Man “Does Not” Have An Immortal Soul

dlibrary.acu.edu.au

God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath [air] of life; and man became a living soul, as it states in (Gen. 2:7). Man, formed from material dust of the ground, upon breathing air, became a living soul. Nowhere does it say man is, or has, an immortal soul. What was formed from material ground became a soul. But what is this entity?

The word “soul” is translated from the Hebrew word nephesh, meaning a breathing animal. Three times in the first chapter of Genesis animals are called nephesh: Gen. 1:20, “moving creature” (Hebrew, nephesh); Gen. 1:21, “great whales, and every living creature” (Hebrew, nephesh); Gen. 1:24, “living creature” (Hebrew,nephesh). The translators in translating into the English language used the English word “creature,” but in Genesis 2:7′ they translated the same nephesh into the English word “soul”—man became a “living soul” (nephesh).

Therefore the soul is physical, composed of matter, and can die – a truth believed by very few denominations, and probably by no religions!

What Is Human Consciousness?

soulresearchinstitute.org

Human beings have been given the wonderful gift of consciousness. We are aware of ourselves and our environment. We are able to appreciate the aesthetic beauties of the earth. We can readily perceive the past — or think we can — and the present and the future. We have the ability to perceive good and evil.

But what are the origins of human consciousness? How and when did we come to have this marvelous gift?

Man Looks at the Problem

Evolutionists have proposed to explain the origin of the physical being called man. But evolution offers no viable explanation for the existence of consciousness — not even the vastly inferior animal consciousness that was before man’s. Eminent scientist and Nobel prize winner, Sir John Eccles, has said:

“The genetic code and natural selection explains quite a lot. But not how I came to exist. It doesn’t explain even the origin of consciousness, even animal consciousness. If you look at the most modern texts on evolution you find nothing about mind and consciousness. They assume that it just comes automatically with the development of the brain. But that’s not an answer” (International Herald Tribune, March 31, 1981).

But if evolutionists cannot really explain the existence of consciousness, the Holy Scriptures do.

God Gives the Answer

The biblical book of Job contains some of the most beautiful poetic language in English literature. But the intrinsic worth of this ancient work goes far beyond mere beauty of language. It records a conversation that the man Job had with the Creator God.

The Almighty had asked the patriarch Job: “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements — surely you know!” (Job 38:4-5, RSV).

These verses reveal that intelligence vastly superior to man’s was present at the time of creation. Further, the same verses show that God possessed by his very nature the marvelous attribute of consciousness. Man was nowhere around at the time. He took no part in the creation work.

Centuries after Job died the prophet Isaiah was privileged to record God’s Word to the children of Israel in a similar vein. “Thus saith the Lord, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb: I am the Lord, who made all things, who stretched out the heavens alone, who spread out the earth — Who was with me?” (Isaiah 44:24).

Subject Content of Biblical Books

 

rcclc.ca

This list of Biblical books is not an exhaustive subject overview, but it represents a good beginning. I will be adding to it from time to time to complete it.

—-

Genesis

Genesis 1, 2 – Re-Creation, Creation

Genesis 6 – Noah’s Ark

Genesis 7,8 – Flood

Genesis 10 – Table of Nations

Genesis 11 – Tower of Babel

Genesis 12 – Call of Abraham

Genesis 12, 17 – God’s Covenant with Abraham

Genesis 14 – Melchisedek (O.T.)

Genesis 19 – Sodom & Gomorrah

Genesis 22 – Abraham Offers Isaac

Genesis 25 – Esau Sells His Birthright

Genesis 27 – Jacob Gains Birthright Blessings Through Deceit

Genesis 32 – Conversion of Jacob

Genesis 48 – Birthright Blessings Given To Ephraim & Manasseh

Genesis 49 – Blessings of Jacob’s Sons

—-

Exodus

Exodus 3 – God Calls Moses

Exodus 12 – First Passover

Exodus 14 – Miracle of Red Sea

Exodus 15 – Healing Covenant

Exodus 16 – Manna & The Sabbath

Exodus 20 – 10 Commandments

Exodus 31 – Sabbath As a Sign

Exodus 32 – The Golden Calf

—-

Leviticus

Leviticus 11 – Clean/Unclean Meats

Leviticus 16 – Atonement

Leviticus 23 – Holy Days Chapter

Leviticus 26 – Blessings and Cursings

—-

Did It All Really Start With A Big Bang?

Editors Note: The site Trumpet.com is fast becoming one of my favourite reads. It has concise, provable and easy to read articles which are interesting and timely in today’s world. The following article is spot on in its analysis of the universe and the sound rebuttal of atheists who think it all started by chance.

———————————————————–

wildwildweather.com

Science has proven that the universe did not always exist. It had a beginning.

