Neither One Of Us Want To Say Goodby

We are bound to the materialness of this world. The center of our being, the self, is supported by this material world. We live and thrive in this natural world, and can do so without acknowledging God, but there is always a void in our life which can not be filled by things in the world. We could say that God is always calling each person without repentance. Only God gives the answer to life which is Him and being in His presence. God accepts the being in the name of Jesus, His Son, as being in the presence of God.

The supernatural Words of God gives each person the opportunity to live a supernatural life. No one wants to let self go and accept God’s Spirit who is in Christ Jesus even with the assurance that one shall have life gained one hundred fold, and actually find their real self. Without going thru a series of thoughts just ask God in Jesus’s name, and God shall give a more perfect answer.

Experiences in the natural world gives us a toyspace an accumulation of ideas, precepts, principles, and concepts. I use the term toyspace because our natural world is an example of the Kingdom of God. The natural world is God’s footstool. God is a Spirit, and we must worship Him in spirit and truth. Our destiny is to live in the spirit with God.

Once One realizes that their conscientious self is actually their created life with God always than one shall begin to know the answers to life. Without God there is no conscientious self, no life.

God came in the flesh as Christ Jesus to return each person to the Kingdom of God. Jesus gives that eternal life.

No one ever want to say goodbye to love.

Proverbs 1:19
Such are the paths of all who go after ill-gotten gain; it takes away the life of those who get it.

Hebrews 11:35
Women received back their dead, raised to life again. There were others who were tortured, refusing to be released so that they might gain an even better resurrection.

Mark 8:36
For what benefit is it for a person to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his life?

Matthew 16:25
For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

Matthew 19:29
And whoever has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

Mark 8:35
For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and for the gospel will save it.

Mark 10:29
Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, there is no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for my sake and for the sake of the gospel

Luke 9:24
For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it.

Acts 9:16
For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.”

Romans 9:3
For I could wish that I myself were accursed—cut off from Christ—for the sake of my people, my fellow countrymen,

Ephesians 3:1
[ Paul’s Relationship to the Divine Mystery ] For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for the sake of you Gentiles—

Colossians 1:24
Now I rejoice in my sufferings for you, and I fill up in my physical body—for the sake of his body, the church—what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ.

Revelation 2:3
I am also aware that you have persisted steadfastly, endured much for the sake of my name, and have not grown weary.

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

*** Will Myers

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Why Our Sun Is Spot On

One of the things that marks humanity’s time on Earth is the optimal conditions of our Sun, including its unusually low flare activity. New research from Japan helps explain why the Sun exhibits such low flaring and stable luminosity. Here I’ll examine the benefits they provide for life, humans in particular.
****
I am not known for being a flashy guy, quite the opposite, in fact. Likewise, the Sun, although it appears cheerfully bright, is not very “flashy.” Indeed, new discoveries indicate that the Sun may be the least flashy of all stars—which is a good thing for advanced life. Why does the Sun lack flashiness—or, as astronomers would put it, why does the Sun manifest so little flaring activity? A group of nine Japanese astronomers recently found that part of the answer lies with sunspots.

Starspots and Superflares
The Japanese team showed that starspots (similar to sunspots, but located on stars other than the Sun) greatly influence a star’s flare activity and superflares in particular, which are ten to a million times more energetic than the very largest that the Sun blasts off.

We found that the energy of superflares are related to the total coverage of starspots. The correlation between the spot coverage and the flare energy in superflares is similar to that in solar flares.
For many years astronomers have understood that the magnetic energy associated with sunspots determines the amount of energy in solar flares. Thus, the Japanese team suggests that “the energy of superflares can be explained by the magnetic energy stored around the starspots.

Sunspots look dark because of the powerful magnetic fields associated with them. The energy output from the nuclear furnace located at the Sun’s core is uniform throughout the Sun’s interior. Therefore, the total energy output per unit surface of the Sun is constant. However, the brightness is not constant. The brightness arises from heat energy. Since the total energy = heat energy + magnetic energy, sunspot regions are cooler, and thus darker, than other parts of the Sun’s surface.
The Sun’s spot activity is not constant. It varies over an 11-year cycle, approximately. At sunspot minimum the Sun displays either no spots or only a few very tiny spots; at solar maximum the Sun will consistently display several spots that are visible through a small telescope. Currently, we are approaching the next sunspot maximum.

Sunspots never cover a significant fraction of the Sun’s surface. For much of the Sun’s 11-year sunspot cycle there are no sunspots at all. (In fact, only once since I started observing sunspots at age 16 do I recall seeing spots big enough for me to observe without the aid of a telescope.) Consequently, sunspots have a barely measureable impact on Earth’s climate.

Other Factors in Flare Activity
A star’s mass and age also influence its flare activity. As I sometimes mention in talks, stars are like humans in that they are most stable when they are middle-aged . The same is true of star size; mid-sized stars are more stable than small or large stars.

