Speaking of Judicial Philosophies. . . .

This is a blogpost from The Powerline Blog on July 26, 2005. Check it out!

Speaking of Judicial Philosophies. . . .

The Washington Times has the latest on the John Roberts nomination. Contrary to some press reports, Hillary Clinton says she has not made up her mind to vote for Roberts' confirmation. The Democrats say they want to drag out the beginning of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing until September--the administration wants it to begin in August--and it appears that they have Arlen Specter's support as to the schedule. But here's what I really want to comment on: The Democrats say they need more time so they can "learn more about Judge Roberts' judicial philosophy, especially on whether he will defer to precedent or seek to undo modern American jurisprudence that many conservatives say has been wrongly settled." We hear this a lot; the Democrats worry that Roberts and other nominees might not adhere to the doctrine of stare decisis, which, in general, holds that courts should follow their own precedents rather than revisiting settled principles. But the Democrats' loyalty to the principle of stare decisis is highly selective. In fact, most of the decisions most beloved by liberals have overturned precedents that held the opposite. For example, in Lawrence v. Texas, which in 2003 discovered for the first time a Constitutional right to homosexual sodomy, the Court expressly overruled its own decision in Bowers v. Hardwick, which was decided as recently as 1986. So as far as the Democrats are concerned, stare decisis applies only after the Court has made a liberal ruling. Liberal rulings are carved in stone, whereas "conservative" rulings--those that represent the traditional understanding of our Constitution and laws, as written--can and should be overturned freely. As Paul has noted, we aren't sure exactly what Roberts' judicial philosophy is. But we're pretty certain it is more principled than the Democrats. Posted by John at The Powerline Blog. In Him, David S. MacMillan III

#1 Problem: Young-Earth Creationists?

According to the leader of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU), the number 1 problem facing Christian Colleges today is not philosophical relativism or the culture war or a myriad of other legitimate problems. No, at a recent meeting of the CCCU the leader of the group stated that the greatest problem for Christian colleges is "the attack of young-earth creationists"!!! Not young-earth creationism being attacked. Young-earth creationists that are supposedly "attacking" these colleges. "They will call good evil and evil good. . . ." To read the entire article by Dr. Terry Mortenson of Answers In Genesis, click here. In Him, D3

Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade

My mom subscribes to Vision Forum's weekly newsletter. This is an article that was sent recently. I know that it is super-long, but bear with me and read it in its entirety. I have edited it extensively, adding my own comments underlined for clarity, so that it won't be as long as it was. I also kinda lopped off the end. . . .

By Douglas W. Phillips

"As well as being extraordinarily popular, the [Harry Potter] books have encouraged millions of children to start reading for the first time.... For those who have a problem with the idea of fantasy and alternative universes alongside ours, we need to recognize that almost all children play imaginative games in their minds starting at a very young age and have no difficulty whatsoever in distinguishing between fantasy and reality.... Additionally, the Harry Potter books send a strong message about moral order. There are beautiful and enjoyable human relationships among the characters, and there is a depth of commitment and service among them.... Finally, I see the books as valuable because they consistently include the three fundamental themes that can be found as a subtext in almost all good literature: the beauty of creation, the appalling reality of evil, and the universal human longing for redemption.... J.K. Rowling does not profess to be a Christian, as far as I am aware, but she has insight into the themes that are at the very heart of what Christians understand to be true about the nature of the universe in which we live.... All truth is God’s truth, and non-Christians recognize that truth to one degree or another.... It is said that because magic is a part of the ... books, they may have the effect of interesting children in the reality of the Occult.... The magic is simply a part of the imaginative worlds.... Some people have gone on record as stating that they believe that J.K. Rowling is purposely and explicitly teaching Occult and even Satanic practice. As a Christian, I have to say I am profoundly ashamed of those who have responded with this kind of malicious gossip. We must recognize that whenever she talks about evil magic she presents it as evil.”

(Jerram Barr, Professor of Christianity and Contemporary Culture and Resident Scholar at The Francis Schaeffer Institute)

Breaking News

This morning, the publishing industry surprised the world by releasing a new, unexpected companion volume to last week’s sixth installment of J.K. Rowling’s hugely successful Harry Potter series. As word of the new release spread like wildfire, crowds of frenzied children and teenagers began thronging at the doors of hundreds of local bookstores in the United States and U.K., hoping to be among the first to receive their own copy of a book bearing the title: Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade.

Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade continues to perpetuate all the sorceries, incantations, and spells which have delighted children around the world. But this installment of Harry Potter introduces a new theme — homosexuality. In Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade, we discover that the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is expanding its curriculum base to provide mandatory training in homosexuality for all of its recruits. Harry discovered in Book One that he was born with witchcraft in his blood. Now, recent discoveries show that the same students born with the gift of magic also possess a genetic predisposition toward homosexuality. With this in mind, the goal of Hogwarts is to teach its students the proper and moral way to be homosexual witches. Students must learn about safety, monogamy, and even social etiquette. But the race is on. A second witch training academy run by evil witches has also discovered their own homosexual predispositions. Unlike Hogwarts, they intend to use their homosexuality for evil. They teach their students evils like sexual promiscuity. They openly encourage pedophilia. It is the mission of Harry and his intrepid gang of sodomite warlocks and lesbian witches (dubbed “The Lavender Brigade”) to once again stop the menace of bad witches.

No Cause for Concern

Perhaps some Christians have concerns about children’s literature in which homosexuality is both a defining characteristic of the protagonists and a thematic element which runs from beginning to the end of the novel.

Relax. Don’t be so uptight. Don’t worry, Christian parents. Harry Potter is not the real world! It is an imaginary world. Children know the difference between the two. They are not going to start dressing up like their heroes or pretending to do the same things their heroes do in the stories. After all, it is just a pretend story. Thoughtful Christian critics will recognize that the author has created an alternative reality with a completely different set of rules. Sodomy may be wrong in the real world, but it is not wrong in Harry Potter’s reality, and it would be sophomoric to think that, just because the book is one long story about the glories of good homosexuality in the world of Harry Potter, that it desensitizes children to the problems with homosexuality in the real world. We should be ashamed of any Christians who would claim the author is promoting perversion. She makes strong distinctions between good homosexuality and bad homosexuality. Bad homosexuality is always presented as really bad.