What’s interesting is that scientists didn’t always believe that. Just a few generations ago, general consensus was that the universe had no beginning and no end—it just always was. Evolutionists found this convenient, as it contradicted the biblical creation account.

Evidence began to refute this idea in the 1920s. Data showed that distant objects are drifting away from our galaxy. Edwin Hubble, by measuring the wavelengths of light coming from other galaxies, determined that the universe is expanding in all directions. This discovery set the scientific world on fire. After all, if the universe is moving apart, then at one time it must have been compressed in a single location. It must have had a beginning.

The big bang theory was born

What is the theory? It has undergone significant refinement and revision over its near-80-year lifespan; today, cosmologists are developing and testing a few dozen variations of it. But in essence the idea is that, somewhere between 10 and 15 billion years ago, the entire universe came to exist suddenly, dramatically, in an infinitesimally brief moment. Theoretical physicist Brian Greene describes the “inflationary” big-bang model this way: “the size of the universe increased by a factor larger than a million trillion trillion in less than a millionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second” (The Fabric of the Cosmos).

Doesn’t sound very compatible with evolution, does it? It’s the extreme opposite of slow, gradual changes over billions of years. And it can’t be attributed to natural selection or other evolutionary processes that supposedly explain how advanced life came to exist without an intelligent author.

In fact, scientists first rejected the big-bang concept because it seemed too religious. Its echoes of “in the beginning” bothered them. (Their concern was no doubt heightened by the fact that the physicist who first advanced the theory, Georges Lemaître, was also a priest.) Somehow, though, atheists the world over eventually came to accept it as proof that the cosmos has no creator.

Everyone Needs A Boss

afdr.ab.ca

It’s not generally known, but in the center of the Vatican there is a tiny private garden used by the pope when he feels like refreshing his mind and being alone with his thoughts. There’s a gardener there named Guiseppe who has been taking care of that area for more than 40 years.

One day Guiseppe was working in the garden when he noticed on the far side a bush begin to shake and shimmer as the light hit it. The whole bush seemed to dance and move. Guiseppe became afraid and ran to a telephone to call the cardinal.

“Cardinalli, Cardinalli, God’s in the bushes!”

And the cardinal responded about the way you would expect. He thought Guiseppe had been standing in the sun a little too long, or maybe he was getting a little senile. So he said, “No, Guiseppe, that’s not so.”

But Guiseppe says, “Cardinalli, look outa your Window.”

So the cardinal says, ”All right.” He walks over and sees the bush shimmering and shaking boldly and brightly. And he comes back and tells him, “You’re right, Guiseppe. You’re right!”

Then Guiseppe says, “Cardinalli, what should I do? What should I do?”.

“Id better call the Papa,” says the cardinal. So he telephones the pope. Meanwhile, Guiseppe is cringing down in his telephone booth. Down in the comer, he can barely see the light shining through, blinding everything around. Finally his phone rings again, and the cardinal says, “Guiseppe, I justa talked to the Papa.”

And Guiseppe says, “Well, what did he say?”

“The Papa say,” came the reply, “looka busy.”

When the boss is around, everyone tries harder, everybody “looka busy.”

Everybody has a boss

But who needs a boss? Do you? Judging by the fact that everybody has a boss, evidently everybody must need a boss, right up to and including Jesus Christ Himself. He has a boss. The Father is clearly in charge and the Father is the only one in the entire universe who does not have a boss.

Behemoth: Largest And Strongest Land Animal In Man’s World!

eaudrey.com

What is the mysterious animal called “behemoth” in Job 40:15-24? Could this terrible beast be the hippopotamus we know today, as some commentators assume? Or some other creature?

You’ll be shocked when you see the scientific confirmation of what has been in God’s Word for over 3500 years!

In 1911 a British scientist was astounded when he found a few HUGE bones from what appeared to be an enormous type of rhinoceros. The bones were of such GIANT size they even dwarfed an elephant’s bones! He named the animal “Baluchitherium” (ba loo” chithee’ ri um).

Eleven years later, another scientist this time an American, was elated when he found three partial skeletons of “Baluchitherium”. The skeletal remains were hurried to New York where they were assembled. The results were nothing short of amazing!

The huge creature was confirmed to be an extinct, gigantic, apparently hornless rhinoceros! — a creature which fits the picture given of the Biblical “behemoth” mentioned in Job! Let us notice the startling comparison between the now-extinct “Baluchitherium” and the enigmatic creature of Job 40:15-24 which has perplexed Biblical scholars for ages.

Begin with Job 40:15: “Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee: he eateth grass like an ox.” What does this tell us?

First, God made a distinct creation of plants, including grass, and animals for the benefit and pleasure of man. The warm-blooded animals and the grasses and herbs were FIRST made when man was made — about 6000 years ago (Gen. 1:24-25). Evolutionists have always been puzzled at the fact that this kind of vegetation appeared so late in geological history.

