong connection between Oprah and the Ant-Christ because I truly do not know who he is or how he will come to power. I just see some of the signs. It is best that we put our trust in the only one who can save us - Jesus!

For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect—if that were possible. - Mark 13:22

Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. - 1 John 2:18

Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. - 1 John 2:22

but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. - 1 John 4:3

Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. - 2 John 1:7

A cool applet

I found the following applet on Iron Man Armor. It is great! I also highly recommend the site. Go ahead and play with it. Move your mouse around. You can find the applet at the following url: Java Boutique

Gerard Butler-After Dark: McCain: Keating Economics

Gerard Butler-After Dark: McCain: Keating Economics

Shadid Lewis and James White

Shadid Lewis is a young black man who is an Islamic convert from Christianity. I have heard of him from James White who has been dealing with Islamic apologists. Shadid Lewis uses the imperfections and problems in the Black church as his primary reasons for turning his back on Christianity. The fact is that there is not a lot of Black churches that deals in fundamental theology. Therefore many people do not get their questions answered. So some people are left thinking that Christians have no way to answer the questions they raise therefore Christians must be wrong. I happen to be one of those people that had I not been raised in a family and in a church ( a black church by the way) where I was encouraged to ask questions and seek answers I would not have been able to be a Christian either. In addition the church I go to now is very heavy into study and digging into the word of God to learn all we can.

I can identify with Shadid Lewis because I have been in church services that was heavy on emotionalism and short on teaching the Bible. I was left feeling wanting. If that is all he experienced then I can see why he may have been thinking that it was inappropriate for his pastor to play the saxophone. I found it amazing that Dr. White agreed with him. There is nothing wrong with praising and magnifying God. I'm the first to admit that some of us get caught up in "the shout". We don't feel like we have had church unless people shout, even if the best preaching and teaching took place. Don't get me wrong...there is nothing wrong with the shout or speaking in tongues. Often I have experience services where you could straight feel the Holy Spirit. But if there is no teaching and no one is learning you have to ask if the Holy Spirit is actually moving. Dr James White is unfamiliar with the traditions and standard ways of conducting services in a black church. We tend to take Psalms literally - praising God loudly, exuberantly, singing, and with as many different instruments as we have people who can play them. We get so happy thinking about what God has done for us we have a party every service to celebrate. Unfortunately sometimes people get caught up in the party and don't know why we are celebrating. They just like the music. I think that is what happened with Shadid Lewis. No wonder he thought Christianity in the Black church was empty if that is all he experienced.

Here is a video James White posted in his blog and YouTube in which he is shown interacting with Shadid Lewis and making comments on how to Muslims twist scripture to deny basic Christian teaching.

Censoring YouTube

I was reading through my RSS feeds tonight and I came across a frightening warning posted by Dr. James White on his blog. I think its very interesting how a movie like Bill Maher's new movies, Religulous, can make fun of Christians and religious beliefs and doctrines without any challenge but its human rights abuse to honestly express what the Bible teaches verses what Muslims teach and believe. We can both be wrong as Maher asserts without proof, but we both can't be right. We can't allow the dialog to be censored or silenced. The Gospel is being preached...yes even on YouTube....and people's lives are being touched by Christ. This must continue. I have pasted Dr. White's comments below and hyperlinked it twice (yes, its that important). Please read them.

How Long Will We Be Able to Openly Speak the Truth About Islam?

10/04/2008 - James White

KUWAIT CITY : Kuwait Human Rights Society (KHRS) Chairman Dr Adel Al-Damkhi has asked the government to put pressure on the officials of ‘YouTube’ — a video sharing website — to delete all derogatory statements about Islam and Muslims from the site, reports Al-Seyassah.

Urging the authorities to take the necessary legal action in case the website fails to erase the statements, Al-Damkhi stressed “uttering profanities against Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the worst form of human rights violation in the world. Attacks on the values and tenets of Islam are extremely dangerous and unacceptable.”

Al-Damkhi pointed out the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) strongly condemns attacks on the holy prophets and religions. He confirmed KHRS recognizes the importance of freedom of conducting scientific research, exchange of information, and significance of the latest technologies and media on human lives, but it is against how ‘YouTube’ depicts Islam. He said this is an outright violation of the human rights of millions of Muslims all over the world.