And here is the clincher: Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade is a brilliant, well-written adventure that includes all the great themes of classic literature — the creation of an alternative reality where different rules apply, a carefully-executed plot, and clear elements of good versus evil. The story presents the beauty of creation and the appalling reality of evil. (Keep in mind that all truth is God’s truth.) There is even a strong redemption theme in the story as the leader of the pro-pedophilia group realizes the wrongness of his ways and joins the good sodomites of Hogwarts. In the end, good sodomites triumph over bad sodomites and order is restored to the alternative universe.

Confession

Okay, so there is no Harry Potter and the Lavender Brigade. I made it up.

What I have not made up is the fact that Pottermania has engulfed the youth of a generation, setting an unprecedented frenzy of sales of the recent installment, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. Within the first twenty-four hours of its release, nearly seven million copies were sold in the United States alone. Assuming a 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. sales schedule, that means they averaged nearly 600,000 copies an hour.

Also not made up is the fact that there are growing numbers of intelligent, reasonable, Christian teachers and scholars — some are friends whom I dearly love and respect — who are on record as giving their blessing to Harry Potter and supporting the inclusion of Harry Potter books as a healthy, positive part of the literary diet of Christian children. I disagree with them for many reasons, but it is the limited purpose of this article to focus in on and address what I see as their root argument.

My question is: If we may bend God’s moral laws in fantasy realities, then why is “Harry the Hero-Witch” okay for our children, but “Harry the Hero-Homosexual” not? Both witchcraft and perversion are deemed “works of the flesh” and “abominations” in Scripture. Both are immoral acts for which the practitioner stands condemned. Why would one be cute, fun, appealing, and — most importantly — legitimate in a fantasy reality, and the other unacceptable?

The character of God is challenged when we posit alternative realities which redefine the moral law order of God to allow men to delight in that which would be deemed wickedness in the real world. Creating worlds of good witchcraft versus bad witchcraft is a prime example of the problem. No such world can exist — anywhere — not even in our own imagination, without redefining the nature and attributes of God Himself. The essence of witchcraft and the desire to employ the tools of witchcraft are an assault on the Lordship and sovereignty of God. By virtue of the fact that Harry and his friends are “good guys” in pursuit of the very powers reserved to God Himself in the real world, the god of Harry Potter’s universe is, ispo facto, a different god than the God of our universe.

And no one need ask, “What Would Jesus Do?” in the real world to Harry and his friends, because the Bible answers the question with deafening specificity:

"But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." (Revelation 21:8)

Doug Phillips is the president of Vision Forum Ministries, the founder of the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival, and a faculty member of the Christian Filmmakers Academy, dedicated to bringing a presuppositionally biblical approach to film and culture.

In Him,

D3

Bombing Suspects Apprehended in London

Yesterday, Scotland Yard released photos of suspected terrorists in connection with the second wave of London bombings. Three more subways were attacked, and one more bus, but this time no one was killed, and only one slight injury was reported. Click on the picture to see a larger image. Is it any surprise that these men are all of the same ethnicity: Muslim? Not at all. It is the goal of every true Islamic extremist to kill an "infidel". Fundamentalist Islam will stop at nothing to obey the Koran. And the ACLU says that we can't do "racial profiling" in airport searches! Look. If we know that kidnappers are usually single, white, middle-aged males, then when an Amber Alert goes out police should be on the lookout for single, white, middle-aged males, right? Of course. For the same reason, we should search Abdullah Ben-Whozit with a bulge under his coat instead of my 93-year-old great-grandfather who can hardly hold his arms out straight. "Racial/Ethnic Profiling"? No, that's called common sense. Another suspected terrorist was . . . apprehended . . . by the police. When a Middle-Eastern man entered a hot, muggy subway station yesterday wearing a thick trench-coat, low-brow hat, and a heavy backpack, police confronted him immediately. Instead of complying, he ran, jumping over turnstiles and dodging metal detectors. The cops shouted for everyone to scatter. They chased down the man and tackled him. Fearing that he would detonate the contents of his backpack, they shot him five times in the head as he fought them, killing him. Scotland Yard has since stated that although it is highly regrettable the man died, it is still likely he was connected with the bombings. He left a house under surveillance in connection with the investigation and exhibited erratic behavior at the subway station. And of course the fact that he ran from police. . . . I know, it's gruesome. But at least the police don't beat around the bush with criminals! I would rather have a terrorist shot in a struggle than have him blow himself up and kill policemen and civilians as well. This is apparently the view of the London police department as well: "If you are dealing with someone who might be a suicide bomber, if they remain conscious, they could trigger plastic explosives or whatever device is on them," London Mayor Ken Livingstone said. "Therefore, overwhelmingly in these circumstances, it is going to be a shoot-to-kill policy." The moral of this story: Don't wear a heavy trench coat and backpack on a hot London day on mass transportation. And, if you are stupid enough to do this, and the cops ask you about it, don't run! In Him, D3

Linking to me and The Account

Hey all,

I finally figured out how to display raw HTML code on the blog for all to see.

If you want to link to me, copy the code in the box below and paste it into your template. If you accidentally erase the code, just hit "Refresh" on your browser.

<a href="http://www.standonbible.blogspot.com"><img src="http://photos1.blogger.com/img/154/4310/1024/D3%27s%20Blog%21%21%21.jpg" height="34" width="100" /></a>

You can resize the "height" and "width" numbers proportionately if you don't like the size. The source image is nearly a thousand pixels wide, so you won't have any trouble with resolution.

---

On another note, I made a new header for The Account, DJ's blog, with Adobe Photoshop. Click here to see it! It only took 30 minutes using pictures that were already on my computer.