Now notice again Job 40:15: “Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee ….” Here is an animal God made when man was made. Behemoth did not exist in the pre-Adamic world which was filled with giant dinosaurs and other types of strange creatures. Behemoth was an unique animal created with man — and for a purpose, as we shall see later!

Biblical Leviathan: More Than A Legend?

rg21.blogspot.com

Dragons! You’ve got to be kidding! No one believes in Dragons, so how can we have a serious discussion about them?

Yet in connection with the marvels of the created world, mention is made in the Bible of a terrifying sea creature called “leviathan.”

The precise identification of this huge animal is shrouded in a few verses: Job 3:8, 41:1-34, Psalms 74:14, Psalms 104:24-26 and Isaiah 27:1.

It obviously was some sort of majestic and awe inspiring aquatic creature. The margin notes in some Bible versions (ASV, RSV) speculate that the creature was a whale, though this description does not appear to even closely match what the Bible describes.

Other scholars identify this animal as a huge crocodile, but these are found mainly in inland waters and would therefore not be described as great beasts of the sea (Psalm 104:25–26). Nor are crocodiles so terrifying that no one dares tackle them—as they are regularly trapped and killed by native tribes.

A third presuppositions is that Leviathan may have been some variety of ancient dinosaur – now extinct (see Duane Gish, Dinosaurs – Those Terrible Lizards, San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1977, pp. 30, 51-54). But this, of course, is also nonsense, as dinosaurs became extinct long before the creation of man.

Then there are expositors inclined to identify leviathan as a  “mythological” entity, or as poetic imagery

“All five occurrences are in poetic passages and belong to ‘dead mythology,’ i.e., old mythological concepts are employed without suggestion that they are still believed” (The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, page 912).

However, the description in this section of scripture (as we shall see shortly) treats  leviathan as a real sea “monster,” with which the ancients were quite familiar.

Historical Proof: Jesus Christ Really Lived!

bijuachan.webs.com

Is there evidence, apart from the Bible, that Jesus really lived? Actually, the accounts in the Bible, which are God’s inspired revelation to humanity, are proof enough. But extrabiblical sources also amply attest that Jesus lived, that He was born of a young virgin, preached the Gospel, performed miracles, and was condemned to execution.

Justin Martyr, a second-century theologian, wrote: “Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, 35 stadia from Jerusalem, in which Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registries of the taxing under Cyrenius your first procurator in Judea” (“First Apology,” Chapter 34).

Justin Martyr was referring to public records that existed in his day to demonstrate that Jesus was born in Judea. Of course, one would expect that a religionist such as Justin Martyr would naturally support Jesus’ authenticity as a historical person. But what about a historian who despised Christians?

Cornelius Tacitus, Roman historian, senator, consul, and governor of the province of Asia, wrote this concerning Jesus and His followers: “Nero … punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved Christians (as they were popularly called). Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius’ reign by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate. But in spite of this temporary setback, the deadly superstition had broken out afresh, not only in Judea (where the mischief had started) but even in Rome” (“The Annals of Imperial Rome,” XV, 44).

The fourth-century Roman emperor Julian the Apostate (named this because he turned from Christianity after being brought up in it) wrote a major work against Christianity in which he said this: “Jesus, whom you celebrate, was one of Caesar’s subjects. If you dispute it, I will prove it by and by; but it may be as well done now. For yourselves allow, that he was enrolled with his father and mother in the time of Cyrenius …. But Jesus having persuaded a few among you, and those the worst of men, has now been celebrated about 300 years; having done nothing in his lifetime worthy of remembrance; unless anyone thinks it a mighty matter to heal lame and blind people, and exorcise demoniacs in the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany”(“Cyril Contra Julian,” VI, pages 213, 191).

These are reports from pagan Romans who despised Christianity. They had access to government records, and, if they could have disproved Jesus’ authenticity, they would have done so. But, they could not. Their writings are additional proof of Christ’s life.

What about the Jews? If Jesus did not exist, the Jews would have had no reason to reject Him! The Jewish historian Josephus admitted that Jesus, His disciples, and John the Baptist lived. He called John the Baptist “the good man” (“Antiquities of the Jews,” XVIII, 5, 2). Scholars recognize as genuine his account of the death of James, “the brother of Jesus who was called Christ” (Ibid., XX, 9, 1).

According to “The Jewish Encyclopedia” (1907 edition) and other sources, Jesus is also mentioned in the “Talmud,” the collection of Jewish tradition consisting of the Mishnah and the Gemara. The sections of the “Talmud” which are said to be references to Jesus are Shabbath 104b and 116b; Sanhedrin 43a, 67a, and 107b; and Sotah 47a. You may also wish to read the article “Jesus of Nazareth” in “The Jewish Encyclopedia” (1907 edition), the article “Jesus” in the “Encyclopedia Judaica,” the articles “Jesus Christ” and “Talmud and Midrash,” which shows how the “Talmud” (Mishna) is organized, in “The New Encyclopaedia Britannica” (1981 edition), and the book titled “Jesus Christ in the Talmud, Midrash, Zohar, and the Liturgy of the Synagogue,” by Gustaf Dalman (1973).