Bible Basics: Bible Translations

Pastor Hampton of Grace Bible Church from Alabama has video on GodTube in which talks about why the King James Translation (KJV) is the true translation everyone should use. I think that he is a sincere Christian who loves God and is living all he knows how. Unfortunately it is wrong to teach that the KJV is the ultimate translation and that people are wrong if they use a different translation. Translations are not divinely inspired. The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew. The New Testament was written in Greek. Because of textual variants and issues in translating these languages into English the only way to be sure exactly what the Bible, short of learning to read Greek and Hebrew (which are not the same today as they were then) says is to study multiple translations and really digging into the text. Pastor Hampton makes a lot of assertions. Here is his video. I will go through each of his assertions and compare the New International Version (NIV) with the KJV. On his church's website he has documented about 200 differences between modern translations and the KJV. I'm not going to cover all of them in this post, but I recommend reading The King James Only Controversy by James White if you want to dig into this. It is worth it.



The list of scriptures in blue are from the KJV and the NIV is in red.
Here is a list of assertions that were made in the video:

1. Assertion - Matthew 18:11 is left out of other Bibles but not the KJV.

The reason why newer translations do not have verse 11 is because it is not in the oldest manuscripts. The KJV was translated from the best manuscripts at the time. Remember that the KJV version was completed in 1611 AD and has undergone numerous revisions over the past 400 years.

2. Assertion - Mark 1:2,3 KJV says "prophets" and other translations say Isaiah when vs 2 is from Malachi and vs 3 is from Isaiah therefore proving that the newer translations are lying.

As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

It is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way" — "a voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.' "

The thing about Mark1:2,3 is that when you look in the Greek text, it reads as the NIV translates it. Why? I have two ideas. Pick one. Either the NIV is basing its translation on an older manuscript than the KJV used or the text the KJV used was redacted by a well-meaning scribe at some point who knew that Mark 1:2 was quoting Malachi 3:1 and Mark 1:3 was quoting Isaiah 40:3. He may have thought that he was providing clarity. And from a modern western European mindset, the same mindset from which Pastor Hampton was speaking, it is a little more clearer to render the verse that way. However from a 1st Century mindset attributing the quotations to Isaiah would not have been seen as an error. When quoting from a group of prophets often Jews would attribute the quote to the "major" prophet. We still refer to Isaiah as a "major prophet" and Malachi as a "minor prophet" today. "Major" does not mean better or more important. It just means that his book was longer relatively speaking.

3. Assertion - Galatians 2:16 "faith of Jesus Christ" in KJV and "faith in Jesus Christ" in other versions.

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified

Pastor Hampton makes much a difference in the NIV rendering and the KJV rendering. According to him, how you understand this verse dictates whether or not you believe that you are saved by your faith or by Jesus' faith. According to my interlinear Greek text either rendering is correct. To Hampton "faith of Jesus Christ"means that we are saved by Jesus' faith. He is right we can't have it both ways we are either justified by our faith or by Jesus' faith. I think that he is misinterpreting the text. No where in all of scripture do we see Jesus needing or having faith. By definition of what faith is (Hebrews 11:1) why would Jesus need faith? Jesus is God incarnate (see my posts about Jesus and the trinity). We are justified by our faith in Christ. Which is not a work because God calls us to himself through Jesus. That is why we believe and have faith in Jesus. This isn't a small point. It's the crux of what the Gospel is and is not.

4. Assertion - Luke 2:33 has the KJV saying "Joseph and his mother" but other translations call Joseph Jesus' father.

And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.

The child's father and mother marveled at what was said about him.

Again I think Pastor Hampton needs to look at the Greek text. It reads like the NIV. I think either rendering is fine and does nothing to mess up what we know about Jesus. The preponderance of scripture does show us that Joseph was not Jesus' biological father but Jesus did submit himself to Joseph's and Mary's authority as his parents just as we are supposed to do to our parents. Recall Luke 2:51 says

And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart.

Who is the "them"? Joseph and Mary!!! Therefore there is no problem with how the NIV renders Luke 2:33 and besides if you look at the Greek text (the 21st Edition of Eberhard Nestle's Novum Testamentum Graece) you see it the way the NIV translates it.

