Homeland Security Labels Bible Prophecy Students Terrorists

Come'on! Is anyone truly surprised? I love this article that I read on this particular blog. It's really well-written and I think everyone should read it. (I'll paste it below because it's hard to read on the original source blog).

By Nathan Jones
LighthousePrayerLine.org


Are you a student of Bible prophecy who has discovered that the Bible teaches the planet will soon be under the control of the one-world government of the Antichrist before Jesus comes and institutes His one-world government? Do you believe the Bible teaches murdering our children is wrong and homosexuality destroys lives and that we should speak out against them? Do you feel the increasing immorality is fueling increasing crime, and wish to defend your children with a firearm? Do you love America and want to see it obey its own Constitution limiting federal power and enforcing its own immigration laws? Are you a military veteran who has bled for the freedom of your country?


If you can answer "yes" to just one of these, then you are now considered by America's own Department of Homeland Security to be a "domestic rightwing terrorists."

The Document

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Office of Intelligence and Analysis, Extremism and Radicalization Branch, in coordination with the FBI, released their ten page Homeland Environment Threat Analysis on April 7, 2009, titled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment." The purpose of this "one of a series" of threat analysis is "to facilitate a greater understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalization in the United States" so that all "law enforcement officials... may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States."

While the document declares the Threat Analysis must be made in an "overt and transparent manner," the document also commands that "no portion of the LES information should be released to the media, the general public, or over non-secure Internet servers."

The Threat Analysis reports that "domestic rightwing terrorists" are energized by a series of current political and social factors: the economic downturn, the election of an African-American president, the possible passage of new restrictions on firearms, immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, anti-Semitism directed by a perceived "cabal of Jewish 'financial elites,'" the rise of a "New World Order," and the large numbers of returning "military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities."

In response to these factors, the DHS claims "domestic rightwing terrorists" are recruiting veterans for paramilitary training and purchasing and stockpiling weapons and ammunition. They are teaching "their children specifically xenophobia and antidemocratic ideals." And, they are using "the Internet and other information age technologies" for the purposes of planning and implementing "violent extremist attack" upon the government.

The document claims such violence has already begun "in two instances in the run-up to the election" when "extremists appeared to be in the early planning stages of some threatening activity targeting the Democratic nominee, but law enforcement interceded." It also cites the Oklahoma City Bombing by since-executed Timothy McVeigh.

The document parallels today's conditions with 1990, stating "prominent among these themes were the militia movement’s opposition to gun control efforts, criticism of free trade agreements (particularly those with Mexico), and highlighting perceived government infringement on civil liberties as well as white supremacists’ longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion, inter-racial crimes, and same-sex marriage."

For people who are concerned about an impending collapse of the United States, the Threat Assessment warns that "historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States." Those who believe this may happen are "conspiracy theorists" who fear "declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps."

That concern, the document claims, is fueled by those who believe in "'end times' prophecies." The document says end-time Bible prophecy teachings "have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement."

On a brighter note for all Americans involved, the Threat Assessment reports it "has no specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists... [are] currently planning acts of violence." Also, it shares the view that "both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move at this time."

The DHS/I&A "will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political, economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization."

The Response

In only the few days since what must have been its leak to The Washington Times newspaper, the DHS Threat Assessment has created a clamor of angry responses. Americans who love their country, its laws and the Bible feel insulted and betrayed that our own government would label over 50% of the population "domestic rightwing terrorists."

Well known speakers like former President Ronald Reagan's son Michael have expressed their incredulity. And Jay Sekulow, chief counsel at the American Center for Law & Justice, is even "preparing a legal analysis and will be launching a nationwide campaign in the days ahead to demand that Homeland Security remove the references from its warning."

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano defended the report, saying that only the definition of right-wing extremism that was included in a footnote should be reworded to be more sensitive.

My Analysis

Concerning the DHS Threat Assessment document, I've read over the ten pages and have found it disturbing. Its claim that Americans who do not agree with the liberal bent of the current administration are paranoid, shows just how paranoid the current administration is.

In part, I can understand the racism element involved in the government's paranoia. Despicable white supremist groups do ooze out of their pits now and then and wouldn't mind taking a pot-shot at President Obama, or anyone else outside of their hometown for that matter. For these white supremist groups the Threat Assessment is certainly addressing, it is well-founded to keep an eye on such groups. But, that racism is somehow tied to the pro-life and pro-marriage movements is an outrageous inference.

As for the paranoia that conservative values equal terrorist values, that inference shows the highest and most unfounded levels of paranoia. The United States has been a nation composed of many ideologies and values throughout its history that for the most part have lived peaceably side-by-side. That the liberal ideology would believe it has to call competitive ideologies "terrorists," proves those who hold to that terminology must themselves be fearful bigots. Fearful bigotry produced the most dreadful event in American history - the Civil War. Is that what the current DHS guard is advocating?

As for Christians who believe in God's moral law and students of Bible prophecy, being seen as terrorists is a chilling thought. Christians only have to look at other large democracies like India to see that democracy doesn't protect its Christian citizens when the government would rather not have them around.

When did such a transition take place in the United States, that our "apple pie" Americans who love God and country such as myself would be seen as the enemy? The answer coincides when the values of the Bible were ejected from our society. A free and truly democratic society that values life and liberty cannot survive without those who hold to God's moral law. True freedom requires Jesus Christ, the Bible, and a foundation that rests firmly on what God calls right and wrong.

I do hope that every intelligence agent who is scouring my article to discern the thought and intents of my heart comes to understand this.

Your Response

Homeland Security gives addresses to its personnel for comments and questions. We, too, should also offer DHS our comments and questions in a civilized and loving fashion.