In Him,

D3

TeenPact University: The Epilogue

Hey Cyberspace, I'm finally back and functioning from TeenPact University! TPU was incredible. Mr. Chris Sherrod, Master Apologist, taught the class. The focus of the week was apologetics: defending our faith. Today, I am more convinced than ever that Christianity is true and that to believe in Jesus is to concur with reason and science. I don't have time to go into all the details of the camp, but I'll probably bring some of the class content up in future posts. This was the basic layout of the week, with occasional highlights: Monday: I flew from Cincinnatti to Detroit and back down to Atlanta. Due to the effects of Hurricane Dennis, my flight from Detroit to Atlanta was delayed nearly 2 hours. Add to this the 1.5 hour layover that was planned, and you get 3 hours of non-stop CNN. Talk about depressing! Tuesday: Settling into camp routine. The food is great, but it isn't much fun when lights out sounds at 11 PM and you have to be up by 7. Especially in the summertime. We tried to play Ultimate Frisbee, but it is hard when the temperature is 95 degrees and 100% humidity with no breeze . . . in the shade. At lunch, I made a small scene by pretending to fall off of a chair but doing it too well and landing hard on my back. Ouch! Wednesday: Routine day. We learned a whole lot of stuff, and I prepared for the Ivy League Track that would take place the next day. That night, the entire camp participated in a massive game of capture-the-flag. The rules were a little different; each player wore a piece of tape around their arm. If this tape was ripped off anywhere on the field, they would be "dead" and would have to return to the center of the playing field for another tape. Their "death" was recorded as a 10-point bonus for the other team, and they returned to the game. Guys were not allowed to take girls' tapes off, but girls could "kill" the guys. This made the girls powerful, almost invincible players. It was during this game that Joe Echols, Mr. Echols' son, came over a rise and slammed into Anna Boyles, knocking her to the ground. Her head struck the grass violently, giving her a medium-to-severe concussion. She drifted in and out of consciousness all night. Anna never lost her sense of humor, though; when asked what she ran into, she shouted "The ground!" Anna left for the ER along with several of the staff members. Play resumed, our spirits slightly dampened by the events of the night. Our team beat the other team by a narrow margin after Bobi, Rebecca, Sarah, and I raided the enemy camp and captured their flag. Thursday: UGA Survey and Ivy League Track day! The group split up; half went with Mr. Sherrod to do worldview surveys/debating with random students on the University of Georgia campus. The other half, including myself and Anna (whose neck was now in a brace), went with Tim Echols and Representative Tom Riner to a conference room at UGA for the Ivy League track. It went well, especially considering that it was the first time this had been done and that the Riner family's plane was delayed and there had been no time to set everything up beforehand. Friday: Routine is relaxed on the last day. Mr. Sherrod ended the week with a session on cults. I'll probably make a post in the future on the great information covered by this part of TPU. Several pranks were played on the last night (nothing serious, and no permanent damage was sustained to anyone or any surroundings). I won't comment on who did it or what happened. ;-). Saturday: Most people were up by 6 AM. Sadly, everyone made their farewells and climbed into a bus to head for the airport. We reached the airport at about 10 AM. I was flying with Andre Fredette to Detroit, where we would split up. Our flight didn't leave until 6:11 PM, so we escorted all the girls to their gates one by one (airports can be dangerous places, you know). I tried to get an earlier flight, but Northwest couldn't guarantee that there would be an earlier flight out of Detroit to Cincinnati to match it, so I opted to take the 6:11 flight. When 5:30 rolled around and Andre and I were waiting to board, they announced that the flight had been delayed 1 hour. This meant that both of us would miss our connection in Detroit. We waited in line at the gate for almost 2 hours. By the time the airline worker got to us, the flight had already left. Northwest grudgingly gave us a voucher for a hotel room and dinner at a Holiday Inn in inter-city Atlanta. The food was expensive, but Andre and I managed to fill ourselves up and get a good night's sleep. Our flight left on time from Atlanta with no further delays on Sunday. When I got home at 4 PM, I hit the pillow in my bedroom and slept 'till 6. The Moral of this Story: Don't fly Northwest and don't stay at the Holiday Inn in Atlanta. The airline has stopped giving complimentary pretzels (they just serve you a cup of soda) and the hotel has stopped complimentary breakfast. Also, be prepared for anything, since anything can happen. I'd post pictures from the camp but I'm not sure the campers want their faces all over the internet. I also have a few articles I wrote while at camp that I will post as soon as they are emailed to me. In Him, David S. MacMillan III

TeenPact University

Hey Cyberspace, This week, I will be attending TeenPact University in Georgia. This camp is centered around preparing teens for the struggles that they will face before and during college. There are two branches of TPU: North, held at Patrick Henry College, and South, held in Carmel, Georgia. I will be attending South because that is where Representative Tom Riner from Kentucky will be teaching a special Ivy League Track on one of the days for those, like myself, who are interested in attending an Ivy League School. In a way, this is the time that summer starts for me, because I've been busy with research for this very camp up until yesterday. As a result of this, I probably won't be in the blogosphere until this time next week. You certainly won't see any full-length articles. Of course, there's always a chance that I will get ahold of a PC in an airport or somewhere else and be able to comment. But don't stop visiting my site! There are quite a few recent articles that no one has been commenting on. It would be great to return home and find a comment war in full swing! Hope you have a great summer, and thanks for being part of my blogpal group (that goes for you too, Anonymous S!)! In Him, David S. MacMillan III

Brutal Terror Attacks in London: Why?

Early today, July 7th, a series of bombs exploded across London, England. As usual, the terrorists targeted population centers; subways packed with early-morning commuter traffic and the huge double-decker buses that traverse the city. So far, 40 fatalities have been reported and over 300 other people were injured in the blasts. Carnage covers London. Authorities believe that the attacks were timed to coincide with the G-8 summit, where European leaders met for humanitarian efforts. Who committed these atrocities? There have been reports that suicide bombers caused one or more explosions. Since the bombs were placed strategically to injure as many civilians as possible, we have another clue to the identification of these terrorists. Suicide bombings. Innocent civilians killed. Attempts to thwart a humanitarian summit. This sounds like the work of Islamic fundamentalists. Sure enough, Muslims have taken the responsibility for the attacks in the name of Al Qaeda. Claiming to be an arm of this infamous organization, the "Secret Group of Al Qaeda's Jihad in Europe" said that the attacks were in retaliation for Great Britain's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan on a web posting today. A phone call from the group was also received in Al Jazeera. "Rejoice, Islamic nation. Rejoice, Arab world. The time has come for vengeance against the Zionist crusader government of Britain in response to the massacres Britain committed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The heroic mujahedeen carried out a blessed attack in London, and now Britain is burning with fear and terror, from north to south, east to west." This is anything but surprising. These attacks are simply more proof that Islamic fundamentalists will stop at nothing, not even the murder of innocents, to take the sword of Islam across the globe. Zionist crusaders? England is losing Christian influence at one of the fastest rates of all the countries of the world. There are hundreds of Muslim mosques in the UK! England is anything but Zionist. But this makes no difference. Muslims cannot allow non-Muslims. The Koran is very clear on this issue. The law is clear, the law is precise. Convert or die. And don't even think about attacking any Muslims anywhere. But is the responsibility really with the fundamentalist Muslims? In Leviticus, God laid down guidelines for his people, Israel. If they honored him and obeyed his laws, they would prosper and be blessed. However, if they didn't:

"But if you will not listen to Me and carry out all these commands, and if you reject My decrees and abhor My laws and fail to carry out all My commands and so violate My covenant, then I will do this to you: I will bring upon you sudden terror, wasting diseases and fever that will destroy your sight and drain away your life. You will plant seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it. I will set My face against you so that you will be defeated by your enemies; those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee even when no one is pursuing you."