Conclusion
Why I believe that Pastor Hampton is sincere and only has the best of intentions, I must disagree with the conclusions he draws in his video. The modern translations are in many ways superior to the King James Translation because they draw on older manuscripts and the older the manuscript the more accurate it should match the original text. The KJV is an awesome translation and it deserves recognition as one of the finest English translations ever. All translations have mistakes because people make mistakes. The original texts are infallible, God-breathed truths - inspired by God. 2 Peter 1:16-21 says

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

These words cannot be used to describe translations. This is why I read and compare many different English translations including the KJV.

New Tekkaman Blade Gif

Good news! I've found a way to update the previous gif I made by getting rid of the Black Background! I used Paint.net and it took all of a minute on each image to pull off.

Bill Maher: Sarah Palin and "Religulous"

You may be aware that the talk show host/comedian/social commentator Bill Maher is promoting his new movie being released on October 3, 2o08. He was recently on The View talking about his views on Sarah Palin and on what his new movie is about. Take note on how they are sitting: the two women who agree with him are on his right and the two that disagree with his world view are on the left. I find I disagree with him about everything he says about religion but somethings he says about politics is true (ie Sarah Palin is not ready to be President if something befell McCain). I don't think that there is any need to insult her however. Here are somethings about religion I disagree with. He says that all he is doing in the film is asking questions. The problem is that he has his mind already made up and he's not looking for the facts. He presupposes that there are no rational answers to his questions. The joke for him is that people believe in things that can't be true. He never seems to be looking at if these things are true or not. The funny thing is that as far as I can tell he never asks anyone who can give reasoned answers. He believes that to have faith means that you have no reason. He really needs to sit down with a good apologetics text or theologian who has studied these points. There are good answers!

Here is an example of some of the questions I have heard asked in the movie's trailer and some answers
1. Why doesn't God just destroy the devil and abolish evil? The devil is not the only evil in the world. We are all evil compared to God and exterminate it completely means that he would have to obliterate all of us...past, present, and future. Instead he chose to redeem some of us because he wanted to. Aren't you glad God chose option B and not Bill Maher's solution!
2. Does it make sense for people to live 900 years and greater? Why not. At the beginning of the human race the earth had none of the polutants that shorten human life. There is also evidence that at one time there was a shield of ice that protected the earth from more radiation than is filtered out now. The Bible hints at this when it talks about the Sky separating water under the sky gathered together to from "seas" and water above the sky in Genesis 1:6,7,8. Some have also postulated that the water above the sky is where some of the flood water came from.

I think Sherri Shepherd made good case. If you don't know who God is why don't you ask Him personally. You can see Bill's attitude of scorn...deriding her and calling her crazy because God spoke to her. If God is not talking to you, then I think you are the one with the problem. Hebrews 11: 1-6 says what faith is and it does not match Bill's definition.

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for. By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible. By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead. By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God. And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

I was also disheartened to hear that the film has blatant lies and falsehoods in it. Lies repeated by Joy Behar during the show. Some accuse Christianity of stealing its concepts from mystery religions, Egypt and other Gods. Anyone who has seriously researched the subject knows that these are urban legends. The "god" Bill mentioned being born Dec 25, dying and being resurrected is the pagan god Mythras. If you want to know why you can't equate Mythras to what we know is true about Jesus please read Lee Strobel's book "The Case For Christ" where he talked to the world reknowned expert on the Mythras religon and he said that there is no parallel or equal can be found to Jesus at any time. There has been no one else like Jesus before Him. Nor will there ever be anyone else like Him. Make no mistake, He is coming back. Are you ready? Research it for yourself. Don't blindly believe the hype. If you do then you are falling for the same kind "faith" that Maher accuses religious people of having. If anyone wants to know more about this please drop me a comment and I'll put some information together. Here are the videos of Maher on The View and the trailer for his movie. There are people who will be lead astray by Maher. Don't be one of them.

Animated Gifs

Back in the day (say 1996) when you didn't have access to streaming video technology and FLASH, but you wanted to show moving images on a website what did you do? You used an Animated Gif. An Animated Gif is just a collection of images that the web browser plays to give the impression of movement...same way television and movies work. Today, we have many more options. Do you use a Java Applet? What about FLASH? Why not just stream the video over the Internet in real time? How do you know which to use? Everyone has their own opinions. If the media is short and doesn't need sound, I like to use Animated Gifs to save on bandwidth. They are perfect as avatars on social networking sites and forums. If I need sound but it's still short, I like to use Java applets because you can even have interaction. I think more people are using FLASH in this situation but I am personally more familiar with the applet route. If I don't need interation but the media needs to be television quality or better in audio and video, and the media is several minutes long, I like to stream it over the Internet from YouTube, MySpace, Blogger, GodTube, and VM Direct or from a site or blog that allows embedding. In this day and age you find that you sometimes have a file in one format but you need it in a different one. No Need to panic because somewhere somehow someone has written software to do the converting for you.