"For comments or questions related to the content or dissemination of [the Threat Analysis] document, please contact the DHS/I&A Production Branch at IA.PM@hq.dhs.gov, IA.PM@dhs.sgov.gov, or IA.PM@dhs.ic.gov."

Atheism is Dead: From Zeitgeist to Poltergeist, Part 2 of 12

This post is the second in Mariano's series of articles discussing Hitler's relationship to Christianity and Atheism. Check it out!

Atheism is Dead: From Zeitgeist to Poltergeist, Part 2 of 12

Pevensie15 | AJ's Blog: Cumulative Case for God's Existence

There is a young man who's blog is always very interesting. When I read this particular post I had to share it. You must check it. In this one post he does a great job of summarizing the 5 best arguments against atheism. These are the main points used by scholars such as William Lane Craig (his picture is on the right). The five points are:

1. The cosmological argument
2. The teleological argument
3. If God does not exist, then objective moral values do not exist (ontological argument).
4. Another argument is the historical evidence for the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth from the dead.
5. Challenge: You can know that God exists wholly apart from any evidence. You can know He exists from personal experience.

Read AJ's blog for more extended discussion.
Pevensie15 | AJ's Blog: Cumulative Case for God's Existence

If I remember correctly, this line of argumentation for the existence of God is called the "Evidential" technique for the first 4 points and the last one is "Experiential". While I think that all these points are true and it does not require to argue for the infallibility of the Bible or the Deity of Christ or most Christian doctrine, I believe it has merit. The problem is that many atheists like Christopher Hitchens are able to point out that the argument can only get you to prove the existence of a god, not the God of the Bible if you use only points 1, 2, and 3. I believe that some people do come to Christ using this method. God does use this...no question. The bottom line is that it take the Holy Spirit to reconcile sinners (all of us) to God. You can't argue a man to salvation. I'm just thankful that these 5 points are just tools that God can use through us.

Apostle of Mormon Church Message From Easter 2009

On Saturday night, April 11, 2009 I was amazed to see a video from the head Apostle of the Mormon Church of Latter Day Saints. During my lifetime, Mormonism has changed much. Instead of the cult that Joseph Smith founded, many Mormons think of themselves as just another Protestant denomination of Christianity. Unless you have some familiarity with Mormon doctrine, it was almost impossible to distinguish this man from any other clergy of Christianity. As a matter of fact, I agreed with almost everything he had to say about Jesus and what he did. Take a look.





After seeing this, you may wonder why I'd bother to post about this if I agree with so much about what the man has said. Two reasons. One: It is important that we do not allow ourselves to be confused. Mormonism is not Christianity. Here is a videos that I think do a great job showing how different Mormon doctrine is.

Check out this video on Mormon Theology



And two: The talk about God the Father turning his back on Jesus while Jesus was on the cross. It's not damnable heresy. It preaches well, but it really sticks in my craw because it is saying something the Bible does not say. Many people who teach this viewpoint say that God turned His back on Jesus because God is too holy to look upon sin and all the sins of humanity were on Christ during His crucifixion. My problem is two fold. If God cannot look on sin, then He would not be able to look on any of us. And Jesus was not saying that His father had forsaken him when the Bible say in Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34:

About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

What I have learned that in the day and culture of Jesus on Earth, if you wanted to call attention to a passage in the Old Testament, all you had to is quote the first sentence and then everyone will know you are talking about the whole passage. You see Jesus was quoting Psalm 22. If you read the Psalm you will find a perfect description of everything Jesus experienced - written 1000 years earlier! And it you read that Psalm you will see that the one who is suffering is vindicated and triumphs! Truly powerful. I'm resisting the temptation to copy and paste the Psalm in this post. I will hotlink to it instead.

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 13 of 14

Can Christians have christmas trees? According to Dan Barker: No. That is where Mariano comes in.
Here is the 13th article in Mariano's series of refutation of Dan Barker. This one not just works for Dan Barker but I can see it being applied to Jehovah Witnesses also. This one is about celebrating Christmas and having Christmas trees at home. It's a good read. Take a look at the link below.

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 13 of 14

Is God Necessary for Morality? William Lane Craig Debates Shelly Kagan MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315

I found another great debate on the Apologetics 315 blogs. The topic: Is God Necessary for Morality? I think it's important to remember that Christians are not arguing that atheists and other people who are not Christians are not capable of moral acts or grasping moral ideals. The argument is that without God, those morals have no basis. Let me give an example. We all agree that it is wrong for me to walk up to you and just stab you because I feel like it. The question is "Why?" Why is it wrong? I mean if I can do it that fast enough that you can't stop me then why not? If anyone can answer that without appealing to a standard above you and me, that I would like to see. Here is the link to the post on Apologetics 315.

Is God Necessary for Morality? William Lane Craig Debates Shelly Kagan MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315

Jon Stewart Comments on Torture and Laws that Are Never Going To Pass

I've got to admit: I watch the Daily Show at times. It's always funny how they present the news. It's sarcastic, yet the facts reported are true. This week, he had two subjects that must not be ignored. The first segment is about Torture and if American officials should be held accountable for the torture of suspected terrorists? No matter what you think the answer is this is very funny and thought provoking.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
A Brief History of Torture
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

Here is the other segment about will the US accept a United Nations resolution that will give children the right to freedom of religion and outlaw corporal punishment? And other laws that will never happen along with one-world government.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Sh#t That's Never Gonna Happen - Global Currency
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

I have to disagree with Stewart. I'd like to think that he's right and a one-world currency or restricting American civil liberties because of an international governing body could never happen. Unfortunately, the way I and many others read the Bible these very things will take place. I liked his point that in now way would we join the one-world currency bandwagon because we haven't even adopted the metric system. But I think that is the awesomeness of Bible prophecy. Even the seemingly unlikely will take place if the Bible says it will.