When Christ fixed the problem caused by Adam 4,000 years before, all men could be saved instead of just Israelites. As a result, all of God's promises now applied to all His people, not just the Jews.

In its day, Great Britain was one of the most Christian nations in the world. This is where, directly or indirectly, the majority of history's missionaries have originated from.

But England has fallen on hard times spiritually. Ever since evolution became accepted as fact, this country has slowly drifted away from God. In a nation where once 40-50% of the population were professing Christian, now only 0.5% attend church services weekly.

". . . if you reject My decrees and abhor My laws and fail to carry out all My commands and so violate My covenant, then . . . I will bring upon you sudden terror."

Is it any surprise that God's word has been fulfilled?

I'm not saying that the innocent victims of this attack brought it upon themselves personally. But the nation as a whole, through a complete rejection of the Bible and God's laws, has opened itself up to be attacked by the enemies of God.

Evolution: A Disproven Hypothesis

Alright, alright, I know that the title of this post is just a little bit strong. But it should be! Macroevolution is being taught in our schools as fact, when it really has very little scientific basis. In Charles Darwin's day, the mainstream scientific belief regarding the origin of life was a caricature of Genesis: God supposedly created all wildlife just as we see it today. Of course, nowhere in the Bible is such an idea stated. God created many distinct kinds, and these kinds reproduced and exhibited natural variation. For example, we got all the dogs we see today from one distinct dog-kind similar to a wolf. But dogs always bred dogs. When Darwin signed on to The Beagle as the ship's naturalist, he sailed to the Galapagos Islands in the Pacific. In this island setting, the wildlife was very specialized and very open to observation. Darwin's grandfather had already publicized the idea that the Genesis account was totally false, and that all life on this planet was descended from the same primitive creature (universal common descent). This young naturalist noted that there were many different kinds of birds on a particular island. One type of bird he was especially interested in were the finches. It is interesting to note that he didn't learn that these birds were finches until after he arrived back in civilization. These finches were many and variegated. Some had big beaks, some had small beaks, some had medium beaks, some had long beaks, and some had short beaks . . . you get the point. Lots and lots of beaks. Darwin theorized that all these finches came from the same basic kind of finch, but natural variation during reproduction changed them slightly. The offspring that had the best chance to live then were given a better chance of passing on their genes; these genes were thereby 'selected'. He called this process "Natural Selection". Natural Selection is a perfectly viable process. Through this mechanism, we get dark skin and light skin, poodles and pyrenees, etc. all through natural genetic variation from a few distinct kinds thousands of years ago. However, because Darwin had been conditioned by his grandfather to think in terms of universal common descent, he began to extrapolate on the data. Extrapolation, or extending of data, is fine if you have a lot of information and just a little that you don't know. But all Darwin knew was that over time, finches' beaks became more specialized. Perhaps, he decided, this same kind of change happens over millions of years, turning bugs into businessmen. I've finally found something to substantiate Gramp's claim! When Darwin returned to civilization, he wrote The Origin of Species. This book detailed his new hypothesis; all the animals we see today descended from a common ancestor through extra-extended natural selection. He also wrote The Descent of Man, where he explained his theories on how man evolved from monkeys. However, the budding idea of evolution would soon be dealt a stunning blow. At the time, simple cells were thought to be just that: simple. Research soon indicated that all life was dependent upon DNA, the four-letter amino acid language that dictated everything about an organism. Research showed something else also. The variation Darwin saw in the finches was only the highlighting of certain parts of the genetic DNA code. This was microevolution within a species, but Darwin's hypothesis required macroevolution: drastic changes to the DNA code itself rather than the masking of unnecessary parts. Until now, atheists had a handy way of denying God: "It all happened through evolution!" But now, evolution was heading downhill. Clinging to their ideology like religionists, the atheistic crowd tried to find some way to make the evidence fit their ideas. Mutations! That's right, mutations! Scientists knew that random mistakes occasionally changed the DNA in the genome. They called these mistakes mutations. Perhaps, the atheists theorized, lucky mutations were the cause of genetic change and macroevolution! Any bad mutations would be filtered out by natural selection, and the lucky mutations they needed would be passed on to the next generation to be built upon by more mutations. Of course, all this is speculation. We haven't ever seen a mutation that not only made its owner more likely to survive but also added to the genome and would eventually lead to a more advanced species. This is the current theory held by the majority of scientists worldwide. But could mutations ever do the trick? The Descent of Man. Our DNA is a little less than 98% the same as the DNA of chimpanzees. Of course, this doesn't mean we are closely related to chimps or anything. We also share 50% of our DNA with bananas, but we aren't banana from the waist up or from the waist down. That 2% of DNA holds an enormous amount of information that dictates many different characteristics. Most of these characteristics are critical to the life of the organism; for example our blood pressure is different from chimpanzees so all the pressure-sensitive cells must be changed to cope with the different conditions. DNA is composed of four amino acid letters: A, C, G, and T. These letters are combined in pairs to create the language; the base pairs AT, CG, GC, and TA. For only 100 DNA base pairs, there are 10 to the 60th possible combinations: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 combinations!!! This is only 100 base pairs. The smallest pieces of DNA that can define a physical function are genes, the smallest of which composed of 1,000 base pairs. The number of combinations for such a thing would be unimaginable! But let's consider 100 base pairs. Any imperfect combination would either kill the mutating organism or would be automatically filtered out by the individual cell's copying mechanism. So, in order to define 1/10th of a gene, we have 1 in 10 to the 60th chances. Mathematics experts tell us that the threshold of impossibility is 1 in 10 to the 50th, meaning that 10 to the 60th is 10,000,000,000 times more than impossible! Evolutionists, of course, always have a way to defend their ideology. They propose that nature can cope with these overwhelming odds because it has extremely large periods of time. But even if we have 10 to the 60th chances, it isn't as if this guarantees victory. Each chance the mutating organism has is just 1 in 10 to the 60th! This puts evolution right back where it started. Science tells us that these odds are astronomically greater than what the human mind is able to grasp. Evolution by mutation is impossible! Scientific ideas progress from speculation to hypothesis to theory and finally to fact. In order to be called a theory, the idea must have substantial, tangible evidence that backs it up; in the case of evolution intermediate forms would be required. I have demonstrated that evolution is impossible. It has been disproven time and time again. Since we never had any evidence for evolution other than the speculations of atheists, this idea never reached the level of theory. Therefore, Darwinian Evolution is nothing but a disproven hypothesis. In Him, David S. MacMillan III

Happy Independence Day!