Intensity of Flaring Activity throughout the Sun’s Burning History
Astronomers constructed the flaring activity level by observing solar-type stars of known ages. The scale on the y-axis is logarithmic. That is, intensity levels are thousands to millions of times higher at the maximum than they are at the minimum.

When astronomers say that the Sun is mid-sized, they are referring to their spectral classification system for stars. The color of a main sequence star (that is, a star undergoing hydrogen fusion) is proportional to its mass. For example, red main sequence stars are the least massive while blue main sequence stars are the most massive. Our yellow Sun is mid-sized.

However, 89 percent of all stars in the Milky Way Galaxy are less massive than the Sun. These stars display dramatically greater flaring activity than the Sun. Consequently, astronomers rule out red and orange main sequence stars as candidates for possibly hosting a planet friendly to advanced life. At the other end of the spectrum, stars more massive than the Sun also display greater flaring activity than does the Sun, although the activity is much less dramatic for these stars. However, higher mass stars burn up much faster than lower mass stars. These faster burning rates cause these stars to exhibit dramatically greater mean luminosity changes relative to the Sun. Thus, astronomers also rule out blue, white, and green main sequence stars as possible hosts for a planet capable of sustaining advanced life.

Though flaring activity does depend strongly on the star’s mass, it is more powerfully dependent on the star’s age. Young solar-type stars (those with the same mass as the Sun) frequently emit superflares.
Young solar-type stars not only exhibit aggressive flaring, but their averaged luminosities also vary hugely from star to star. This observation is counterintuitive because mass is an accurate predictor of luminosity for hydrogen-burning stars. Such a star’s luminosity is proportional to the 3.9th power of its mass.

In a recent study of the nearest giant molecular cloud, called Lynds 1641, a team of astronomers observed that young stars with similar masses differed in luminosities with respect to one another by as much as a factor of a hundred times. Astronomers had observed this variation in other star clusters. They assumed that the accretion of mass from the young stars’ birthing clouds at differing rates explained the variation. However, the team that studied Lynds 1641 did extensive analysis of multi-epoch spectroscopic data on Lynds 1641’s stars; they determined that accretion variability cannot explain the luminosity differences.

Many astronomers have suggested that a star’s rotation rate may also be an important factor concerning flaring activity and luminosity differences. Taking advantage of Kepler satellite observations of solar-type stars, the Japanese astronomers determined, “Stars with relatively slower rotation rates can still produce flares that are as energetic as those of more rapidly rotating stars, although the average flare frequency is lower for more slowly rotating stars.

What This Means for Life
Astronomers now recognize that the Sun stands apart from other stars in possessing such an extremely low level of sunspot activity. It possesses the best possible mass and is at the optimal age for minimizing sunspots on its surface. All this is critical for human health and well-being. As I described in a previous Today’s New Reason to Believe article, even the extremely minimal sunspot activity manifested by the Sun poses a slight health risk for humans at solar maximum.

The Sun’s sunspot history goes a long way to explaining why the fossil record looks the way it does. Bacteria appeared on Earth as soon as the Sun’s mass stabilized and sunspot activity subsided enough to permit their survival. As sunspot activity continued to subside more complex life-forms appeared. Humans appeared at the beginning of the very narrow time window in the history of the Sun when the sunspot activity is low enough to permit the launch, development, and maintenance of global high-technology civilization.

When it comes to the Sun and its spots, we humans have much cause to praise God’s providence. He designed the best possible star to meet our needs and, in part, to equip us to fulfill our purpose and prepare for our ultimate destiny. He placed us on Earth at the most optimal time in the Sun’s burning history when its luminosity is the most stable and its spotting activity the least disturbing. The brevity of that optimal time implies that God will fulfill His intended purposes for humanity in the present creation relatively quickly and then usher those who choose His redemptive gift into a brand new creation. Psalm 97:6 says, “The heavens proclaim His righteousness, and all the peoples see His glory.” The Sun and its few tiny spots are part of that proclamation.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Faith In God Reveals Truths And Precepts After Precepts

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. The Word of God reveals the full magnitude of “what’s it all about” from the beginning unto the end. The physical laws of the universe including man’s physical entanglements has produced cultures alone with their religions liken unto the hands of a master craftsman. For one to have faith mean that one remain vigilant and observant hoping to see the truth verified. If one has faith in the Word of God than the man shall see God’s truth revealed before his eyes. We see what we behold firstly.

With a continual ear bent toward the Lord and the Word of God held in one’s heart one shall become aware of the invisible things of this world; the spirit of truth of this world shall continue to renew your mind by giving precepts upon precepts unto the absolute concept of God.

May Christ Jesus be intimately engaged with each and all of us. Praise the Lord!

Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Hebrews 13
8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

9 Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.

14 For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come.

Ephesians 2:20
built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

Hebrews 13:15
By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.