These facts, all from sources outside the Bible, clearly substantiate the existence of Jesus Christ. Jesus was not a myth. The Bible record is true.

Did Old Testament Disobedience Result In Great Slaughter From God?

all-history.org

The King James Version states that at the time the ark of the covenant was returned to Israel by the Philistines, God slew 50,070 men because they had looked inside the ark. Many Bible translations and commentaries reject the number 50,070 as inaccurate and unreasonable. They argue that this verse should read that only 70 men were actually killed.

This conclusion, however, is inconsistent with the second part of this verse. The Bible plainly states that “the people lamented, because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a “great slaughter.”

The term “great slaughter” is used many times in the Old Testament to describe military engagements where tens of thousands of soldiers were killed. Notice I Samuel 4, verses 10 and 17, where 30,000 Israelite soldiers died at the hands of the Philistines in a “great slaughter.” Compare also Joshua 10:10, Judges 11:33, and II Samuel 18:7.

Nevertheless, Bible students still find the account of I Samuel 6:19 difficult to accept. The original Hebrew clearly reads “seventy men, fifty thousand men.” Scholars point to the unusual arrangement of the numbers in that the 70 stands before the 50,000. The smaller number appearing first, however, is not an unprecedented arrangement in the Hebrew language. Even the omission of a conjunction between the two numbers does not change the meaning of the original text.

The Bible very precisely states that 50,070 men died in a great slaughter because of the irreverence and presumption of the men of Bethshemesh. The critical arguments of Bible scholars to dismiss the number 50,000 as a scribal error or a deliberate corruption of the text are a misguided attempt to diminish this dramatic account.

Did Samuel The Prophet Come Back As A Spirit?

walk-by-faith.com

King Saul asked God about an impending battle with the Philistines, but God gave him no answer (I Sam. 28:1-6). In great fear (verse 5), Saul disguised himself and went to the witch at Endor, a woman who had contact with familiar spirits or demons. She asked, “Whom shall I bring up unto thee? And he said, bring me up Samuel” (verse 11).

The woman complied with Saul’s request — or at least she performed some ritual which made it appear that she did. And “when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with a loud voice” (verse 12) because she then realized she was dealing with King Saul and could well be in jeopardy of her life for practicing witchcraft (verses 3 and 9). But Saul told her not to be afraid and asked what she had seen. She replied “I saw a god-like being coming up out of the earth” (verse 13, Jewish translation).

Saul then asked the woman, “What form is he of? And she said, An old man cometh up; and he is covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived [thought] that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed himself” (verse 14).

In describing what she saw, the woman used these expressions: “a god-like being,” “an old man,” and “he is covered with a mantle.” There is not one word that it was actually Samuel himself! What did she see? She saw an evil spirit which presented itself in a way in which it could be mistaken for Samuel.

The Bible reveals that Satan is the prince of the power of the air (Eph. 2:2). He is the god of this world and can transform himself into an angel of light (II Cor. 4:4; 11:14). Satan and his demons have the power to produce apparitions and to appear in human or animal forms.

The next question in I Samuel 28 arises over verse 15: “And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up?” Why does the account read as though Samuel were speaking to Saul? It is merely a matter of what Saul wanted to see and hear. Demons enjoy fooling people. This one took the opportunity to play into Saul’s hand by impersonating Samuel. It apparently knew the outcome of the battle and told Saul that he would die the following day and that his army would be defeated by the Philistines.

Deception is one of Satan’s devices (Rev. 12:9). I Samuel 28 records that “Samuel” spoke, although it was actually a demon speaking through what looked like a human (John Gill’s Exposition Of The Bible). Samuel was not there, either in body or spirit. He was, and still is, dead and in his grave, awaiting the resurrection. This account is written, at least in part, from the human point of view, that is, the way it appeared to the witch and to Saul.

This scripture in no way contradicts the multitude of clear scriptures proving that the soul is mortal.

What Is The Second Tithe?

tithinginfo.com

The second tithe is an additional tithe of one’s income and is saved by the individual each year for use in observing God’s Holy Days. Instruction concerning this tithe is found in Deuteronomy 14:22-26:

“Thou shalt truly tithe all the increase of thy seed, that the field bringeth forth year by year. And thou shalt eat [of the tithe] before the Lord thy God, in the place which he shall choose to place his name there, … And if the way be too long for thee, so that thou art not able to carry it; or if the place be too far from thee, which the Lord thy God shall choose to set His name there, when the Lord thy God hath blessed thee: Then shalt thou turn it into money … and thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth [desires] after… and thou shalt eat there before the Lord thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and shine household.”