Happy Birthday to the United States of America!

Two hundred and twenty-nine years ago today, our forefathers finalized the Declaration of Independence, making the United State of America a free and Independent Nation! "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America, When, in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, and that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. " HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!

An Objective Faith: Why Christians Believe the Bible

Often as I surf the Internet debating Creation/Evolution with secular humanists, I find that they try to bolster their argument by accusing me of subjectivity: "All that stuff about God and the Bible is just faith. Faith has no place in science!" In other words, David MacMillan doesn't have a place in science either. I've seen quite a few analogies that try to defend faith. An example of this would be the car analogy: "You have faith that your car will start in the morning." However, this falls short because it deals with faith that something will happen, rather than faith that something is true. Jesus told us to do to others what we want them to do to us. This command stems from the fact that people normally do "unto others" what the others have done to them in the past. So, I'm going to do to the secular humanists just what they have done to me; that is, attack the thing that their arguments rest on. We Christian believe in the Bible. Atheists believe in science textbooks. Let's take Joe. Joe is an fictional atheist freshman in highschool studying biology. He believes what he reads in his science textbook, right? But why does he believe what it tells him? Unless he has examined every statement in the book, he must accept the book on faith. This is anything but a blind faith. Joe has quite a few reasons to believe the textbook. To start with, viable authorities like his teachers and his parents have told him that the textbook tells the truth. His parents and teachers have never lied to him in the past, so the textbook is probably accurate based only on this support. However, this is not the only reason he has faith in the contents of his textbook. Everything that he already knows about biology agrees with what he reads. The book shows careful attention to detail and much planning. Joe knows that all the stuff he has checked makes sense, so he trusts the rest enough to have faith in it. The most important thing, though, is the author. On the front of the book, he can read the author's name followed by a PhD. If the writer of this textbook has multiple PhDs in biology, Joe reasons, he probably knows a lot more about this subject than I do. That's the most important point on which his faith rests: the greater knowledge of the author. These are all the same kinds of reasons that we Christians believe in the Bible. We have faith in the Bible based on different things: the testimony of our elders for instance. Strangely, though, this is used against us: "You just believe the Bible because your parents do." Everything that we understand about the world we live in agrees with the Bible. This is another reason that we accept the Bible on faith. Since we know that the Bible is accurate wherever we have checked it, we can have a strong faith that the rest of it is equally accurate. The last and most important reason that we have faith in the Bible is that the Author is smarter than we are. He tells us in one of the books (2 Timothy, to be exact) that "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness." It is true that Christians believe the Bible based on faith. But it is anything but a blind faith. In fact, it takes much more faith to believe in most scientific textbooks than it does to believe in God's Word. The only support of faith in evolution would be the recommendation of our peers. All other evidence supports faith in the Bible. To sum up this post, I'd like to quote the renowned evolutionist professor Richard Dawkins: "All appearance to the contrary, the only watchmaker in nature is the blind forces of physics, albeit deployed in a very special way." Even when all the evidence is against the theory of evolution, they still have faith that God doesn't exist.

D3's Birthday Party Vacation

Dear Cyberspace, I'm going to be 16 on the 12th of July, but at that time I will be busy at a camp in Georgia. So, I'm having a birthday bash this weekend (June 24th-26th) to celebrate. We are renting a cabin on a lake in a nearby town. Swimming, fishing, disc golf, etc. As a result of this, I probably won't be blogging or commenting until early next week. So long for now, everyone! In Him, David

Link to Me!

Hello Cyberspace, I'd like to thank all the great folks who link to me across the internet. My latest "wholinkstome" search turned up 65 links or more! Thanks, everybody! For all you bloggers who link to my site, I have a great new way to do it. Where, under this part of your Blogger template (Replace "{" and "}" with "<" and ">": {mainorarchivepage} {h2 class="sidebar-title"}Other Blogs/Great Links/etc.{/h2} {ul} you've put: {li}{a href="http://www.standonbible.blogspot.com"}D3's Blog{/a}{/li} replace it with this html code: {li}{a href="http://www.standonbible.blogspot.com"}{img height="32" src="http://photos1.blogger.com/img/154/4310/1024/D3" width="91" /}{/a}{/li}

Experiment with the height and width until you get the size you want. If the image is too distorted, that's ok. If you want, you can click on the link, download the picture, downsize it to the right width, and edit the words "D3's Blog" so that they appear better. Whatever you want to do with it is perfectly ok . . . as long as you still link to me!

If you don't already link to me, please do! Leave me a comment with a link to your site and I will link to it from my site. I'm getting around 20 hits per day not including my own visits, and the numbers keep on escalating!

In Him,

D3

Winds of Change Unravel Progressive Creationism

Today's feature article at www.AnswersInGenesis.org dealt with a new publication by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.  To read the article, please click on this link: www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i3/big_bang.asp.

 

The article is, as always, very well-written.  Basically, a segment of prestigious secular scientists have attacked the Big Bang Theory.  They challenge many of the BBT assumptions, including the speculation that the universe has no center and no edge.

 

This should not alarm the evolutionists out there.  If it's all in the pursuit of "science", there is no reason that this would make the secular world upset.  It's just the rejection of the current model in favor of a new idea . . . that, incidentally, would allow for a young earth.

 

However, this should alarm Hugh Ross and kids like Gabriel Bertilson (no offense, Gabe, I'm just identifying you as a progressive creationist).  In his book about progressive creationism, Hugh Ross basically claims that he got the Big Bang/Day-Age idea directly from scripture without any significant outside input.  He tried to fit the Genesis account around the BBT.  Now, if "science" changes its mind (as it is prone to do; Scripture never changes), does he have to re-interpret his re-interpretations to fit the new scientific model?

 

As AiG scientists have observed so many times, if you marry your theology to secular science, you are likely to be widowed tomorrow.

 

Let's make it a point to stand on God's Word ALONE, the only thing that never changes!

Incorrect Information

Post-Script to the last post:

 

I was wrong in saying that they "did pretty well".  It was at the 250 word limit (so they aren't supposed to edit it), but the way they printed it, an entire sentence was removed from the words "Researchers" to the word "expect" at the end of the letter.  The last paragraph now read:

 

The researchers expect that if they understand life's beginnings on this planet, and know what simple life forms to look for elsewhere, they can prove we are all accidents.

 

Compare that to the post below.  Censorship!  Censorship!  Shame on you, Mr. Herald-Liberal . . . er . . . Leader.

 

---

 

Right now, something on our computer is messed up and I cannot add comments to my blog, I can only read them.  So, I decided to reply to one of the comments on my last post this way:

 

---

 

This comment was made by "Anonymous S".

 

You have to learn that repeating something again and again doesn't make it true.

 

That's exactly right.  Another thing that is true, however, is that if a false statement is repeated again and again, people start believing it even if it isn't true.  That's what has happened with evolution.  If someone hears "Science has disproven the Bible" enough times, people begin to believe it even though it is patently false.

 

I was just playing with Google and found this interesting abstract:

I won't reproduce the abstract in full because it is too long.  To view it in its entirety, point your browser to www.standonbible.blogspot.com/2005/06/letter-to-editor.html#comments.  Please read it before reading on in this post.

 

Sdic is a new gene that evolved recently in the lineage of Drosophila Melanogaster.

 

There's nothing wrong with a "new gene" as long as it doesn't mean "new information".  Evolution within as species is also viable, as long as it is the loss of information and not the gain thereof.  I read on:

 

It was formed from a duplication and fusion of the gene AnnX,

 

So there was nothing really amazing about the way it happened; a gene was accidentally copied twice and fused together, kinda like if your copier accidentally printed two copies on the same page, one forwards and one backwards, rather than just one copy on one page.  The information was already there.  Mutations like this happen all the time, but they never make the organism move up on the "evolutionary tree".

 

[This is a technical explanation of exactly how it happened].

 

I don't pretend to know what this means.  From what I see, it is just a play-by-play analysis of how the accident happened.

 

A novel protein is created lacking 100 residues at the amino end that contain sequence motifs essential for the function of cytoplasmic dynein intermediate chains.

 

It seems that through this accident, a squished-up protein is formed that doesn't have essential parts for the original function.  Again, compare to the copier analogy.  Let's see if they have a new function that not only makes the organism more likely to survive but also acts as a step up on the "process" of macroevolution.

 

Instead, the amino end is a hydrophobic region of 16 residues that resembles the amino end of axonemal dynein intermediate chains from other organisms.

 

I see.  When the gene was double-copied, it mixed the residual amino acids up so that they looked a little like a different kind of gene that already existed.  Of course, it wasn't perfectly the same, so it wouldn't have the function of the other organism.  Also, if it had the function of the other organism (a much harder thing), it would also have to have supplementary mutations all around it to allow the function to work correctly in that organism.  This looks like a handicap rather than an asset.

 

The downstream portion of Sdic features large deletions eliminating Cdic exons v2 and v3, as well as multiple frameshift deletions or insertions.

 

A "frameshift deletion or insertion" is just a shifting around and removing of pre-existing parts of the gene.  No new information.  Does it even have a new function?

 

The new protein becomes incorporated into the tail of the mature sperm and may function as an axonemal dynein intermediate chain.

 

Nope.  If we're lucky, it might be able to function as a partially handicapped version of the gene we already had.  Since this messes up the particular sperm, it would have less of a chance of surviving and passing on the defective gene.

 
I thought you'd like to see it since, you know, new genes are not suppose [sic] to be created.
S

 

I did like to see this fine example of a detrimental mutation.  Thanks for pointing it out!

 

The problem with macroevolution is this: In order for the organism to move up on the "evolutionary tree", it must have a change (like this one) in the genome.  This change, though, has to be both beneficial to the organism (so it can pass on the revised gene) AND it must help the species as a whole to move up toward a greater evolutionary goal.  Sickle-cell anemia, for instance, can be beneficial to the organism that has it, but is a loss of information that results in a 50% death rate in the society as a whole.  Since this "new gene" does neither of these things, it is no close to molecules-to-man evolution than anything else we've seen.

 

In Him,

 

David S. MacMillan III

Letter to the Editor

Today, the Lexington Herald-Leader published one of my myriad letters to the editor. It is as follows:

---

Blinded by Science

While scanning the June 10th edition of the Herald-Leader, I noticed a headline: "Scientists search for common-ancestor cell." I had to see what it was about. Biologists have now decided that all organisms, from President Bush to the bush in your yard, are descended from a single cell. This is convenient for them, as it only requires life to arise from the "primordial stew" once. Momentarily, let’s set aside the myriad of evolutionary difficulties. We won’t criticize the never-observed "process" of new information being added to the genome; necessary for Darwinism. We won’t even analyze the abject impossibility of that first fully operating cell "appearing" from non-life. If, as the article intimates, we are the "cousins of everything from whales to . . . pond scum," where does that place us? If, indeed, it is perfectly alright to squash a fly, who can say that it is ‘wrong’ to squash the life out of the elderly, the sick, or anyone else who we think is useless? The researchers stated that the efforts to understand this bug will help other branches of "science" as well. Branches like "evolution", the study of something that never happened, "genetics", biogenetic tampering, "medical science", cloning other human beings, and last of all, "finding primitive life on other planets". They expect if they understand life’s beginnings on this planet, and know what simple life forms to look for elsewhere, they can prove that we are all accidents. It’s amazing what lengths humankind will go to to disavow a Creator.

---

Besides the fact that they failed to put "III" after my name, and the fact that they changed "Creator" to "creator", they did pretty well considering that I only submitted the letter 3 days ago. -D3

I now pronounce you. . . .

Today, my mother and I went to the wedding of some close friends of ours. A few years ago at a different wedding, the groom at this wedding had completely ceram-wrapped the honeymoon vehicle. So a few of us decided that today was payback time.

Ingredients:

• 1 Nissan Maxima
• 27 rolls of cheap toilet paper
• 1 deck of Bicycle playing cards
• 14 plastic cups
• 20 feet of nylon string
• 1 stick of white shoe polish
• 12 very jovial guys

You can guess the results.

We took all their luggage from the backseat and placed it in the trunk, then wrote "We have your bags" on the window. The car was so stuffed with toilet paper that we had trouble closing the doors. The leftover tubes were put to good use too; they adorned the radio antenna and the windshield wipers.

Once we get the pictures that we took, I'll see if I can post them as well.

Happy Wedding Day, Dan & Andrea!

New look

Hey guys, Do you like the new look of the website? It took a lot of HTML mental gymnastics, but I finally was able to create the image in Adobe and paste it onto the website header. Questions? Comments?

Bible Bowl

Hey guys,

Today, my younger brother and sister are going to Cincinnati for a Bible Bowl tournament (Boy, I like links, don't I?).

My dad wanted me to make personalized name tags for each of the kids on the team. I used a trial edition of Adobe Photoshop that came with a book we purchased. It's a trial edition not only because it says so, but because it's a real trial to use it! You cannot save anything from the Photoshop application since it's the free version, so you have to Ctrl-PrintScreen (Copy screen contents onto the clipboard) in order to save your work.

Here is a sample of one of the nametags.

The res was much better, but HelloPicasa wouldn't upload anything bigger than what you see at the link. If you download the pic at the link the picture takes you to you should be able to see it with better resolution.

Professional looking?

The reason their team is called Winchester BLAST is because some of the team members are from Winchester, and BLAST is an acronym for the first names of the team.

Cya guys!

David

Summer has begun!

Okay, okay. I know that summer began quite a while ago, but for our family it really began yesterday. Consider:

• We got up at 10 AM.
• We had brunch at Waffle House.
• We went swimming.
• We had tennis lessons.
• AND WE NEVER DID ANY SCHOOLWORK!

That is the essence of summertime.

---

On a less light note, my 16th birthday bash is going to be held in two weeks. I will be turning 16 on the 12th of July , but at that time I will be attending TeenPact University in Georgia. TPU will be a lot of fun. I am helping out a little bit with some of the research for the Ivy League Track curriculum.

On that note, does anyone know of some information concerning what the Bible says about Mathematics? That's one of the things I have to find out for TPU.

I've been reading up on HTML, and I think I have found a way to make a clickable map!!!

For example:

Which state is Georgia, where I will be attending TPU?

(This is supposed to be a clickable map . . . why isn't it working???)

If the state you click sends you to the TeenPact website, you'll know you are correct!

Clickable maps are fun! Good luck!

In Him,

David S. MacMillan III

PS. If all you webwizards can help, click "View=>Source" to see the raw html. Please tell me where I went wrong.

Answers In Genesis

Hey everyone, You may have noticed the "Got Questions?" section at the sidebar of my blog. Our family visited the Creation Museum recently. It is absolutely superb! Not only is it being built true to the literal account in Genesis, but everything about it is so professionally done that it will simply floor you. When I was surfing the Answers In Genesis website, I came across a FAQ in the technical section: "Can I link to AiG?" Since I already linked to their website, I decided to take a look. They have a great way to link to them . . . JavaScript-powered displays that change every time a page is refreshed. To see the list of optional javascript displays, click here. Put one on your site! Not only does it spread the word about AiG, but it also makes for a great eye-catcher and e-conversation starter! Cya, guys! In Him, David

The Law : : Francis Bastiat

Another article that I wrote:

---

The Law

The Law was written by an economic theorist named Frederic Bastiat in the early nineteenth century. In his book, Bastiat analyzes the purpose, meaning, and progression of modern law. He explains why law is needed, the limits of law, and he also points out many laws in effect during his lifetime that actually promoted the very thing that the legal system was formulated to restrict.

The root of The Law lies in an explanation of justice. Bastiat tells his readers that, at best, law is but a necessary evil. Or, to put it more plainly, law is necessary because of evil. God has given men certain liberties: personal freedom, the right to own and use one’s own property, and the like. These liberties are justly used for the personal gain of whoever holds them.

However, all men are sinful, and wish to gain what is not their own through underhanded means. This, Bastiat intimates, is a violation of liberty. He calls this act "plunder". Plunder, of course, is a form of injustice. How can injustice be stopped? God has given individuals the right to use force when their liberties are violated through injustice. The law is simply "the collective organization of the individual right of lawful defense."

One of the most fundamental insights in The Law relates to our understanding of this definition. Strange as it may seem, law is not put into place to create justice per se. Rather, the law exists only to prevent injustice. When we understand this key principle, our understanding of legal systems is greatly increased.

Why is this so important? Many people view the government as an instrument for providing prosperity and well-being. But that is not its purpose! All the law exists for is to counter injustice and plunder. Whenever men try to twist the government into an instrument for equalizing and justifying humankind, this inevitably results in something Bastiat calls "legal plunder".

Legal plunder, like its counterpart illegal plunder, is the non-consensual removal of one man's property for the benefit of another. The difference is that in the latter case the person guilty of plunder is the criminal, but if a person resists the legal plunderer, they themselves become criminal. The law is a powerful thing that must not be turned to immoral ends.

In reading The Law, my thinking about government responsibilities and intervention was drastically changed. I can now see the rise of socialism in America. Many, if not most, of our governmental programs today are built around legal plunder. I firmly believe that our economy is doomed for destruction unless we abolish these abuses in our legal system.

David S. MacMillan III

Eschatology 101

I've decided to write a medium-sized dissertation introducing the reader to the subject of eschatology (the end times).

---

Welcome to Eschatology 101! This article will be presented in the most straightforward and simple manner possible. Before we start, though, I would like to clear up a common misconception that many people have concerning prophetic interpretation. Many of you have heard the "Golden Rule" of prophecy formulated by Dr. Tim Lahaye:

"Take all passages literally whenever possible unless the immediate context indicates otherwise."

or, in the words of Dr. David Reagan:

"If the plain sense makes sense, don't look for any other prophetic sense, lest you end up with nonsense."

Recently I was asked where we dispensationalists get this rule. I puzzled over it for a while, but finally came up with the answer:

Prophecy in the Old Testament concerning Christ's First Coming can almost always be linked to its fulfillment in the New Testament, usually because after the account of the fulfillment the author of the book gives you the prophecy.

If we look closely at the matched prophecies, we see that normally the fulfillment happens through the plain sense of the verse. For example, the boy Jesus returned from Egypt after the death of Herod. The Bible then says: "This was done that it might be fulfilled what was written in the prophets: 'Out of Egypt have I called My Son.' " Most likely the Pharisees before the time of Christ "spiritualized" this passage, saying "This just refers to the Exodus, where God called Israel out of Egypt." We know now that if the plain sense makes sense (like it does here), we shouldn't look for any other sense (like the misguided hypothetical Pharisees) lest we end up with nonsense.

One more thing before we begin: I will not refer to anyone as an authority aside to Scripture. I absolutely hate it when people say "Well, that particular passage was interpreted by St. Joe Smith in 1433 to mean. . . ." Frankly, I don't care what Saint so-and-so said about that passage. God's Word is clear enough to speak on its own.

That being done with, allow me to show you the basic passage that most people use to back up their eschatology.