The universe continually sing a song from God; punctuated by man.

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

DNA MAKES A CASE FOR CREATION

As I discussed in The Cell’s Design—and elsewhere—one of the most provocative arguments for intelligent design centers on the recognition that DNA (and other biomolecules) is an information-based system. Common, everyday experience teaches that information derives solely from the activity of human beings. So, by analogy, the biochemical information systems, too, should come from a divine Mind. The stark similarity between the way that biochemical information systems are structured and the structure of information systems designed by humans deepens the analogy (for an example, go here).

Yet skeptics argue that biochemical information is not genuine information. Instead, they maintain that when scientists refer to DNA as an information storage molecule they are making use of an illustrative analogy—a scientific metaphor—and nothing more. They accuse creationists and intelligent design proponents of misconstruing their use of analogical language to make the case for design.2

But the work by the Harvard and Johns Hopkins scientists questions the validity of this objection.

DNA Data Storage

These researchers are not the first scientists to store information within the nucleotide sequences of DNA. However, they are to be credited for storing the most information to-date, and, in doing so, addressing some limitations of this technology.

In order to encode specific information into the nucleotide sequence of DNA, researchers must make DNA molecules with a prescribed sequence without error. Yet, with the current synthesis technology, the number of errors in the DNA sequence increases with the length of the sequence. In other words, researchers can make “perfect” sequences, but only if they are relatively short—not long enough to store any appreciable amount of data.

Stabilizing the encoded DNA molecules poses another challenge. DNA tends to become damaged or broken down over time. When this happens, information is lost.

To sidestep the first of these two issues, the researchers encoded the book’s contents into small DNA fragments—devoting roughly two-thirds of the sequence for data and the remainder for information that can be used to locate the content within the entire data block. In a sense, this approach is analogous to using page numbers to order and locate the contents of a book. By making short DNA sequences, the researchers were able to ensure that few, if any, errors were introduced into the sequences of the synthesized DNA fragments.

The researchers addressed the problem of stabilizing the synthesized DNA by making multiple copies of each fragment. In this way, if one of the fragments becomes damaged or breaks down, the redundancy prevents the information from being lost completely.

As impressive as this advance is, the practical implementation of DNA storage is still a dream for the future. The chief hang-up at this point is the time and cost to synthesize the amount of DNA required to store a book, and then, in turn, to read out the information. But these efficiency concerns may not hinder progress for long, as the cost of making and sequencing DNA is dropping rapidly.

Even if the work on DNA storage never translates into practical applications, it still has profound implications for the creation/evolution controversy. These scientists were able to store information in DNA, because DNA is an information-storage system. In other words, it is hard for skeptics to argue that biochemical information is only a metaphor, when biotechnologists are using DNA to store an entire book’s worth of information.

The more that DNA becomes the focal point of new biotechnology application, the more the claim that life comes from the outworking of undirected evolutionary process becomes the same old tired story. It is time to “turn some pages.” (RTB,FR)

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Were They Real? The Scientific Case for Adam and Eve

Did Adam and Eve really exist? Did all humanity originate from a single pair? These questions are not peripheral topics for an academic debate; they are central to the Christian faith.

Toward this end, recent advances in molecular genetics are quite provocative. Numerous studies indicate that humanity originated: (1) recently (around 100,000 years ago, plus or minus 20,000 years or so); (2) at a single location (East Africa)—close to where some Bible scholars think the Garden of Eden was located; and (3) from a small population
of individuals.

Moreover, analysis of mitochondrial DNA (which provides insight into the origin of the maternal lineage) indicates that humanity traces back to a single ancestral sequence that could be interpreted as a single woman. Likewise, characterization of Y-chromosomal DNA (which provides insight into the origin of the
paternal lineage) indicates that all men trace their origin back to a single ancestral sequence that could be interpreted as a single man.

These astounding results harmonize with a traditional reading of the biblical account of human origins, and suggest that Adam and Eve likely existed as real persons who gave rise to all of humanity.

But Did Adam and Eve Exist? Population Size

Others have challenged this interpretation, arguing that the genetic data shows that humanity arose from thousands of individuals, not two.1 The chief basis for this claim comes from estimates of the ancestral population size of humans based on genetic diversity.

It is possible to estimate the effective population size of any ancestral group from genetic diversity of present-day populations if the mutation rate is known. As discussed in Who Was Adam?, a number of these types of studies do indeed indicate that humans stem from a small population, on the
order of a few hundred to a few thousand.2

Skeptics of the traditional reading of the biblical account of human origins uncritically accept these results. They argue that the data indicate humanity experienced a genetic bottleneck, with the population collapsing to a relatively small number of individuals. Consequently humanity arose from the thousands of survivors, not a primeval pair.

Critics also point to other methods to model the size of the ancestral population that do not depend on mutations, but on other types of processes to generate genetic diversity.3 Studies employing these techniques also seem to indicate that humanity arose from population sizes on the order of a few thousand individuals.