Miss California, Carrie Prejean, on Fox News

Just when people say that Christians don't practice what they preach, God raises someone up to prove the critics wrong. Although it cost her winning Miss America 2009, Carrie Prejean chose to honor God and tell the truth rather than compromise her stand for God. I admire that. May we all do the same when our time comes. She was interviewed on Fox News and I'd bet she surprised a lot of people. What did she do that was so amazing? She really obeyed Jesus.

Middle Knowledge & Free Will: What Does God Know And When Does He Know It

As you probably already know that one of my favorite blogs is Pros Apologian which part of Alpha and Omega Ministries. One of it's regular contributors TurretinFan
has put together a series of very interesting blog articles about Middle Knowledge. It's a multipart series of posts. I will link to them below and following that will be a playlist of videos. This is really important. It's about exploring the question: What does God know and when does he know it?!

Middle Knowledge - Part 1
Middle Knowledge - Part 2
Middle Knowledge - Part 3
Middle Knowledge - Part 4
Middle Knowledge - Part 5
Middle Knowledge - Part 6

I thoroughly enjoyed the series. The information presented is invaluable. I admit the talking cartoon was a tad...creepy...but if this is the voice of the author he has a great voice for communicating verbally. This information is important because it is about the nature of God and what He does.

It is unavoidable that "Middle Knowledge" was developed so that people who believe that humans have free will can still argue that God is in sovereign control of everything. For that reason alone, agree that we should throw out the thought. However, I think that the idea that God puts people into circumstances and situations so that they will voluntarily choose to do things that they would not have done otherwise. Here is an example from scripture (2 Chronicles 7:11-14):

When Solomon had finished the temple of the LORD and the royal palace, and had succeeded in carrying out all he had in mind to do in the temple of the LORD and in his own palace, the LORD appeared to him at night and said:
"I have heard your prayer and have chosen this place for myself as a temple for sacrifices.

"When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command locusts to devour the land or send a plague among my people, if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place. I have chosen and consecrated this temple so that my Name may be there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there.

Recall that in this passage God uses chastening to "inspire" repentence. What I like is that these verses totally knock down Middle Knowledge because it shows that the main driving force is God and his purposes first. It's God's world, we just live in it.

This not saying the same thing that Middle Knowledge says because God know what He has to do to cause a person to move the way He wants them too. However, God can just make a person choose what He wants them to choose apart from their own will. For example we know for a fact that God restrains evil. Proverbs 21:1 says

The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD;
he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases.

One last point. The Bible reveals two different "wills" of God. One is identified by the Greek word "Thelos" which refers to the purposes which God will put his power into fulfilling. This corresponds to God's free will as defined in this series. The other is "boulomai" which refers to God's desire but not to what He will put his power into accomplish. This corresponds to the "natural" knowledge has because of his omniscience - knowing all possible paths He could take.

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 11 of 14

Mariano has posted his 11th article in his 14-part series refuting atheist Dan Barker. This is another high-quality article! This time the Dan Barker asserts that when Jesus told the young man to sell all his possessions and give the money to the poor he was talking to all his followers. Dumb assertion I know, but I'll leave it in Mariano's capable hands to refute this. Read his post at the following link.
Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 11 of 14

Heroes Webisodes "Nowhere Man" Part 1 of 4

The latest Heroes webisode series, Nowhere Man" just started. Here is part 1 called "The Truth Within". The series follows the character Doyle whom has the power to make anyone do what he wants. He attempts to go straight after already been shown to be a villain. Lots of luck there.

Updated: Miss USA California Responds To Gay Marriage Question From Perez Hilton

What happened to being able to express your own opinion? I'm certain that this affected her chance to win the pagent. When I saw the same video (poorly done) from another YouTube channel, she was made to seem stupid but she just stated her opinion but did not condemn Same-Sex marriage. Perez Hilton was visibly unhappy. Proponents don't want people to just allow Same-Sex marriage, they want us to agree with them that there is nothing wrong with it. Unfortunately, God said different. I'll have to side with Him.





I have seen a video from Perez Hilton commenting on Miss California's answer to his question that is posted above. The problem is that his comments shows just what I thought. She lost the pagent because she disagrees with the "gay" agenda to redefine what "marriage". Her comment forced her to loose. She came in second. Listen to Hilton's comments. You can hear his hate and disgust.





Fortunately, some heavy hitters have weighed in and commented on what all this means. Listen to what Dr. James White comments on Carrie Prejean's comments.

Atheism is Dead: Adolf Hitler’s Birthday Present - Joe Keysor, "Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible”

Mariano has written a brilliant article reviewing a new book, Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible. His article inspires me to read this book. It's important because many Atheists and other Christian critics like Muslim apologists like to argue that Christianity is evil because Hitler was a "Christian" and Nazism has "Christian" underpinnings. Hog wash, I know but people are trying to use it. This article puts a lot into perspective.

Atheism is Dead: Adolf Hitler’s Birthday Present - Joe Keysor, "Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible”

What Would Jesus Do?

Mariano, from the Atheism is Dead Blog, had a brilliant idea. Christians who blog about Apologetics and Christian issues collaborating together. For my part of suggesting topics, I want to respond to the article entitled What Would Jesus Do? and I want to be clear why the subject is important because there is nothing and no one more central to the truth of Christianity than the person, life, and work of our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ. My article will be posted in such a way that I will copy the article's bullet points and put my comments afterward in red. The author of the article attempts to discredit Jesus by taking his words and message to seem that atheists are more moral than Jesus. Definitely blasphemous, but needs to be countered.

Advocate child abuse and murder amongst many other cruelties.

Christians are always claiming, “he’s the lamb”, “our savior”, “the king of peace”, “the embodiment of love”, amongst the many other names they associate with a loving, merciful nature. Jesus a nice guy? Not in my book. Nor in any other person’s who is capable of compassion and rationality. Let’s examine who the hell the Jesus character really is. These verses will show not only is Jesus’ “loving” nature a joke but so are the Christians who worship him. Jesus’ real mission to come to earth:

Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has “come not to send peace, but a sword.” Matthew 10:34

Jesus says, “Don’t imagine that I came to bring peace on earth! No, rather a sword lf you love your father, mother, sister, brother, more than me, you are not worthy of being mine. “The real beauty of this verse is that Jesus demands people truly love him more then they love their own family. I ask you how can we love someone that we can not see or interact with? Love is an emotion pertaining to physical existence not to faithful ideologies, yet God threatens you with Death just because your love for your mother maybe stronger than your love for him. Matthew 10:34

Families will be torn apart because of Jesus. “Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death." Matthew 10:21

Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. Matthew 5:17

Let's look at what Jesus actually said - in context - Matthew 5: 32-38

"Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -
a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'

"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

The atheist commentator is wrong. The commentator is saying that Jesus is saying that he is outright come to divide families and turn people against their parents and parents against their children. The author makes this assertion and never seems to ask why people will be divided because of Jesus. Jesus himself gives us the answer in verse 32. Families will be divided because of Jesus because when people choose to follow Christ family and friends will turn on them. Recall that in the first century and all the way through today many people who had chosen to follow Christ have been killed, persecuted, and their family and friends were the ones who turned them in. This is what Jesus was referring to. Jesus never told us to not love her parents and families. Jesus went far enough to tell us to love our neighbors as much as we love ourselves. When asked "Who is my Neighbor?" Jesus responded with the parable of the "Good Samaritan" where someone who should have hated a man who was robbed and left for dead acted in compassion while the man's so-called brothers and leaders stepped over his half-dead body. Check it out in Luke 10: 25-37. especially verses 36-37 Jesus asks:

"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."
Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

Jesus told us be like the good Samaritan. Keep in mind that under most circumstances, Samaritans and Jews had no interaction. They hated one another. The man whom the Samaritan had helped would have more than likely not done the same for the Samaritan had the positions been reversed. That is the kind of morality Jesus expects of us. Also, who said that we can't interact with Jesus. He's alive and you can interact with him if you seek him. Of course Jesus had no problem with the Old Testament....He is the Word - the Torah fulfilled and personified. If anyone would like discuss this point further, I invite comments.

Jesus advocates murder and death:

Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn’t care for his preaching. Matthew 11:20

They are condemned because they rejected Christ. It's like a drowning man who rejects an offered life preserver. Jesus was not pleased that they refused to repent (nor was he surprised). He was merely pointing out what the consequences of rejecting him are.

Jesus, whose clothes are dipped in blood, has a sharp sword sticking out of his mouth. Thus attired, he treads the winepress of the wrath of God. (The winepress is the actual press that humans shall be put into so that we may be ground up.) Revelations 19:13-15

I'd like to know why the author thinks that humans will be ground up in the winepress. I can't find it in the text. This portion of scripture is only showing what the consequences of rejecting Christ will be.

The beast and the false prophet are cast alive into a lake of fire. The rest of us the unchosen will be killed with the sword of Jesus. “An all the fowls were filled with their flesh.” Revelations 19:20-21

What else would we expect to happen to those who choose to disobey God and reject salvation?

Jesus says he is the only way to salvation yet he purposely disillusions us so that we will go to hell:

Jesus explains that the reason he speaks in parables is so that no one will understand him, “lest . . . they . . . should understand . . . and should be converted, and I should heal them.” Matthew 13:10-15

Jesus explains why he speaks in parables to confuse people so they will go to hell. Mark 4:11-12

It's interesting that an atheist would feel disillusioned that Jesus spoke in parables. Verse 11 gives the answer. Jesus was talking to his disciples. If you want Jesus to speak plainly to you become a disciple of his. By definition, an atheist rejects Jesus as his/her Master.

Jesus advocates child abuse:

Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” Matthew 15:4-7

Okay. I wonder if the author understands how to read. This is what the text actually says:

For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

Jesus never said that they should kill disobedient children. He is drawing a lesson on how they picked and chose what laws and traditions they kept and which ones they changed. The author missed the point of what Jesus was saying. Sad.

Abandon your wife and children for Jesus and he’ll give your a big reward. Jesus asks that his followers abandon their children to follow him. To leave your child is abuse, it’s called neglect, pure and simple. Matthew 19:29

No where does the Bible ask us to neglect our children! The author has again taken a text out of context. Jesus is talking to his disciples after he just told them in verses 23 and 24

Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

Jesus then tells them that all we need to do is to put him first and everything will work out for us, but part of putting him first is to take care of our parents and children.

Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark 7:9

The author has the wrong reference. Mark 7: 9-12 says:

And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban' (that is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that."

As you can see Jesus admonished the religious leaders for teaching people that they do not need to honor their parents. If you are going to use scripture to criticize scripture at least get the reference correct.

A few other things about Jesus:

Jesus says that those who have been less fortunate in this life will have it even worse in the life to come. Mark 4:25

More problem with context. Here is what the passage truly says in verse 24 and 25:

"Consider carefully what you hear," he continued. "With the measure you use, it will be measured to you—and even more. Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him."

Jesus was not talking about wealth or riches. He's referring to enlightenment, meaning how much of scripture and spiritual things we understand and accept.