This passage is called the "Seventy-Weeks" prophecy in Daniel 9:

While I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, reached me about the time of the evening offering. And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, "O Daniel, I have now come forth to give you skill to understand. "At the beginning of your supplications the command went out, and I have come to tell you, for you are greatly beloved; therefore consider the matter, and understand the vision:

Daniel has been praying in Babylon, and Gabriel has been sent to give him a vision of the end times.

"Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy.

The Hebrew word for "weeks" and the word for "sevens" are the same. This was translated "weeks" here; it really means a set of seven somethings. We know from later in this chapter that it means 7 years (see a little bit lower down in the passage).

"Your people and your holy city" is addressed to Daniel. This, of course, means Israel and Jerusalem (which, incidentally, is what he was praying about).

So Israel has seventy seven-year-periods left, after which all the things Gabriel lists will happen: the Most High (Christ) will be anointed, all vision and prophecy will be finished, everlasting righteousness will be brought in, no more sins will be committed, etc. This is an indication of Christ's Second Return, right?

Here's a chart to illustrate what we've covered:

Start of the 70 wks.}----------------------------------{Christ reigns in glory

"Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem So it starts at the decree to Nehemiah to restore Jerusalem in about 440 BC. Knowing this, we can add to our chart:

*445 BC*}------------------------------------------{*End of the World*

Until Messiah the Prince, there shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublesome times.

The street and the wall obviously mean Jerusalem in this context (restore and build Jerusalem). Records show that, indeed, it took seven "weeks" from the command to restore Jerusalem in 445 to the finishing of construction in around 409 BC. Then it took 62 "weeks" before Messiah would come. This leaves one week from Messiah until the end of the world.

*445 BC*}--(7wks)--*409 BC*---(62wks)---*Messiah*-(1wk)-{*End of the Age* And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;

So the sixty-two weeks measures until approx. 28 AD, when Christ was cut off but not for himself.

*445 BC*}------(A total of 69 wks)-------*28 AD*--(1wk)--{*End of the Age*

Here's where it gets tricky:

And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood (explanation: a flood of armies), and till the end of the war desolations are determined.

We don't know anything yet about this elusive "prince who is to come", but we do know that in 70 AD, the Romans under Titus destroyed the city and the temple. Since then, Israel has been desolated by Gentiles.

But like I said, this is interesting. We know that the world did not end 7 years after Christ was "cut off". Look at the first part of this passage where it talks about the 70 weeks themselves: Seventy weeks have been determined for your people (Israel) and your holy city (Jerusalem).

Since God doesn't lie, we conjecture from this passage that the 70 weeks is only "counting off" during the God-ordained existence of the Israelites and their total occupation of Jerusalem. This would mean that the prophetic 70-week "clock" stopped ticking after the Jews rejected Messiah. What does this do to our chart?

*445 BC*}---69 weeks---*Messiah is cut off*-{ Blank space }-1wk-{*End of the Age*

Since the blank space started when the Jews were "broken off" and the Gentiles were "grafted in" (see Romans 11 for explanation), we call the blank space the Church Age.

**}-----------69 weeks----------**-{ Church Age }-1 week left-{**

So what is the deal with the last week? We know so far that:

• This week ushers in Christ's 2nd return.
• This week must have Israel holding Jerusalem.

The passage now tells us about this week. I'm including some of the last part of the passage to make it easier to understand.

And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary . . . Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;

Wait a minute! Who is this "he" who is going to take up the last week? It can't be Christ, for it says later that "he" breaks his covenant. Reading carefully, we notice that it talked about a "prince who is to come". Apparently, "he" is this prince, and he will make a treaty with many nations for the last week.

But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.

So we have this prince who makes a covenant of seven years with many nations, but breaks it in 3.5 years later (the middle of the week), bringing an end to the sacrifices in the temple and desecrating it. This desecration lasts 3.5 years, until the consummation of all things, when Christ returns.

So our chart now looks like this:

*}-69 weeks-{*Church Age}-*3.5 years-DESOLATION-3.5 years*-{Christ's Return

Look familiar? This is where we get the famous "Tim Lahaye style" charts depicting the end times. Seven years, huh?

Second Thessalonians 2 tells us more about this prince. When he is revealed in the last days, he "opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."

Someone who is opposed to Christ is called Anti-Christ. John tells us that "You, children, have heard that THE ANTICHRIST is coming, and even now the spirit of antichrist is in the world".

2 Thessalonians tells us that this "lawless one" will be consumed by the breath of the Lord and the brightness of his Second Coming.

This, my friends, is where we get a chart like this one (click for larger picture):

Chart taken from Lamb&Lion Ministries.

---

I hope that Dr. Reagan doesn't mind! :-) If you read this, Dr. Reagan, I hope you aren't offended by my using the pic. If so, give me a call (Ben or Linda Rake will give you my number; we live in the same city) and I will take the picture off immediately and replace it with a link to your article.

This, my friends, is the basis of eschatology. In Him, David S. MacMillan III

What they're teaching in the schools

Hey everyone, I was commenting on one of Neo's posts (http://www.oldfashionedwhippersnapper.blogspot.com) and I came up with this little list of school subjects. I liked it so much when I was done with it that I decided to post it on my blog. Neo had posted about how the winner of the national geography bee was a homeschooler. In the comments, a public-schooled kid said that "Public schools only teach science, math, and history. That's why homeschoolers have an advantage. This was my reply: No, no, no. Public schools only teach: 1. Science? You are worthless slime that evolved over millions of years from non-life. This is proven scientific fact (LIE!), so it doesn't matter what you do. Morality doesn't matter either. Sure, go get pregnant. You can always slaughter the result of your immorality. March into a classroom in Columbine and shoot people. It's just natural selection sped up! 2. Math? We have to make the mathematics easier so that children won't ruin their self-esteem! Let's not hold the children back; they might get depressed. Let's hold everyone else back to their level and just say that they are advancing, ok? 3. History? It has always been the religious regimes that oppress people (like Hitler and Mussolini, right?). Religion is a crutch for the weak. The founding fathers were uneducated wimps . . . but still they didn't want God in schools! Yes, yes, they clearly stated in the First Declaration . . . er . . . Amendment . . . that there had to be complete separation of Church and State (like when John Jay said that it is the duty of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers?). In fact, if the government had anything to do with the church, you've got to restrict what the Church is doing. But remember that they are all uneducated boors that didn't know what they were talking about. In Him, David

Test Message

Hey guys,

 

This is a test message to see whether I can post text remotely.  Lots of times our computer can't access the internet but we can still email, so this way I can make posts easier.

 

In Him,

 

David