What Was the Population Size, Really?

In the face of this challenge, it is important to recognize that population sizes generated by these methods are merely estimates, not hard and fast values. The reason: the mathematical models are highly idealized, generating differing estimates based on a number of factors. As a case in point consider two studies discussed in Who Was Adam? One, reported in 2003 by a Russian and U.S. research team, examined DNA sequence elements called short tandem repeats at 377 locations in the human genome for 1,056 individuals that represented 52 population groups. On the basis of this analysis, they concluded that humanity originated from a single point of origin (apparently Africa), from a small population (~2,000 or less) between 71,000 and 142,000 years ago.4 Although this conclusion was consistent with that of an earlier study of short tandem repeats, the population size estimate from the earlier study was around 500 individuals.5 The reason for the difference (of about 1,500) was due to a varying sample size and number of locations in the human genome that were studied.

Did humanity originate from a single pair? Even though population estimates reveal that humanity originated from several hundred to several thousand individuals based on mathematical models, it could well be the case that these models overestimate the original numbers for the first humans.

And it is important to note that an origin of humanity from a small population is consistent with the existence of a historical Adam and Eve who gave rise to all of humanity. After their creation the biblical text teaches that they procreated––having many sons and daughters (Genesis 5:4). Given the limitations of the methods, could it be that the population estimates are reporting on the population structure of humans some time after their creation, when the population would have been small, on the order of a few thousand? Additionally, skeptics who claim that humanity came from thousands of individuals and not two assume that Adam and Eve were genetically identical. Yet, there is no hint of that idea in Scripture. When Eve is created, God takes material from Adam’s side and rebuilds (bānâ in the original Hebrew) it. Part of this process could have involved the introduction of genetic differences into Eve’s genome that made Adam and Eve genetically heterogeneous.

As with the mouflon sheep, if natural selection drove an increase in genetic diversity in humans, then the estimates of the original population sizes of humanity would be artificially high.

We All Like Sheep?

In 2007 a research team reported on the genetic diversity of wild mouflon sheep on one of the islands that are part of the Kerguelen sub-Antarctic archipelago.6 This group of sheep provided researchers with an unprecedented opportunity to study the effects of population dynamics on genetic diversity in small populations.

In 1957 a male and female yearling were placed onto Haute Island (an island in the Kerguelen Archipelago). These two sheep were taken from a captive population in France. By the beginning of the 1970s, the number had grown to 100 individuals and peaked at 700 sheep in 1977. Since that time the population has fluctuated in a cyclical manner between 250 and 700 members. Given that the population began with only two individuals (the founder effect), has experienced cyclical changes in the population size, and was isolated on an island, the researchers expected very low genetic diversity (measured as heterozygosity).

Using mathematical models, the heterozygosity of a population can be computed at any point in time from the heterozygosity of the ancestral population (which was known for the original mouflon pair) and the original population size. What the researchers discovered, however, when they measured this quantity directly for the sheep on Haute Island was that it exceeded the predictions made by the models by up to a factor of 4. In other words, the models underestimated the genetic diversity of the actual population.

The researchers explained this discrepancy by speculating that natural selection drives the increase in genetic diversity, since an increase in genetic variability increases the survivability of the population.

Consequently, if these same models were used to estimate the effective sizes of the ancestral population from the measured genetic diversity at any point in time, they would have overestimated the original population size as much larger than two individuals.

Lastly, the primary reason to think that humanity arose from a single pair does not rest on population estimates, but the fact that the Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA sequences sampled from humans alive today trace back to single ancestral sequences. Again, these can be understood as reflecting an origin from a single man and single woman.

One Lucky Mother, One Lucky Father?

Even though the genetic data traces humanity’s origin back to a single woman and man, evolutionary biologists are quick to assert that mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam were not the first humans. Rather, according to them, many “Eves” and “Adams” existed.7 Accordingly, mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam were the lucky ones whose genetic material just happened to survive. The genetic lines of the other first humans were lost over time.

While this explanation is not out of the realm of possibility, it is highly contrived. It would work if only a few of the first humans reproduced, or were allowed to reproduce. If the data is simply taken at face value, the biblical model is the more parsimonious explanation.

Even though evolutionary biologists offer ways to explain away the implications of the human population genetic data, these explanations—entrenched in naturalism—are not necessarily superior to an interpretation that fully squares with the biblical account. The scientific case for the biblical Adam and Eve stands firm.

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Lamb and the Goats

Jesus spoke of two kind of people, the lambs and the goats. Jesus also said that the lambs shall inherit the Earth.

  1. Matthew 25:32
    All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats.
  2. Matthew 25:33 : And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.
  3. Matthew 5:5 Blessed are the meek, For they shall inherit the earth.

Revelation 9:10 : They had tails like scorpions, and there were stings in their tails. Their power was to hurt men five months.