The second tithe is used mostly for observance of the Feast of Tabernacles, which is held in the fall for eight days and is one Festival during which the whole Church comes together to worship and rejoice before God. The other annual Holy Days are observed in local church areas.

What Is The Third Tithe?

tithinginfo.com

In ancient Israel, God instructed His people to set aside a special tithe to assist those in need such as orphans, widows, strangers, and Levites (Deut. 14:28-29; 26:12-15).

God’s Church has always met its Christian duty toward its needy brethren through the third-tithe program. This is an additional tithe, entirely separate from the first tithe which supports God’s Work of preaching the Gospel. Like the first tithe, the third tithe is ten percent of a person’s increase. While the first tithe is paid year by year, the third tithe is paid only on the increase earned during the third and sixth years of a seven-year period.

Usually, a person begins counting the third-tithe year soon after the knowledge of it is gained. Since most would probably learn about this tithe just prior to baptism, they would count their third-tithe year from either the Passover or the Feast of Tabernacles, whichever is closer to the date of their baptism.

In some cases the individual may give his third tithe to a near relative. A widowed mother, sister, or daughter, for example, would qualify under the guidelines set out in Deuteronomy 14 and 26. Orphans in a similar category would also qualify. This tithe supports many needy widows at this time and is God’s way of taking care of those who are in need.

Gays And Conservatism: The New Norm?

Editors Comment: Gays are now pushing the conservative agenda, according to the article below by TheTrumpet.com. In this arena,  GOProud, America’s first-ever organization that “represents gay conservatives and their allies,” condemns anyone opposed to homosexuality for religious reasons, calling them backward and barbaric—then proudly evangelizes for its own cause with nothing less than religious zealotry. These homosexual conservatives” are in the vanguard of a society aggressively pursuing an anti-Bible agenda that is dismantling the old ways piece by piece and hastening our ruin by doing so.

———————————————————————————-

metroweekly.com

Conservative in America ain’t what it used to be.

“The whole idea about conservatism is about individual freedom, individual liberty,” said Matt Hissey, a 22-year-old college student, at this past weekend’s cpac.

Really? The dictionary says conservative means holding fast to established, traditional norms, customs and values. Too bad for tradition: More and more American “conservatives” agree with Hissey.

For 38 years, the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, sponsored by the American Conservative Union, has drawn dozens of high-profile right-wing American political figures, hundreds of conservative activist groups and thousands of participants. Hissey was a volunteer for an organization attending the conference for the first time—and actually co-sponsoring this year’s event. This group’s inclusion caused some consternation among long-time participants, and not just because of Hissey’s off-kilter ideas on just what conservatism is.

Hissey is a member of GOProud, America’s first-ever organization that “represents gay conservatives and their allies.”

cpac organizers wanted to show just how big the tent for “conservatives” has grown. Now it includes proud homosexuals and people who want homosexuals in the military and support other “gay rights” issues. Define “conservatism” as individual freedom and liberty, and all kinds of possibilities open up.

Predictably, though, the move rankled those who actually favor preserving traditional norms. GOProud’s presence at cpac drove some folks to boycott the event, including the Family Research Council and the Heritage Foundation. GOProud’s executive director, Jimmy LaSalvia, said the boycotters “have chosen to marginalize themselves out of the conservative movement.” The fact that such right-wing luminaries as Sarah Palin, Andrew Breitbart and Ann Coulter supported GOProud’s presence would suggest he’s correct. Clearly, Republican organizers felt they had more to gain by courting homosexuals than they had to lose by alienating social conservatives.

Conversion: Sudden Experience or Lifelong Process?

The Plain Truth, April 1977

autoclave.com

At times I have expressed the idea I think many millions have come to believe and on which they are staking their eternity. It is this: You are on a journey on a railway train. It is your life’s journey, whether long or short. At the end of the line, because of Adam’s sin, the switch is automatically thrown to send you directly down to hell, where you will be burned alive — constantly burning, yet never burning up because you are an immortal soul that can’t die. Or, as millions also believe, it will shoot you directly to “purgatory.”

But, if at any point in your life during the journey you “accept Christ as your Savior,” then at the instant of that sudden experience, in whatever manner such experience takes place, the switch at the end of the line is suddenly thrown to shoot you immediately up to heaven. And there you shall live FOREVER in idleness and ease, in glorious surroundings of splendor, with nothing to do — no responsibilities anymore — nothing but to be enraptured with the delight of gazing continually on the face of Christ your Savior. A man once said to me: “Let me see if I can define your belief as contrasted to what you claim many millions of others believe.” Then he explained the belief of the many approximately as I have stated it just above.