Jesus sends the devils into 2000 pigs, causing them to jump off a cliff and be drowned in the sea. Clearly Jesus could have simply sent the devils out, yet he chose instead to place them into pigs and kill them. This is called animal abuse. Mark 5:12-13

Let's get this straight. In order for this argument to even get off the ground then one would have to grant that Jesus had the power to cast out demons (given that they exist) and they submitted to Him. Unless you'd want to argue that demons would obey a mere man then you have to consider Jesus' claims to be Yahweh. Remember all the other cases in the Bible where demons were exorcised by people, they did it in Jesus' name. Therefore if Jesus is who He claims to be, then He made those pigs just like He made everything - giving Him the right to do whatever He pleases with what He created. Argument is therefore silly. Jesus is not guilty of animal abuse. Abuse is using something other than how it was intended to be used. Jesus made everything h3 can't abuse what he has created.

Jesus kills a fig tree for not bearing figs, even though it was out of season. Jesus must not be as smart as Christians would have us believe, for he was retarded enough to do something this silly. You’d think the son of god (god incarnate) would know that trees don’t bear fruit in dry season. Mark 11:13

Does the author know why Jesus acted the way He did? Of course He knew what the season was. You show your own stupidity. Jesus cursed the fig tree in order to teach his disciples. If you bother to read a few more verses down you read in 22-26

"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins."

What I am saying is that Jesus used the Fig Tree as a teaching opportunity to teach his followers about prayer and faith.

I found out that there exists an article on why Jesus cursed the fig tree in Hard Sayings of the Bible by F. F. Bruce from the blog called Lighthouse Prayer Line. Here is the excerpt:

Was it not unreasonable to curse the tree for being fruitless when, as Mark expressly says, "it was not the season for figs"? The problem is most satisfactorily cleared up in a discussion called "The Barren Fig Tree" published many years ago by W. M. Christie, a Church of Scotland minister in Palestine under the British mandatory regime. He pointed out first the time of year at which the incident is said to have occurred (if, as is probable, Jesus was crucified on April 6th, A.D. 30, the incident occurred during the first days of April). "Now," wrote Christie, "the facts connected with the fig tree are these. Toward the end of March the leaves begin to appear, and in about a week the foliage coating is complete. Coincident with [this], and sometimes even before, there appears quite a crop of small knobs, not the real figs, but a kind of early forerunner. They grown to the size of green almonds, in which condition they are eaten by peasants and others when hungry.

When they come to their own indefinite maturity they drop off." These precursors of the true fig are called taqsh in Palestinian Arabic. Their appearance is a harbinger of the fully formed appearance of the true fig some six weeks later. So, as Mark says, the time for figs had not yet come. But if the leaves appear without any taqsh, that is a sign that there will be no figs. Since Jesus found "nothing but leaves" - leaves without any taqsh- he knew that "it was an absolutely hopeless, fruitless fig tree" and said as much.

This means that although it was not the season for figs there should have been something edible on the tree. Another way to look at this event is that when Jesus comes to inspect your life there should be fruit. Something that should be able to be used to help others even if you are in transition (as we all are) to what we will be.

Luke 12:47 Jesus okays beating slaves.

This was another parable. In context Jesus is talking about servants (all of humanity) not necessarily slaves. We will all be judged according to how good we are at being obedient and carry out our purpose. But we will be judged according to what we did with what we knew. People who had more access to more knowledge but still chose to ignore the master will have more punishment than those who disobey out of ignorance.

Is America A Christian Nation?

I came across this video on YouTube that I must not let pass by without comment. The video was posted by well-meaning individual to support Barack Obama against Fox News. I thought Fox would clean up its act and stop making clumsy and stupid attacks against Obamas but no dice. "Fair and Balanced"? Must be some form of sarcasm that I missed! This particular news cast was obviously to call into question Obama's commitment to Christianity. To arouse the anger of Christians in America. I think the video is correct in calling Fox into question but we can't throw the whole argument "under the Bus". What does it mean to be a "Christian" nation? This is what we must ask.

Let's give Obama the benefit of the doubt. Let's assume that he's not the anti-Christ bent on world domination and casting off all religions and uniting all of humanity in worshipping him. I think the majority of "Christians"...even the racist ones...have to concede that we don't have enough info to make such accusations. Okay, given that I have to side with the video author in interpreting Obama's words as saying that America is not backing any one particular religion because we have "separation of church and state." On the surface many Americans embrace this rhetoric as a good thing! But as a Christian...your religion isn't just something you do on Sunday/Saturday...it's a life-long, 24 hour, committed lifestyle! If you truly believe that the Bible is the Word of God and you line up your life with it, how can you say that your nation is a Christian nation. Take a look at the video.





As for actually answering the question: Is the United States A Christian Nation? If you define a "Christian Nation" as one that follows the Bible and seeks to be a model of Jesus' kingdom on earth, then I would have to answer "No" and go as far as saying it never really was. Can we call a nation that legalizes abortion and is on the cusp of legalizing homosexual marriages following God's will? Not to mention all the other evil sins our nation does and has done. And don't forget that when John Adams was President slavery was legal. When he said that the US was not founded on a particular religion he was right. Adams was a Mason and Deist. Remember a deist is someone who believes that there is a God who created everything and set reality in motion but no longer intervenes or interact with what was created. Some Deists even go as far as saying that God is not even a personal being but more like an impersonal not-being - just a force with no thought or feeling. This is almost about as far from Judaism, Christianity, and Islamic as you get!

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 10 of 14

Mariano, has published his 10th refutation of Dan Barker in his 14-part series. This time the topic is about whether or not Jesus advocated that his follower castrate themselves to worship and glorify him. I know...I know, Barker is deluded but he must be answered. Mariano does an excellent job!!! Read his post.