A possible scenario in Revelation 9:10 is that UFOs are going to invade Earth in order to produce a new humanity that is safe for expansion into the cosmos. People like the Murdocks, Trumps, and Kocks are going to suffer unbearable pain and desire death while the goat spirit is burned from their minds, leaving the nature lamb spirit in each of the persons. Greed shall exist no more.

The lamb spirit is concerned more about people than itself. All that the lamb has is made available to those who can not help themselves. Jesus is that lamb spirit.

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Edward Snowden; Traitor, Spy or Whistle-Blower?

  • Edward Snowden is a whistle-blower, not a traitor nor a spy. The government is attempting to equate Snowden with Bradley Manning who gave info to a foreign power. Snowden gave info to his American citizenry; a stark warning to our privacy rights being covertly taken.

    Beware! Sensitive info about the public has never remained secured in one place with the sole purpose for which first intended. Employees shall be lured away by big money offered for this info as employees come and go. This highly valuable info shall also lure domestic spies to infiltrate the system becoming part of the folds, and very possibly foreign spies shall do the same.

    Special Interest Groups already have mountains of info about each citizen; myself being a witness. SIG can mold any private citizen into what they want by using intimidate and orchestrating and planting adversities into their life. At a certain point, dissidents shall be eliminated; thereby, killing all protest against the powers that are. The right to oppose these powers is essential to a high quality democracy.

    SIG is good for the people when it is monitoring our politicians, but is anti-freedom and anti-democracy when targeting private citizens.

    The NSA came into being as an answer to the threat of terrorism after 9/11. I applaud this construct, but it was hastly put together as justified by the Patriot Act, and motivated by overwhelming emotions within the public. The public hasn’t had the time to make the NSA fully accountable to the people. It is operating on its own will mostly.

    Snowden, our Whistle-Blower, has made us citizens aware that it is time to make the NSA accountable to the people because it has become obvious that if we do not, than the NSA shall hold the people accountable to the NSA.

  • Rep. Peter King made a jackass appearance on CNN TV who gave the NSA a rubber stamp from the government. King called Edward Snowden a traitor. I ask a traitor to Whom? I don’t understand how a citizen can be a traitor to his own citizens by revealing info that specifically regards his own  citizenry. This sounds very domestic to me! And, sounds as if Snowden is a whistle-blower.
  • When I refer to SIG (special interests who target individuals), I am not strictly referring to our overt government of known Democrat and Republican politicians; I am referring to a covert socio-political machinery.

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

I Have The Ardacity To Claim That Jesus Is The Only Way To God

One of the strongest rebuttal is from atheist to our Christian belief  that Jesus is the only way to God. I have seen personalities in the national media laugh at the belief that Jesus is the only way. To this, I must first qualify my belief. Jesus by another name is still the Son Of God, Jesus.

Each person has a soul journey in this life. Each have different experiences in life.  Our origin for a Godly life is that cornerstone laid by God from the foundation of the world.  As one seek their true blissful life which is coming into the Kingdom of God invariably must pass the Jesus Spirit test. One must pass though Jesus and come alone with Jesus. There are as many testimonies as there are souls witnessing how they found Jesus or Wonderful Councilor or Prince of Peace or Justice who is all about the Son of God, Jesus. He has many more names under the heavens.

Each person has a spirit, a life, and only one spirit, one life. So does God have one Spirit with that being the Holy Spirit in and to each human? Yes, because the Holy Spirit is a person who abides in each of us.  Mind you, this reasoning is from man as a reference because God has no limit.

Referring to man again, Jesus is God wrapped in flesh and is 100% man. Do we emphatically call Jesus God. No, because God remains always an infinite and eternal God.  Faith in Jesus bring each soul to a point where the soul can begin their journey through the Son of God unto the Kingdom of God.

God laid a chosen stone, a precious stone, in the essence of things while founding the world. The world is framed by the Word of God. This stone is also called a stumbling stone which is Jesus, God’s Truth. Man goes so far and he stumbles over this stone and can not go any farther because the stone is the truth. Once again, it’s one stone about one life, Jesus.

*** Will Myers

John 14:6

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

  1. Romans 9:32
    Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.


  2. Romans 9:33
    As it is written: “Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”


  3. 1 Peter 2:8
    and “A stone of stumbling And a rock of offense.” They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed.

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Jesus Said That Only A Few Shall Be Choosen

The secularist points toward Christians are being no better than anyone else. I tend not to defend such accusations. The chosen flock among all so-called Christians are smaller than what one would first think. Most Christians of today are inspiring Christians and not saint hood Christians who are born again into God’s Kingdom. By the Grace of God we are rewarded for trying to be Christians. God sent His Son not to destroy all sinners, but to save the world.