“But you believe,” he continued, “that after one is initially converted, accepting Christ, he must then live a life of obedience to God’s way, struggling against himself to overcome all wrong ways and growing spiritually in Christ’s knowledge and in grace — thus training himself and qualifying to carry an important responsibility in the next life. You believe that when he dies, he is dead, will not go to heaven or hell, but will come to life again by a resurrection from the dead, and he will be here on earth. Then he will have immortality, and he will be rewarded according to what his works were in this life — the biggest reward being to have conferred on him the heaviest and most important responsibility. Is that what you believe?”

“Well, not exactly,” I replied, “but you are not too far off.”

What Did Christ Look Like In The Flesh?

pressthat.wordpress.com

The debate on what Jesus Christ looked like in the flesh has many contradictions. The Bible does not give an exact description of Jesus, but a simple study of the Bible shows that Christ could not have looked as modern pictures or movies represent Him.

As a human being, Jesus Christ was a Jew (Heb. 7:14) and looked like a normal Jewish man of His time. He was also a carpenter, working outdoors. That means He was tanned in the summer and wind-burnt in the winter, with a healthy, weathered look about Him. Since carpenters at the time of Christ were also familiar with stone masonry, Christ would have been muscular enough to carry and place large stones in homes and buildings. He was definitely not weak and feminine looking like modern pictures depict Him.

Bible description of Christ

The only Biblical description of Jesus Christ in the flesh is given as this: “[H]e hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him” (Isa. 53:2). In other words, Christ had no distinguishing features or handsomeness that made Him stand out in a crowd. He even used this fact to His own advantage many times. He was able to escape harm by blending safely into a mass of other Jews on more than one occasion. Remember also, Judas had to point Him out to the authorities with a kiss (Matt. 26:48-50).

It is also important to recognize that the Jews of Christ’s day considered it a great shame for a man to have long hair (1 Cor. 11:14). So Christ would never have looked like the pampered, long-haired, easy-to-point-out man modern pictures make Him appear to be.

Other than these conclusions, we have no more information about his actual physical countenance. In fact, anything else is a matter of speculation and uncertainty. The New Testament is likely silent on these points because it is more important to center attention on the message, rather than the messenger.

Idolatrous image of Christ

Still, there is a general “standardized appearance of Christ that is largely accepted today. The image of a fully-bearded Jesus with long hair did not become established until the 6th century in Eastern Christianity, and much later in the West. Earlier images were much more varied. Beliefs that certain images are historically authentic, or have acquired an authoritative status from church tradition, remain powerful in both Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. The Shroud of Turin is now the best-known example, though the Image of Edessa and the Veil of Veronica were better known in medieval times.” (Wikipedia)

The modern depiction of Christ is wrong, of course, but that hasn’t deterred Christianity at large from  using that false image in an idolatrous way through pictures, on crosses, etc. But God wants us to think of Jesus Christ as He actually is today. The Bible states:

“His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters” (Rev. 1:14-15).

As the living Son of God, Jesus Christ’s face shines with fiery brilliance. His spirit body burns like molten brass. We could not look into His face and not be harmed by the experience. All false representations of Christ through crucifixes, pictures and statues fail miserably to represent Him as He truly is. They are wholly false and must be discarded if true Christians are to worship God in spirit and in truth.

Dinosaurs Before Adam: The Physical Proof Of Biblical Truth!

ghostradio.wordpress.com

What do the facts of science and the Bible reveal about dinosaurs – about the earth before Adam? Why is evolutionary geology unable to account for the sudden extinction of dinosaurs? Here are the answers!

Did you know that once literally millions of dinosaurs and other creatures suddenly perished from the face of the earth? Why? How did it happen? Why are the scientists puzzled by this catastrophic “time of great dying?”

Evolution has no answers

The Bible answers all these questions. It reveals whether the earth is older than man – just what kind of world God created in the beginning.

But evolution has no answer to the sudden disappearance of dinosaurs. No answers to the almost complete change of both plant and animal life forms at the end of what scientists have dubbed the “Mesozoic era.”

Why is the present world fitted for man’s existence, while the world of the dinosaurs was unfit for human survival?

Suppose you visit a museum

Take a brief walk through any natural history museum. It will reveal a vast array of charts and fossils depicting the theory of organic evolution. geology, you will be told, provides evidence of a succession of life forms in the strata of the earth.

But does the record of the rocks really show this? Do the facts of science substantiate these “scientific” theories?

Furthermore, it is claimed, the earth is billions of years old and the fossil record – the aged bones, tracks and other remains of extinct animals and plants – proves that life has been evolving over millions of years.

Why have scientists reburied the facts only to resurrect them in the image of their evolutionary theories? This article explains why!

Neanderthal Man DNA Disproves Evolution!