Here are some animated Gifs I created:

So what is the difference between and Animated Gif and an AVI (video file). Look below




The Gif is on the left. The video is on the right. The video can be longer and moves a little smoother.

I decided to go back to animated gifs when i realized that they could be used to make mugen characters and vice versa. I've decided to make a character from which I can get sprites before I try something like Black Panther that has fewer than no sprites. I like the Anime series Tekkaman Blade. I have found no Tekkaman Blade character but I did find a Super NES video game based on the series. I can get my sprites from there!

Here is an example of sprites gleaned from the game and about 11 of them animated together. I still need to learn how to make the background transparent. Mine is on the Right.

Here are some informative links for learning how to create Animated Gifs:
So, You Want An Animated .gif, Huh?
Tutorials: Sprite Ripping
Make Animated Gifs
Ripping and Using Sprites

Software that you may want (Just "Google" them):
ImageTasks
GIF Construction Set Professional
Easy Graphic Converter
Ulead GIF Animator
Free FLV to AVI Converter
Any Video Converter
Free FLV Player
SWF and FLV Toolbox
Camstudio

McCain is a liar

I saw the following McCain advertisement on YouTube. I have embeded it below. The problem is that the ad implies that Obama made zinging and overwhelming criticisms of Obama and his policies and Barak, simply conceded the point as if he had no better ideas.



C-Span has posted the presidential debate that was held 09-26-08 I have posed it below. If you look at what was really said by Obama and McCain you will see that Obama only admitted when McCain spoke the truth and then expanded on the ideas and Obama did challenge McCain where they disagreed. The ad misrepresents what really happened and tries to make Obama look like a child compared to McCain. I am highly offended

"Dark Bailout"

I just came across this video in YouTube. It is a post originally from
overthinkingit.com by Matthew Blinkie I can't think of a better title other than the one given to the posting on YouTube. It's a commentary on George Bush's speech earlier this week in which he proposes that the government use $700 billion dollars to buy up bad debts of corporations and banks to keep the economy from total collapse. The hope is that the government can take over those corporations, and when the economy recovers, the government will be able to make a profit because the assets purchase will be worth more than what was paid for them. The rational is that it worked before on a smaller scale I suppose. Besides that I'm not even sure I understand. The editor of the video point out the silliness of the situation using a scene from Dark Knight, edited together with Bush's speech. It's great. I'm afraid I agree with the Joker. How about you?

Here are Mr. Blinkie's comments:

Our society’s institutions are collapsing, and we have lost confidence in our leaders to save us. Wait, didn’t someone make a summer blockbuster about this?

Where do we turn in this time of crisis? Here’s what the Joker thinks about President Bush’s economic bailout.

Here is the video:

More Making Fun of Christians in the Name of Politics

In 2004, one of the then members of our church brought the following video (minus the annotations) to our Bible Study. It chronicles the ministry of Pastor Muthee and his wife in Kenya and fighting witchcraft and sin. That video is here.



There has been another video on YouTube showing Sarah Palin being prayed for Pastor Muthee. I see no problem with the prayer. It would be prayed by any pentecostal preacher who has daily come against witchcraft. However, the comments on the video really through me. They made fun of him and her. They scoffed at the reality of witchcraft. In the west, the devil is a little more subtle than in other less "developed" countries. The devil is more apt to do supernatural acts in Kenya than he does here. It carries more weight in Kenya than it does in the United States because America thinks that we are above all of that. In Kenya and the "third world" they are smarter than that. He keeps a low profile in America, allowing us to believe that neither he nor witchcraft exist. They do. The Bible says they do. I don't think Palin is good Presidential material, but I take offense at born-again, Bible-believing Christians being perceived as deluded, ignorant at best and plain stupid at best! Here is the video I am referring to:

Bible Basics Trinity - Part 2 Redux

I know. I know. Yes, the Trinity again. Remember I promised to interact with the website links that Ronald provided in his comments on my post called:

Bible Basics - Trinity - Part 2a Bible Foundations

I am amazed about the posts he cited. I will respond in the following order:
John 1:1,2 - The Word is Mighty found at:
http://notrinity.blogspot.com/2008/08/john-112-word-was-mighty.html
The author of the article asserts that John 1:1,2 does not call Jesus God. The author says that Jesus is mighty. What? Let me quote some of his argument:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God [TON THEON], and the Word was God [THEOS]. The same was in the beginning with God [TON THEON]. -- John 1:1,2, World English - transliterations from the Westcott & Hort Interlinear.

The author says that because "Ton Theon" is refering to God the Father and "THEOS" is refering to the Word - the LOGOS. These not the same words , that Jesus is being referred to as "God" in the way that human judges and leader were called "gods" in the Old Testament. The writer tries to dispel the orthodox interpretation of John 1:1-2 by stating that just because there is one God, does not mean that John is saying that either Jesus is the one true God or a false god. It is then asserted that the following verses from the Old Testament are examples were forms of "EL" and "ELOHIM" in Hebrew mean "strength, power, might, rulership, ect.": Genesis 23:6 (mighty); Genesis 30:8 (mighty); Genesis 31:29 (power); Deuteronomy 28:32 (might); 1 Samuel 14:15 (great); Nehemiah 5:5 (power); Psalm 8:5 (angels); Psalm 36:6 (great); Psalm 82:1 (mighty); Proverbs 3:27 (power); Psalm 29:1 (mighty); Ezekiel 32:21 (strong); Jonah 3:3 (exceeding). Because "ELOHIM" is translated as "THEOI" the plural of "THEOS" in John 10:34 when Jesus quotes Psalm 82:6-7 and that ELOHIM sometimes means mighty in the Old Testament, the author concludes that John 1:1,2 should read "the Word was mighty".

Let us examine the argument further. The laundry list of scriptures used to show that variants of Hebrew words related to the Hebrew words for God being applied to men cannot be applied to the times Jesus is referred to as God, because no man other than Jesus has ever had the divine name applied to Himself of claimed for by Him. I have never found any case where the Divine name YHWH was applied to anyone but Jesus and God the Father in all of scripture.

Revelations 22:13 from the Son of Yahweh blog can be found at:
http://sonofyah.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/ao-03/
In order to get out of saying that Jesus is God and worshipped as God, the author argues that Revelations 22:7,12-15 is not Jesus talking but the angel that was talking to John. I would love to see what version of the Bible and what printing the author used. Every King James Version and any Bible that has Christ's words in red letters have these verses in red. Why? Traditionally this has been interpreted to be Jesus' words. The NIV reads very differently. I find nothing compelling to say that the angel was speaking and and quoting anyone else. The evidence points to that John was hearing Jesus with his own ears. Here is the NIV translation of Revelations 22:6-16:

The angel said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place." "Behold, I am coming soon! Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book."

I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. But he said to me, "Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers the prophets and of all who keep the words of this book. Worship God!"

Then he told me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near. Let him who does wrong continue to do wrong; let him who is vile continue to be vile; let him who does right continue to do right; and let him who is holy continue to be holy."

"Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

"Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

To be fair...how do we know that what I have said Jesus said was him and not the angel as the author asserts? Here is one reason: Why assume that the angel is quoting someone else. He nor any angel or man other than Jesus Christ is qualified to say most if not all of the verses I maintain is Jesus talking not the Angel. And second, no man has seen the Father at any time. This has to include John himself so it wasn't the Father talking to John. We know that Jesus is not included in the statement because the Bible says that Jesus has made the Father known to us and reveals the Father.
Here is another point: verse 16 said that He sent the angel to John. The angel told John in verse 6 that "The Lord" sent the angel. "The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets" is what the verse says. If they are both true. Then Jesus is "The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets".

The First and the Last by Ronald Day can be found at:
http://reslight.net/forum/index.php?topic=193.0
Ronald Day's post is to try to argue against paralleling Revelations 1:17,18 with Isaiah 44:6. The bulk of his argument seems to center on using the fact that Jesus died and then was resurrected means that He is not God because God is eternal, always existed, and will never ever cease to exist. Who said Jesus ever ceased to exist? John 1:1,2 says Jesus has always existed - pre-incarnation. John 1:14 says "The Word (LOGOS) became flesh" remember? No where does the Bible says Jesus came into or out of existence. We do not think of death as ceasing to exists when we think of each other from a Christian worldview, why would "death" mean ceasing to exist when we talk about Jesus' death on the cross. Instead of ceasing to exist, Jesus merely separated from His body and 3 days later Jesus was resurrected in the same kind of glorified body that He has promised to us on his return.

Discern 2008 Conference

Last weekend, September 12-14, 2008, the Discernment Conference 2008 was held in Santa Fe, New Mexico at Calvary Christian Center. It is an apologetics conference presenting many subject from renowned speakers and scholars. Unfortunately, I was not able to attend. Fortunately I heard from Jeff Downs, in his blog post on Alpha and Omega Ministries, that mp3's of the material that was presented is available on from the church's website. I've listened to about 3 of them and have been enjoying them. It's going to take some time to get through all the material because there are 19 presentations and each one is about an hour long. I can't wait to hear them all. Maybe there will be video too!

Irony of Ironies

When I was a child, I loved Knight Rider. I admit it was probably one of my influences for becoming an engineer. I can't really say anything good or bad about the new series because I have not seen a single episode. What I can say is that every attempt to resurrect the series failed miserably. I don't know if it is a portent or not, but I just saw a video on YouTube of one of the cars used in the new series being stolen!! I don't know if its a publicity stunt or not, but I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Take a look

The Trinity: A Response to Points Raised by Adam Pastor

I finally was able to watch the video Brother Pastor suggested that I watch, The Human Jesus. I found it interesting but wanting. I will respond to it as I discuss his comments. My question concerning the video is based on Deuteronomy 6:4 - What is what is meant by "one". "....the LORD is one" what? One entity? One essence? One person? One Being? Consider what "being" means and what "person" means. The following two questions are asking different questions: "What am I?" and "Who am I?" What I am is a human being. Who I am is defined by my person. If you look up "being" it means "the quality or state of having existence" according to the dictionary. "Person" is defined as "is defined by the characteristics of reasoning, consciousness, and persistent personal identity", according to Wikipedia. The video does not really answer the question of if God is a person or a being. The Trinity is understood to be monotheistic because God is a single being not person. The video attempts to draw a historical reason for developing the idea of the Trinity and exploring why they do not believe that the New Testament does not teach the Trinity.

I have attached the video The Human Jesus below.



First Timothy 2:5 does not tell us the Jesus was not divine but it does tell us He was a man. It does not argue against the Trinity. First Timothy 2:5 says

For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

John 1:1 is interpreted differently in the video than I understand it. In the video, it says the LOGOS, the Word, is not Jesus. But they don't give any reason for that interpretation. John 1:1-5 says:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

Psalm 110:1 is also interpreted differently. They recognized that "The Lord said to my Lord" are two different words and they said that its not Yahweh talking to Adoni. I believe it is. It's the short form of Adoni and it does refer to the Messiah, but it cannot say that Jesus is not God. Psalm 110:1 says:

The LORD says to my Lord:
"Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet."

1 John 5:7,8 is not a viable proof of the trinity because it was not part of the earliest manuscripts. I agree, but there are so many other scriptures that support Trinitarian doctrine.

1 Timothy 3:16 says:

Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great:
He appeared in a body,
was vindicated by the Spirit,
was seen by angels,
was preached among the nations,
was believed on in the world,
was taken up in glory.

I do not understand how citing this passage disproves that Paul did not teach that Jesus was deity - one of the persons of the true God. If anything he points out how much of a mystery in understanding how are points listed in the passage as true but asserts them as true.

The video said that Jesus is called "God" in the same way Moses and human judges are called gods (Psalm 82:6). The problem is that in those cases "Elohim" is used while Jesus applied the divine name, Yahweh (Jehovah), to himself. Psalm 82 says:

God presides in the great assembly;
he gives judgment among the "gods":

"How long will you defend the unjust
and show partiality to the wicked?
Selah

Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless;
maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed.

Rescue the weak and needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.

"They know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

"I said, 'You are "gods";
you are all sons of the Most High.'

But you will die like mere men;
you will fall like every other ruler."

Rise up, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are your inheritance

No way can this passage be used to allude to Jesus being called "God" like the judges and kings being referred to as "gods". Different contexts!

John 20:27,28 is explained that Thomas did not call Jesus "God", but only meant it the same way human judges are called gods, but that is reading a context into the text that is not there. "God" is a title not a personal name. John 20:27,28 says

Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

I disagreed that John 10:23-30 does anything but tell us the Father and Son are distinct and have different roles. It does not say that either one is better or less than the other. How does this disprove the Trinity? Instead I see the hope of eternal security. If the Father has given you to Jesus, no one can take you from Him. Look at the verses yourself:

and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade. The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. and the Father are one."

Isaiah 9:6 is said not to have applied to Jesus, but Hezekiah. They tried to reason that when Isaiah equated the one coming as God that it's not talking about Almighty God. However none of the rest of the names given to the one prophesied to come could be rightly applied to anyone but God. Besides that, Matthew says Isaiah was talking about Jesus Christ. Isaiah 9:6,7 says:

For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Of the increase of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign on David's throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.
The zeal of the LORD Almighty
will accomplish this.

How can these verses in their entirety describe anyone but Jesus perfectly.

It was stated in the video that "the son of God" has no divine application. I am willing to bet that Unitarians would agree that "Son of Man" is the Messiah and it refers to Jesus. What about Daniel 7. "Son of Man" is a divine name.

I would like to know how they would respond to Colossians 2:9. Paul says that all that makes God God in character and nature can be found in Jesus. Colossians 2:9-12 says:

For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

The video claims to give the Trinitarian view point but they did not allow Trinitarian scholars to defend their position. All the people they talked to was either lay person or non-Trinitarian scholar.

Hebrews 7: 14-17 shows that Jesus is a priest forever. It says:

For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. For it is declared:
"You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek."

Jesus is a priest forever for He will never die again and by his credentials. Who else has them? No one!

As far as the idea that Jesus cannot be God because he was tempted by Satan and God cannot be be tempted by evil depends on the thought that temptation to do evil can only be temptation if there really is a danger of falling into doing evil. The Bible says that God cannot be tempted to do evil and does not tempt people to do evil. Agreed! The conclusion drawn is not valid. Jesus' temptation does not invalidate Jesus' divinity. This line of argumentation reminds me of the arguments raised against Christians by Muslims! They use this and the thought that because Jesus ate and drank food He could not be God. There is a valid response to these points. In James 1:13 the Bible says:

When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone;

Put this with Hebrews 4:15 which says:

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin.

The video would have people believe that these two verses conflict with each other if Jesus is God. However, one must remember that this is why it's been taught that Jesus has two natures: human and divine. You cannot argue that Jesus only human without also proving that there are other human beings who are without sin. Who else is there who perfectly fulfilled the law? Only the incarnated Word (which is God according to John 1:2) was with out sin. All other human being fit Romans 3:23. It says:

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

If Jesus never sinned, He can't be lumped in with us completely. He is something other...He is God.

It was also asserted that God cannot die, therefore Jesus cannot be God because He died. Muslims use this same thought that this video used. Warning Bells should go off. There is also a valid response to this point. What is meant by "death" The verses that the video are purposed to state God's eternal existence - that He never came into existence. He will never go out of existence. He is existence. Nothing can be defined or exists without Him. When Jesus "died" the Bible was talking about death in the same context in which all people die - our spirits are separated from our physical form. When we say someone dies (from a Biblical standpoint) we are in no way implying that they cease to exist. Therefore to use argument of God not being able to die against Jesus' divinity does not work because it mixes categories.

Bible Basics - The Trinity Part 4: Bibliography

Here are some videos that I would recommend for understanding the doctrine of the Trinity.

"Is Jesus Christ God" A debate between James White




Trinity vs Oneness Debate on GodTube

It's in 27 parts and here is the first part

Dr. Susan E. Rice

Do you know who Dr. Susan E. Rice is? She is someone Barak Obama's has in place as one of his senior foreign policy advisers. I'm not saying that she is going to be on his Presidential Cabinet in case the he wins, but she is being publicly acknowledged as someone who's counsel Obama seeks. This is a must see!



I would like to see a response from the McCain Camp. Clearly the fact that Alaska is close to Russia is not going to help foreign policy.