All have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God. We live in a fallen world. Good people who obey all civil laws and contribute to our country are relatively good, but not absolutely good. As I grew up I thought that 98% were good and 2% were bad people, but after much growing pains, I came to realize that 98% of all people were not so good and only 2% were good-hearted. This was a painful experience for me.

All power hunger persons who causes wars in the name of religion is not known by the Son of God, Jesus. “I know you not.”

The church p are filled with sinners each Sunday morning, but they know where their salvation is; also, if evil, greedy persons threaten to burn all churches, then the church members who are sinners shall fight to save the church. This is the difference between being an atheist and Christians. Church members have chosen sides with Jesus. For secularist this is the deadly difference.

Christianity is in the collective conscience of America and the conscious of each citizen. It’s the constant proclaiming of God’s Truth by a few who are conscientiously saving America. So, most Christians of today are props in the name of Jesus who will fight to defend the church. Such are their rewards from God.

Most Jehovah Witnesses are true Christians because they carry the gospel to others and they witness their faith while suffering rejection and condemnation by so-called good people. They also tend to renew their minds; thereby, being dynamic Christians who seek the Kingdom of God.

Matthew 20:16

New King James Version (NKJV)

So the last will be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few chosen

Luke 13:25

When once the Master of the house has risen up and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open for us,’ and He will answer and say to you, ‘I do not know you, where you are from,’

Luke 13:27

But He will say, ‘I tell you I do not know you, where you are from. Depart from Me, all you workers of iniquity.’

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Reading Between the Fossil Lines

One of the most frequently argued objections to the trustworthiness of Scripture is found in the apparent discrepancy between the account of creation given in Genesis 1 and the supposed evidence from the fossils and fissionable minerals in the geological strata that indicated Earth is billions of years old. Yet Genesis 1 allegedly teaches that creation took place in six twenty-four-hour days, at the end of which man was already on the earth. But this conflict between Genesis 1 and the factual data of science (in contradistinction to the theories of some scientists who draw inferences from their data that are capable of quite another interpretation by those equally proficient in geology) is only apparent, not real.

To be sure, if we were to understand Genesis 1 in a completely literal fashion—which some suppose to be the only proper principle of interpretation if the Bible is truly inerrant and completely trustworthy—then there would be no possibility of reconciliation between modern scientific theory and the Genesis account. But a true and proper belief in the inerrancy of Scripture involves neither a literal nor a figurative rule of interpretation. What it does require is a belief in whatever the biblical author (human and divine) actually meant by the words he used.

An absolute literalism would, for example, commit us to the proposition that in Matthew 19:24 (and parallel passages) Christ actually meant to teach that a camel could go through the eye of a needle. But it is abundantly clear that Christ was simply using the familiar rhetorical figure of hyperbole in order to emphasize how difficult it is spiritually for a rich man (because of his pride in his material wealth) to come to repentance and saving faith in God. To construe that passage literally would amount to blatant heresy, or at least a perversity that has nothing to do with orthodoxy. Or again, when Jesus said to the multitude that challenged Him to work some miracle, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19), they grievously erred when they interpreted His remarks literally. John 2:21 goes on to explain that Jesus did not mean this prediction literally but spiritually: “But He was speaking about the temple of His body. Therefore when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this, and they believed the Scripture.” In this case, then, literal interpretation was dead wrong because that was not what Jesus meant by the language He used; He was actually referring to the far greater miracle of His bodily resurrection.

It thus becomes clear in this present case, as we study the text of Genesis 1, that we must not short-circuit our responsibility of careful exegesis in order to ascertain as clearly as possible what the divine author meant by the language His inspired prophet (in this case probably Moses) was guided to employ. Is the true purpose of Genesis 1 to teach that all creation began just six twenty-four-hour days before Adam was “born”? Or is this just a mistaken inference that overlooks other biblical data having a direct bearing on this passage? To answer this question we must take careful note of what is said in Genesis 1:27 concerning the creation of man as the closing act of the sixth creative day. There it is stated that on the sixth day (apparently toward the end of the day, after all the animals had been fashioned and placed on the earth—therefore not long before sundown at the end of that same day), “God created man in His own image; He created them male and female.” This can only mean that Eve was created in the closing hour of Day Six, along with Adam.

As we turn to Genesis 2, however, we find that a considerable interval of time must have intervened between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve. In 2:15 we are told that Yahweh Elohim (i.e., the Lord God) put Adam in the Garden of Eden as the ideal environment for his development, and there he was to cultivate and keep the enormous park, with all its goodly trees, abundant fruit crop, and four mighty rivers that flowed from Eden to other regions of the Near East. In 2:18 we read, “Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.’” This statement clearly implies that Adam had been diligently occupied in his responsible task of pruning, harvesting fruit, and keeping the ground free of brush and undergrowth for a long enough period to lose his initial excitement and sense of thrill at this wonderful occupation in the beautiful paradise of Eden. He had begun to feel a certain lonesomeness and inward dissatisfaction.