Editors Comment: Once again, evolution is being shown as an amateurish attempt to discredit God. The following article from the Trumpet.com shows that DNA from Neanderthal man is so similar to humans, that the difference is insignificant. Seems Neanderthal man is nothing more than pre-flood humans with a lot more muscle than his modern, soft counterparts.

————————————————————-

johnberardi.com

After years of anticipation, the genetic code of Neanderthal “cavemen” is being decoded. And it is unraveling the theory of evolution. Apparently Neanderthals are a little more closely related to humans than expected. How close? Let’s just say that the man Aunt Thelma married may really be a “Neanderthal” after all.

According to a May 6 Science article, the Neanderthal genome sequencing is nearing completion. It is not complete yet, but what scientists have found so far is astounding: Humans and “Neanderthals” are practically identical at the dna code level.

The researchers used dna captured from the nucleus of cells found in three bone fragments from three different female Neanderthals found in Croatia. The scientists then compared the Neanderthal genome to the human at 14,000 protein coding gene segments that differ between humans and chimpanzees. In doing so, they looked at over 3 billion combinations of four key protein molecules.

What did the scientists find? Simply put: Neanderthals are human. There was virtually no difference between the two codes. The few differences they did find were so slight that researchers say that they are functionally irrelevant—and that if more Neanderthal genomes could be compared there might be no differences at all!

But that is not all the scientists found. The data suggests Neanderthals are as closely related to humans as Chinese are to Germans, or French to Javanese. Furthermore, the genetic material analyzed indicated that Neanderthals and humans interbred and produced offspring that interbred—and regularly.

Uncle Jed’s jutting eyebrow? Chalk that one down to dna passed down from generation to generation.

“Whatever our differences, they’re not in the composition of your building blocks,” reports Wired Science. The “Neanderthal genome shows most humans are cavemen.”

Did you get that? All those supposed pre-man, caveman bones are actually just plain old human skeletons.

It is a startling admission for evolutionists because it throws a monkey wrench into conventional evolutionary theory.

The Truth Of God’s Word

iandibook.com

The Bible is the inspired Word of God and as such is truth:

2 Timothy 3:16-17: All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Psalms is also full of references to biblical truth, in particular, Psalm 119, which has four references alone.

Psalm 119:89- Your word, O LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens.

And again:

Psalm 119:160- All your words are true; all your righteous laws are eternal.

And a few other references from both the Old and New Testaments:

2 Samuel 22:31- As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless.

Luke 21:33- Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

One more:

Proverbs 30:5- Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.

Obviously the list goes on.  Those are just a few of the dozens of verses testifying to the reliability of scripture to guide our lives in conduct of morality and right and wrong.

Abortion and homosexuality are a denial of an absolute biblical truth.  Heading this perversity is a doctrine that has infiltrated our schools, our homes, the media, and the lives of every person in Western society –  evolution and the morality and worldview that it entails. With the idea that humans are nothing more than advanced animals comes the disregard for human life.  Abortion is a direct result of the success of evolution in our society.

Evolution and the Bible cannot mix, because they are fundamentally opposed to each other.  Evolution was invented for one purpose, and one purpose only- to provide people with an excuse to reject God.  That is it’s sole purpose. It goes against everything the Bible teaches, from creation to the sanctity of human life to the very existence of God.

Even so called Christians have tried to work it into the scriptures, with the result that some denominations have been made a laughingstock.

Evolution teaches that we are nothing more than advanced animals, and that homosexuality is just another way for evolution to keep mankind’s population in control. This is precisely why they compare humans to animals with seemingly homosexual tendencies. But comparing animals to humans is irrelevent, since animals do not possess the same level of intelligence as humans. And population control presumes that evolution can think, or act ahead of itself, which is preposterous. This sort of foolish talk is mere nonsense from blinded adherents.

The word of God teaches that mankind has a beautiful future with God, while evolution teaches that we have this short life and nothing else. Why would anyone choose the latter?

Anti-Evolution Quotes

http://www.wayhome.org

“The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.” – Charles Darwin 1902 edition.

“…I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science….It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] & holes as sound parts.” Charles Darwin to Asa Gray, cited by Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1991) pp. 456, 475.

“Nowhere was Darwin able to point to one bona fide case of natural selection having actually generated evolutionary change in nature….Ultimately, the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.” Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crises (Bethesda, Maryland: Adler & Adler, 1986) pp. 62, 358.

“I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.” Søren Løvtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth (New York: Croom Helm, 1987), p. 422.

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.” Dr. T. N. Tahmisian Evolution and the Emperor’s New Clothes by N.J. Mitchell (United Kingdom: Roydon Publications, 1983), title page.

“The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination.” Albert Fleischmann. Witnesses Against Evolution by John Fred Meldau (Denver: Christian Victory Publishing, 1968), p. 13.

“[T]he theory suffers from grave defects, which are becoming more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge, nor does it suffice for our theoretical grasp of the facts…No one can demonstrate that the limits of a species have ever been passed. These are the Rubicons which evolutionists cannot cross…Darwin ransacked other spheres of practical research work for ideas…But his whole resulting scheme remains, to this day, foreign to scientifically established zoology, since actual changes of species by such means are still unknown.” Albert Fleischmann, “The Doctrine of Organic Evolution in the Light of Modern Research,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 65 (1933): pp. 194-95, 205-6, 208-9.

“Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” Louis Bounoure. The Advocate, 8 March 1984, p. 17.

“And the salient fact is this: if by evolution we mean macroevolution (as we henceforth shall), then it can be said with the utmost rigor that the doctrine is totally bereft of scientific sanction. Now, to be sure, given the multitude of extravagant claims about evolution promulgated by
evolutionists with an air of scientific infallibility, this may indeed sound strange. And yet the fact remains that there exists to this day not a shred of bona fide scientific evidence in support of the thesis that macroevolutionary transformations have ever occurred.” Wolfgang
Smith, Teilhardism and the New Religion (Rockford., Ill.: Tan Books, 1988), pp. 5-6. Dr. Smith, taught at MIT and UCLA.

“With the failure of these many efforts, science was left in the somewhat embarrassing position of having to postulate theories of living origins which it could not demonstrate. After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the inevitable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort could not prove to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past.” Loren Eisley, The Immense Journey (1957), p. 199.

“If complex organisms ever did evolve from simpler ones, the process took place contrary to the laws of nature, and must have involved what may rightly be termed the miraculous.” R.E.D. Clark, Victoria Institute (1943), p.

” `Creation,’ in the ordinary sense of the word, is perfectly conceivable. I find no difficulty in conceiving that, at some former period, this universe was not in existence, and that it made its appearance in six days (or instantaneously, if that is preferred), in consequence of the volition of some preexisting Being. Then, as now, the so-called a priori arguments against Theism and, given a Deity, against the possibility of creative acts, appeared to me to be devoid of reasonable foundation.” Thomas H. Huxley, quoted in *L. Huxley, Life and Letters of Thomas Henry Huxley, Vol. I (1903), p. 241 (1903). 63.

“Our theory of evolution has become . . one which cannot be refuted by any possible observations. Every conceivable observation can be fitted into it . . No one can think of ways in which to test it. Ideas wither without basis or based on a few laboratory experiments carried out in extremely simplified systems, have attained currency far beyond their validity. They
have become part of an evolutionary dogma accepted by most of us as part of our training.” L.C. Birch and *P. Ehrlich, Nature, April 22, 1967.

“What is at stake is not the validity of the Darwinian theory itself, but of the approach to science that it has come to represent. The peculiar form of consensus the theory wields has produced a premature closure of inquiry in several branches of biology, and even if this is to be expected in `normal science,’ such a dogmatic approach does not appear healthy.” R. Brady, “Dogma and Doubt,” Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 17:79, 96 (1982)

Pope Pius XII Is No Saint: History Reveals A Narrow Spirit And Heart While Millions Died

ivarfjeld.wordpress.com

“Pope Pius XII (Latin: Pius PP. XII), born Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Pacelli (March 2, 1876 – October 9, 1958), reigned as the 260th pope, the head of the Roman Catholic Church and sovereign of Vatican City, from March 2, 1939 until his death in 1958. Some historians view the record of his long papacy and wartime predicament sympathetically; others view his actions (or inactions) critically, if not harshly. The interpretations of non historians vary even more widely, with some (John Cornwell, Hitler’s Pope) accusing him of pursuing personal power at the expense of the Jews, while others (Ronald Rychlak, Hitler, the War, and the Pope) argue he did everything in his power to help them. (Freelibrary.com)

In We Remember, a 1998 statement on the church’s role in the Holocaust, the Vatican claimed that Pius saved “hundreds of thousands of Jewish lives.” It was an absurd statement.

“Pope Pius XII, prior to his pontificate, successfully negotiated the Reich Concordat with Adolf Hitler in 1933, effectively destroying all political opposition to the fledgling Nazi movement in Germany. According to cabinet meeting minutes from July 14, 1933, Hitler considered the German-Vatican pact a “great achievement”—particularly “in the developing struggle against international Jewry.” (The Unapologetic Pope)

Since the death of Pope Pius XII i on October 9, 1958, there has been a concerted effort by the Vatican and Jesuits to diminish the overwhelming evidence of racial hatred, inaction and evil by this Roman Pontiff, particularly to the Holy Inquisition undertaken during his reign against the Jews.

In the 1960′s, it was the Jesuit sponsored work Three Popes and the Jews (1967), by Panchas. E. Lapide that attempted to portray the grand illusion and claims that Pope Pius XII never met Hitler once, in direct contradiction to the testimony of those closest to Pius for most of his life since Munich and his rise to Pontiff.