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 10 of 14

James White Comments on the D'Souza vs Barker Debate

On the 04-16-09 webcast of the Dividing Line, Dr. James White commented on the debate between Dinesh D'Souza and Dan Barker. I've posted on it before but I feel the need to talk about it again because seeing it through Dr. White's viewpoint I got to think about it differently. I still don't think that D'Souza did badly in the debate, but White's criticisms are also valid. At first I thought D'Souza's plan of attack - to argue against Barker without defending the Bible but to win on Barker's terms using only philosophy, science, and history. I see now how he failed to be most effective because Barker attacked the Bible. Dr. White is preparing for his upcoming debate against Dan Barker so of course he is thinking about the larger issue: How do you defend the faith against people who don't believe. A lot of Christians take the viewpoint that you can't use the Bible to witness or as an affective defense of the Bible if the people you are dialouging with refuse to acknowlege the Bibe as the Word of God. Dr. White takes a different view: defend the Bible, explain the Bible, stand on the Bible. I would further argue that this is the methods the Apostles used themselves. I have two examples: in Acts 2:14-41 - Peter's first sermon - all Peter used to prove his point was the Old Testament scriptures and he appealed to their own experiences. Remember Jesus had been crucified some 40 days prior and many, if not all, of his hearers had eyewitness knowledge of everything Peter was preaching. My other example is Acts 17 when Paul was in Athens on Mars Hill. What did Paul use? He used some philosophy and with the bulk of arguments based on scripture. The audience was different - people who likely had no idea what the Old Testament said. This shows me that we have tailor or preaching and teaching to our audiences. Dr. James White's comments are well-worth review. Here is the web cast: Dividing line 04-16-09.

Here is the full debate between D'Souza and Barker.
What had happen' was.....: D'Souza vs Barker: Christianity Vs Atheism

Vox Veritatis: The Impossibility of God Part 1

Here is a great post written on the Vox Veritatis blog that refutes the stupid argument against God by trying to prove that the Bible gives contradictory descriptions of God's nature. The article does a good job of showing how silly that really is. Take a look!

Vox Veritatis: The Impossibility of God Part 1 - Prolegomena

Rhoblogy: The EvilBible.com Project, Part 1 - Murder in the Bible

Today on the blog Rhoblogy, in contributing to Mariano's idea of we cohesively tackle the same subjects, a post has appeared discussing how Murder is discussed in the Bible. The author did a great job knocking down the ideas about murder given to evilbible.com and I think the response is well-written and a must-read. The only thing I would add, and it may be covered in a future part of his series is the question of does the Bible say "You will not kill." or does it say "You will not murder." in Exodus 20:13. We see in Ecclesiastes 3:3 says:

a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,

The King James Version uses "kill" in both Exodus 20:13 and Ecclesiastes 3:3, but more modern translations like the NIV use "murder" in Exodus 20:13 and "kill" in Ecclesiastes 3:3. They are not the same words, this is why this is important the word in Exodus 20:13 is "Ratsach" which means "murder" but in Ecclesiastes 3:3 the word is "harag" which is a different word. It makes sense given that "murder" and "killing" are not equivalent. For example, killing someone who breaks into your hows to kill your family is not murder but it is killing. However if you planned to find an opportunity to stab someone when no one is looking to kill him or her - that's murder. Killing enemy soldiers who are trying to kill you in a war is not murder. The difference is intent - the reason behind the action.

Here is the link to the article:
Rhoblogy: The EvilBible.com Project, Part 1 - Murder in the Bible

The Bible & Rape

Today on his blog at Atheism Is Dead Mariano is going to cover the faulty assertion that the Bible condones and advocates rape. Whenever I hear some stupid idea such as that I wonder what orifice the writer pulled such an idea out of. In keeping with Mariano's theme I will be looking at one particular case concerning rape from the Bible found in Judges chapters 19-21. The story is very horrific a man allows a group of men to rape and murder his concubine to save his own life. The Bible only reports that this happened...in no way does God or anyone condone the act. As a matter-of-fact it leads to a civil war among the Israelites. I challenge anyone to find a verse that prescribes that this is what we should do. I'm even referring to the Levite announcing the crime by cutting his dead concubine up into 12 pieces and sending one to each of the tribes of Israel's territory. God did not tell him to do that. Based on what the rest of the Bible says I can't find anything that tells us it's good, God glorifying behavior. I'm also referring to the way the rest of Israel allowed surviving Benjamites to take wives. God did not tell them to do that! All the nation was outraged by the crime and the aftermath. Why report the story? The story underscores the cultural reality of the time summed up in Judges 21:25 which says:

In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.

This is scary and sums up the state of our own country. When a society is left to itself and does not respect God, this is what you get.

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 9 of 14

Here is Mariano's 9th part to his scriptural refutations of Dan Barker's stupid claims. This one deals with the lie that Jesus taught that we should ignore and hate our parents. Thanks to this article I learned the term for this is called"Filial Misanthropy" There is no Biblical leg to stand on this issue to substantiate that it is a God-sanctioned practice. Check out the article.

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 9 of 14

Personality Tests

When I used to do Network Marketing I learned about one way sales people learn how to interact with people is be able to recognize different personality types in yourself and others. It turns out that there are 4 types of personalities that have been identified. When I was first exposed to this information, it was presented as if each person fits in one type. However today, the conventional viewpoint is that we are all combinations of each type with one or two types dominantly affecting how we think and behave. Each of the four types have been called by different names. For the purposes of this post I will list them and the corresponding order matches for each trait or temperment. I also will provide links for more information and who came up with the identifications.

Famous Greek physician Hippocrates who lived from 460 until 377 B.C.

choleric

The choleric can be considered to be highly excitable: this person’s emotions are very easily aroused. This person is vehement in speech and action and his/her movements are carried out swiftly. He/she is bold and ambitious but tends to be incautious.

sanguine

Has a tendency towards excitement, whereas the phlegmatic have a tendency towards inhibition. The sanguine person is stable, yet active. He/she is courageous, hopeful, amorous and cheerful, but somewhat inconstant. He/she is courteous, lively, alert, and demonstrative.

phlegmatic

Stable and calm. He/she may even look cool, sluggish or apathetic. Normally quiet and reserved, he/she does not easily become friendly or antagonistic.

melancholic

Can be seen as the opposite of the choleric because this person is highly inhibited. The melancholic person is characterized by slowness of thought and a tendency to be depressed. The melancholic has difficulty making friends, but he/she is reliable because constancy and determination are the other traits.

Here is an online personality test based on this idea.

Myers and Briggs

In 1958, Isabel Myers and her mother Katheryn Briggs wrote a paper titled Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI for short), in which they proposed that there are actually sixteen different human personality types.

Ms. Myers had been reading various obscure psychology textbooks when she stumbled across Psychological Types. Being intelligent and perceptive, she immediately realized that here was a masterpiece of psychological thought, written by one of the greatest geniuses in human history. She read the book cover to cover, and thought long about how to expand Jung's ideas into a complete model of human personality.

Ms. Myers came to realize three things:

1. That everyone chooses not only a first-choice or "Primary" function, but also a second-choice or "auxiliary" function.
2. That if the primary function is judgmental, then the auxiliary function will be perceptive, and vice versa.
3. That if the primary function is introverted, then the auxiliary function will be extraverted, and vice versa.

In this system, then, a person

has 2 choices for orientation, introvert (I) or extravert (E); two choices for method of information intake, sensing (S) or intuition (N); two choices for method of judgment, thinking (T) or feeling (F); and two choices as to which function is used in the outer world, judgment (J) or perception (P). Hence there are 2x2x2x2=16 different MBTI personality types, as shown in this chart:

ISFJ	ISTJ	INFJ	INTJ
ISFP	ISTP	INFP	INTP
ESFJ	ESTJ	ENFJ	ENTJ
ESFP	ESTP	ENFP	ENTP

Tests were created to help determine which of the sixteen types the test taker was, and after a time, when many people had taken these MBTI tests, personality "profiles" (correspondences between MBTI type and the personalities of individual people) emerged. When one examines these profiles and compares them with the "temperaments" of Hippocrates, a clear correspondence emerges:

• SJ = Guardians
• SP = Artisans
• NF = Idealists
• NT = Rationalists

Human Metrics is a website for take a test that scores you using these ideas.

True Colors by Don Lowry - 1978

Red

The Red color personalities make up 15 percent of the population and are very direct, totally self-contained and will not let you see their weaknesses. They are extremely focused, are very intense and like to get straight to the point. They must be in charge at all times and are totally motivated by money and success.

They dislike indecision and have no time for chit chat about family or relationships. When talking to a Red, it is important to stroke their ego, show them respect and let them believe they are in total control of the conversation at all times. Although they are very goal-oriented, they are short tempered, domineering, impatient and un-teachable.

Blue

Blues personalities are open and direct with their feelings and make up 15 percent of the population. Although th

ey make up a smaller percentage of the population, there are many Blues are drawn to network marketing because they are very fun-loving, high energy, extremely creative individuals. When you ask them a question, they will go on and on, giving you more information than you needed, and in the process probably forgetting what the question was to begin with.

Their weaknesses are that they tend to talk too much, are unorganized and are poor with follow-up (one of the best things you can do for a Blue is to teach them to use an auto-responder). But if you can train them to focus and to follow a system for success you will have one of the hardest working and resourceful team members you could ask for.

Yellow

Yellow personalities are open yet indirect with their feelings and make up 35 percent of the population. They are dependable, great listeners, exceptional team players, and are and supportive and nurturing. They are the best at using both sides of their brain. Key words to use when communicating with a Yellow are "team", "together", "relationship" and "family." They are very open with their feelings, but when you ask them a question they don’t volunteer any more information than is required. They enjoy life and hate pushy people or any kind of confrontation.

Their weaknesses are that they are overly sensitive, take things personally, tend to be followers and are not goal-oriented. However, if you take your time and build a strong relationship with them, teach them, and help them, you’ll have a remarkable and very loyal team member that "plays well with others."

Green

Green personalities make up 35 percent of the population. They are indirect, self-contained, and very pragmatic and logical. They rely on the confirmation of facts and figures before any decision can be made or any action can be taken. They are extremely organized, very good planners and are always accurate, persistent and great on follow-through.

They might, however, sometimes be perceived as being depressed and lonely. They tend to be over-analytical and hard to please, making them slow to begin any project until they have all the information required and it has been graphed, analyzed, dissected and scrutinized to their satisfaction. They hate pushy sales people and need to be allowed to sell themselves on your MLM business opportunity. After they do, their expertise and attention to detail will make them invaluable members of your network marketing team.

The above website even make an equivalence:

Equivalents for the 4 Personality Types

• Hippocrates (370 BC): Choleric, Sanguine, Phlegmatic,Melancholy
  
• Plato (340 BC): Guardian, Artisan, Philosopher, Scientist
  
• Kretschner (1920): Melancholic, Hypomanic, Anesthetic, Hyperasthetic
  
• Sprangler (1930): Religious, Aesthetic, Theoretic, Economic
  
• Fromm (1947): Hoarding, Exploiting, Receptive, Marketing
  
• Psycho-Geometrics (1978): Triangle, Squiggle, Circle, Square
  
• D.E.S.A.: Dominant, Expressive, Solid, Analytical
  
• LEAD Test: Leader, Expressor, Dependable, Analyst
  
• ARRAY (Knaupp): Production, Connection, Status Quo, Harmony
  
• PSI: Controller, Promoter, Supporter, Analyst
  
• Gary Smalley: Lion, Otter, Golden Retriever, Beaver
  
• Biblical Characters: Paul, Peter, Abraham, Moses
  
• Children's Literature: Rabbit, Tigger, Pooh, Eeyore
  
• Charlie Brown Characters: Lucy, Snoopy, Charlie Brown, Linus

I've recently learned about another way to look at these types. It's from the Laugh Your Way to A Better Marriage ministry by Pastor Mark Gungor. He worked with Larry Bilotta on an online test. Each temperment is called countries: Perfect, Fun, Peace, and Control. What I like most about this test is that each trait is given a store so you can truly understand how much each trait fits you.


Here is the results of my Flag Test.

Open publication - Free publishing - More flag page

Movie Review: Fireproof

I recently had the opportunity of seeing the movie Fireproof. I liked it. I thought it was brilliant. Okay, I've got to come clean and admit that my lovely wife, Mitsouky, twisted my arm to watch it. I think everyone should see it because it has much to say about marriage that can be applied no matter how long you've been married or your race you can use the movie to help you think about your own marriage. The story is not just about how God can reconcile husband and wife back to each other but also how God reconciles people back to himself. The movie actually focuses on the husband's point of view but when I saw they related to one another I could see mistakes they were both making. It wasn't all him or all her cause their maritial problems. The movie points out a more fundamental fix: if God isn't part of your life and your marriage then you have set yourself up for failure. This was shown how the main character Caleb was only able to look past himself and love his wife only by loving God first. I don't want to give away all the story...you've got to see it. What I got most out of it was realizing that my role as husband does not depend on my wife and what she does. I should love her and value her no matter if she acts like she accepts it or not. I've heard that before but seeing really helped me understand it better.

My wife and I attended a seminar back in February called Laugh Your Way To A Better Marriage and it covers how to relate better to your spouse if you are both already Christians....really practical stuff. The movie does not give much in this area. The folks who made the movie did put together the Love Dare book that showed up in the movie. Here is a link to the main site for the web site.


Here is the movie's trailer

Tax and Spend by Barack Obama

Apparently there are some Americans that are not happy with the change in Taxes. They are staging a demonstration kind of like the Boston Tea Party from the American Revolution. Here is what I found from YouTube:

Revolution is brewing... This April 15th go to your local tea party! There will be tea parties in over 500 cities! Find out where your cities tea party will be here: http://www.taxdayteaparty.com

Tax Facts

I found the perfect video to commemorate Tax day. Remember Jesus paid his taxes and we have to pay them too.

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 8 of 14

Mariano has again written an masterful defense of what the Bible actually says instead of Dan Barker's imagination. This time Mariano shows how Barker's assertion that the Bible condones polygamy is wrong. He needs to go to the teachings of Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon church, for a mandate for polygamy.
Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 8 of 14

Public Apostasy

A video has been posted on YouTube as a public statement of apostasy, decrying the stance of the Roman Catholic Church against the use of condoms and "safe" sex teachings. The video attempts to be humorous. You be the judge.





The video offends my own sensibilities because although I don't think for a moment that Jesus is happy with an church denomination on every point, I do believe that Jesus wants us to use His word as the final authority for all we stand on, say, and do. Reality is what He says it is. The maker of this video, and those that think like him, think that we should do extra-marital sex is okay and anyone should be free to have sex with whomever they choose and how ever they choose. Therefore, to avoid diseases and "unwanted" pregnancies while we selfishly seek to fulfill our own carnal pleasures and desires, "safe" sexual practices is the only intelligent solution because "they're going to do it anyway...let's keep them safe". From my own point-of-view: fine. Why not, if that is what people want? Doesn't affect me. Do you know what the problem is: Our Lord. Our Master. Our Creator. The one who gives us life and sustains that life says no. As long as we keep disobeying Him and refuse to submit to God we will keep having problems as we watch our society slip into the toilet socially, economically, physically,and emotionally - as individuals, families, and nation.

Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 7 of 14

Mariano has again written another awesome post refuting Dan Barker. This time the discussion is about Barker's assertion of God allowing and condoning child sacrifice. Mariano did an awesome job talking about it. I agree with his points. The one thing that I think a little differently about is about Jephthah's story told in Judges 11:30-39. In my NIV Bible it does have aq footnote that says that Jephthah did not sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering but dedicated her to God so she could not marry or have children. What I learned from Mariano is that a literal translation (Young's Literal Translation) of the Hebrew from Judges 11:40 could be:

And it was an ordinance in Israel that the daughters of Israel went from year to year to the daughter of Jephthah, that they might comfort her for four days in a year.

instead of how I'm used to reading it:

And it is a custom in Israel, that the daughters of Israel went yearly to tell again of the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite, four days in a year.

The Young's Literal Translation does seem to imply the thought that Jephthah's daughter did not die because it says that girls went to see her for four days every year. When I studies this, I looked at the words used (okay it was a lexicon, so it does not prove anything) and I could not find anything that made me think that it she did not die. Every other translation I could find says that the girls held a memorial for her every year.

Mariano even pointed out another point I had not considered:

Clearly, if we do not choose and pick but consider the greater context of the Torah we know that if it was a clean animal he would have offered it as a burnt-offering and if a human then they would be consecrated to the LORD.

I'm not sure where he got this from. I made comment on his blog to ask him about it and I'm sure he will get back to me soon. The truth is whether or not Jephthah sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering has no bearing on Mariano's brilliant exegesis on why Barker is wrong. We got to face it. No where does God condone or prescribe for us to serve him by human sacrifice. That is why abortion is most-often an abominable evil. It's child sacrifice a foreign evil deity: our own selfish desires as people.


Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 7 of 14