In order to compensate for this lonesomeness, God then gave Adam a major assignment in natural history. He was to classify every species of animal and bird found in the preserve. With its five [sic] mighty rivers and broad expanse, the garden must have had hundreds of species of mammal, reptile, insect, and bird, to say nothing of the flying insects that also are indicated by the basic Hebrew term ‘ôp (“bird”) (2:19). It took the Swedish scientist Linnaeus several decades to classify all the species known to European scientists in the eighteenth century. Doubtless there were considerably more by that time than in Adam’s day; and, of course, the range of fauna in Eden may have been more limited than those available to Linnaeus. But at the same time it must have taken a good deal of study for Adam to examine each specimen and decide on an appropriate name for it, especially in view of the fact that he had absolutely no human tradition behind him, so far as nomenclature was concerned. It must have required some years, or, at the very least, a considerable number of months for him to complete this comprehensive inventory of all the birds, beasts, and insects that populated the Garden of Eden.

Finally, after this assignment with all its absorbing interest had been completed, Adam felt a renewed sense of emptiness. Genesis 2:20 ends with the words “but for Adam no suitable helper was found.” After this long and unsatisfying experience as a lonely bachelor, God saw that Adam was emotionally prepared for a wife—a “suitable helper.” God, therefore, subjected him to a deep sleep, removed from his body the bone that was closest to his heart, and from that physical core of man fashioned the first woman. Finally God presented woman to Adam in all her fresh, unspoiled beauty, and Adam was ecstatic with joy.

As we have compared Scripture with Scripture (Gen 1:27 with 2:15-22), it has become very apparent that Genesis 1 was never intended to teach that the sixth creative day, when Adam and Eve were both created, lasted a mere twenty-four hours. In view of the long interval of time between these two, it would seem to border on sheer irrationality to insist that all of Adam’s experiences in Genesis 2:15-22 could have been crowded into the last hour or two of a literal twenty-four-hour day. The only reasonable conclusion to draw is that the purpose of Genesis 1 is not to tell how fast God performed His work of creation (though, of course, some of His acts, such as the creation of light on the first day, must have been instantaneous). Rather, its true purpose was to reveal that the Lord God who had revealed Himself to the Hebrew race and entered into personal covenant relationship with them was indeed the only true God, the Creator of all things that are. This stood in direct opposition to the religious notions of the heathen around them, who assumed the emergence of a pantheon of gods in successive stages out of preexistent matter of unknown origin, actuated by forces for which there was no accounting.

Genesis 1 is a sublime manifesto, totally rejecting all the cosmogonies of the pagan cultures of the ancient world as nothing but baseless superstition. The Lord God Almighty existed before all matter, and by His own word of command He brought the entire physical universe into existence, governing all the great forces of wind, rain, sun, and sea according to His sovereign will. This stood in stark contrast to the clashing, quarreling, capricious little deities and godlets spawned by the corrupt imagination of the heathen. The message and purpose of Genesis 1 is the revelation of the one true God who created all things out of nothing and ever keeps the universe under His sovereign control.

The second major aspect of Genesis 1 is the revelation that God brought forth His creation in an orderly and systematic manner. There were six major stages in this work of formation, and these stages are represented by successive days of a week. In this connection it is important to observe that none of the six creative days bears a definite article in the Hebrew text; the translations “the first day,” “the second day,” etc., are in error. The Hebrew says, “And the evening took place, and the morning took place, day one” (1:5). Hebrew expresses “the first day” by hayyôm h­­āri’šôn, but this text says simply yôm ’ehād (“day one”). Again, in v.8 we read not hayyôm haššēnî (“the second day”) but yóm šēní (“a second day”). In Hebrew prose of this genre, the definite article was generally used where the noun was intended to be definite; only in poetic style could it be omitted. The same is true with the rest of the six days; they all lack the definite article. Thus they are well adapted to a sequential pattern, rather than to strictly delimited units of time.

Genesis 1:2-5 thus sets forth the first stage of creation: the formation of light. This must have meant primarily the light of the sun and the other heavenly bodies. Sunlight is a necessary precondition to the development of plant life and animal life, generally speaking (though there are some subterranean forms of life that manage to do without it).

Genesis 1:6-8 presents the second stage: the formation of an “expanse” (r­­āqía‘) that separated between moisture in suspension in the sky and moisture condensed enough to remain on the earth’s surface. The term r­­aqía‘ does not mean a beaten-out metal canopy, as some writers have alleged—no ancient culture ever taught such a notion in its concept of the sky—but simply means “a stretched-out expanse.” This is quite evident from Isaiah 42:5, where the cognate verb r­­āqa‘ is used: “Thus says the God Yahweh, the Creator of the heavens, and the one who stretched them out [from the verb nātāh,‘to extend’ curtains or tent cords], the one who extended [rōqa‘] the earth and that which it produces [the noun se’e sā’ímrefers always to plants and animals].” Obviously r­­āqa‘ could not here mean “beat out,” “stamp out” (though it is often used that way in connection with metal working); the parallelism with nātāh (noted above) proves that here it has the force of extend or expand. Therefore, the noun r­­āqîa‘ can mean only “expanse,” without any connotation of a hard metal plate.

Genesis 1:9-13 relates the third stage in God’s creative work, the receding of the waters of the oceans, seas, and lakes to a lower altitude than the masses of land that emerged above them and thus were allowed to become dry. Doubtless the gradual cooling of the planet Earth led to the condensation of water necessary to bring about this result; seismic pressures producing mountains and hills doubtless contributed further to this separation between land and sea. Once this dry land (hayyabbāšāh) appeared, it became possible for plant life and trees to spring up on the earth’s surface, aided by photosynthesis from the still beclouded sky.

Genesis 1:14-19 reveals that in the fourth creative stage God parted the cloud cover enough for direct sunlight to fall on the earth and for accurate observation of the movements of the sun, moon, and stars to take place. Verse 16 should not be understood as indicating the creation of the heavenly bodies for the first time on the fourth creative day; rather it informs us that the sun, moon, and stars created on Day One as the source of light had been placed in their appointed places by God with a view to their eventually functioning as indicators of time (“signs, seasons, days, years”) to terrestrial observers. The Hebrew verb wayya‘aś in v.16 should better be rendered “Now [God] had made the two great luminaries, etc.,” rather than as simple past tense, “[God] made.” (Hebrew has no special form for the pluperfect tense but uses the perfect tense, or the conversive imperfect as here, to express either the English past or the English pluperfect, depending on the context.)

Genesis 1:20-23 relates that on the fifth creative day God fully developed marine life, freshwater life, and introduced flying creatures (whether insects, lizards, or winged birds). It is interesting to observe that the fossil bearing strata of the Paleozoic era contain the first evidence of invertebrate animal life with startling suddenness in the Cambrian period. There is no indication in the pre-Cambrian strata of how the five thousand species of marine and terrestrial animal life of the Paleozoic era may have developed, for there is no record of them whatever prior to the Cambrian levels (cf. D. Dewar, “The Earliest Known Animals,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80 [1948]: 22-29).

Genesis 1:24-26 records that in the sixth and final stage of the creative process, God brought forth all the land animals after their various species (lemînāh in v.24 and lemînēhû in v.25 mean “according to its kind,” whether the antecedent was male or female in grammatical gender), culminating finally in the creation of man, as discussed more extensively above.

In this connection, a comment is in order concerning the recurring formula at the end of each creative day: “And it was/became evening, and it became/was morning, a second day” or whatever ordinal it might be). The reason for this closing statement seems to have been twofold. First, it was necessary to make clear whether the symbolic unit involved was a mere sunrise-to-sundown day, or whether it was a twenty-four-hour day. The term yôm (“day”) could mean either. in fact, the first time yôm occurs is in v.5: “And He called the light day, and the darkness He called night.” Therefore, it was necessary to show that each of the creative days was symbolized by a complete twenty-four-hour cycle, beginning at sunset of the previous day (according to our reckoning) and ending with the daylight portion, down to the setting of the sun, on the following day (as we would reckon it).

Second, the twenty-four-hour day serves as a better symbol than a mere daylight day in regard to the commencement and completion of one stage of creation before the next stage began. There were definite and distinct stages in God’s creational procedure. If this be the true intention of the formula, then it serves as no real evidence for a literal twenty-four-hour-day concept on the part of the biblical author.

Some have argued that the reference in the Decalogue (commandment four) to God’s resting on the seventh day as a basis for honoring the seventh day of each week strongly suggests the literal nature of “day” in Genesis 1. This is not at all compelling, however, in view of the fact that there was to be any day of the week especially set aside from labor to center on the worship and service of the Lord, then it would have to be a twenty-four-hour day (Saturday) in any event. As a matter of fact, Scripture does not at all teach that Yahweh rested only one twenty-four-hour day at the conclusion of His creative work. No closing formula occurs at the close of the seventh day, referred to in Genesis 2:2-3. And, in fact, the New Testament teaches (in Heb. 4:1-11) that the seventh day, that “Sabbath rest,” in a very definite sense has continued on right into the church age. If so, it would be quite impossible to line up the seventh-day Sabbath with the Seventh Day that concluded God’s original work of creation!

One last observation concerning the word yôm as used in Genesis 2:4. Unlike some of the modern versions, KJV correctly renders this verse “These are the generations of the heavens of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.” Since the previous chapter has indicated that there were at least six days involved in creating the heavens and the earth, it is abundantly evident that yóm [sic] in Genesis 2:4 cannot possibly be meant as a twenty-four-hour day—unless perchance the Scripture contradicts itself!(RTB)

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment