blackbird

No pictures. Demons are not material beings, but are unseen spirits. Mankind likes to invent and make pictures of devils or demons, but these are just inventions. A Biblical survey is just an overview of what is in the Bible on the subject of Satanic deception. You sure like to make up nonsense.

A Christian program on TV at the moment is talking about The Destructive Lies of Evolution. The # 1 lie is that man is just another animal. TWTV.org/Evolution

A book I am reading at the moment, War on the Saints, Chap. One, called a Biblical survey of Satanic Deception talks about how people in Christian churches are often deceived by Satan and his demons. If believers, i.e. Christians are so easily deceived, one can only wonder how easily Satan deceives non-believers. Billions of people in the world are under great deception. That explains why the world is in the mess it is in. The fact that you would say what you said proves you are really under great deception and don't even know it or acknowledge it. The book starts off "Truth of every kind makes free. while lies bind up in bonds. Ignorance also binds up, because it gives ground to Satan. Man's ignorance is a primary and essential condition for deception by evil spirits. " Ignorance is a result of lack of knowledge of God's revelation to man, in English, the King James Bible (1611). If you don't understand that since the first couple on earth, Adam and Eve, disobeyed God by eating the forbidden fruit and as a result they fell out of the good relationship they had with God. They and all their descendants received a corrupt, fallen nature because we are part of their family. We inherited the fallen nature. They listened to the serpent (Satan) and were deceived. That is the condition of mankind now. The world is in a corrupt, fallen condition because of man's first sin against God. That was passed down to all of us. That problem is exacerbated by the fact mankind with the fallen nature often does not believe what they are told about their condition and the fact they are being deceived by Satan and demonic spirits under his command. Demons are able to put thoughts in their mind such as what you said in order to keep you under his control and prevent you from knowing the truth. In this case, one requires a degree of humility and willingness to acknowledge one doesn't have all the answers or knowledge. One needs to keep an open mind to what God has said in his word. That is the only possible way of being delivered from the powers of darkness.

Does Satan rule you? How do you know?

I know exactly where you are coming from. I will explain it concisely so you will hopefully understand. There is Bible believing Christianity and there are many other false religions in the world. One of the false belief systems is called humanism. There are religious humanists who advocate and push their ideology of humanism throughout the public educational system with the aid of such teachings as the theory of evolution. The book Refuting Evolution say this on page 20: 1. Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created. 2. Humanism believes that Man is a part of nature and has emerged as a result of a continuous process. This is exactly what evolution teaches. Many humanist leaders are quite open about using the public schools to proselytize their faith. This might surprise some parents who think the schools are supposed to be free of religious indoctrination....." So you appear to be a supporter of humanism. Humanists like yourself say keep theological thinking (i.e. Christianity or Bible beliefs out of government, out of public schools), and restrict it to private. But you are quite agreeable to humanist ideology being spread through government, schools, and society. That makes you a religious humanist of some sort. This is the religion of those who claim they are atheists. They see humans as kind of gods and believe everything should be based on humanist (man-centered) ideas or beliefs. They put their complete trust in humans as having the answers to everything. Any supernatural Bible belief system is anathema to them. Humanism definitely has a strong anti-God or anti-Christian bias. Always remember that humanism is a religion to many people, although they would never admit to that.

Sorry but your humanism ideology is a lie of Satan. Humanism is one of Satan's biggest lies and is exposed and refuted by the Holy Scripture, the King James Bible 1611. Humanism is a road to hell.

Actually this article explains scientists are embarrassed by the claims of evolution. Many of them apparently now reject the theory. "But in "scientific circles" it has become an embarrassment. It contradicts the best established law in the whole of science. The Law in question is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In language easily understood this law guarantees that any physical system subject only to natural processes follows a downward path to ever lower levels of energy, it becomes more disorganized - it suffers decay." Studies in Evolution - Reformation International Schools This is why the Big Bang theory has also fallen into disfavour with many. An explosion such as a Big Bang does not create order; it creates disorder. The universe with all the laws of physics is a precise thing. Everything operates in the universe according to precise laws of physics. Where did those laws of physics come from. Where did the precise atoms and molecules, protons, electrons, and neutrons come from? That is a very important question. I doubt there is any scientist on earth who has the answer to that one.

Many scientists would disagree with you. quote Evolution has played such a major role in shaping modern society that it is essential for every member of our culture to understand the theory, the evidence for it, and its implications. It is more difficult than one might first expect to discover exactly what the theory of evolution says. One reason is that it has changed drastically over the relatively brief period that it has been the ruling paradigm of Western thought. Changes are not usually broadcast to the general public. (See Arthur S. Lodge's search for a definition.) When the theory first became popular, following Charles Darwin’s proposal of natural selection as the means to drive the process, it was a simple and very appealing hypothesis. Life was rather simple in those days. Algae, amoebae and such humble creatures were blobs of protoplasm which Darwin postulated might have just happened in some warm little pond by the chance coming together of chemicals. It was rather easy to imagine that a few relatively simple changes in this protoplasm could lead to developmental change, and that natural selection would ensure that better adaptation would be preserved. Changes which led to worse adaptation would die out as poorly adapted creatures would perish in the struggle for existence and fail to leave offspring with their inferior design. The idea of natural processes bringing complex life forms from simple ones, which themselves came from dead matter, logically leads to the idea of all things having arisen by chance through purely natural processes. This way of looking at the world is reflected in the definition given in Evolution and Genetics by Julian Huxley, one of the most influential evolutionists of all time :- "Evolution, in the extended sense, can be defined as a directional and essentially irreversible process occurring in time, which in its course gives rise to an increase of variety and an increasingly high level of organization in its products. Our present knowledge indeed forces us to the view that the whole of reality is evolution - a single process of self transformation." For many years this was the accepted view. It is still the view put forward in popular literature, the media and school text-books. But in "scientific circles" it has become an embarrassment. It contradicts the best established law in the whole of science. The Law in question is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In language easily understood this law guarantees that any physical system subject only to natural processes follows a downward path to ever lower levels of energy, it becomes more disorganized - it suffers decay. For many years supporters of the theory attempted to overlook the contradiction between evolution’s requirement (self transformation to ever higher levels of organization), and the Second Law’s exactly opposite requirement, by claiming that the Second Law applies only to "closed systems" in which no energy enters from outside. Few now try to support this discredited position, (see, for example, The Mystery of Life's Origins) and changes in the definition of evolution itself have been brought in to address the problem. Another difficulty for the theory has come from microbiology. As scientists have learned how to examine life in ever greater detail, Darwin’s picture of organisms consisting of a few simple chemicals has given way to one of mind-boggling complexity even in the most humble of creatures. The lowly E coli bacterium possesses not only miniature electric motors of outstanding efficiency, but also the apparatus to build, repair, maintain and operate them - as well as the electricity-generating system to power them. As it has become possible to calculate the probabilities of evolution’s mechanisms producing evolution’s supposed results, ever growing numbers of scientists have become convinced that there are problems which the theory is unable to cope with. Many are now seriously considering intelligent design as an alternative. As the founder of the "cult" of evolution, Charles Darwin and his magnum opus, the Origin of Species are presented for study. A more modern text, an Introduction to Evolutionary Biology by Chris Colby shows the enormous change which has taken place in evolutionary thinking in the last century. My annotations are rather full and attempt to show what I see to be the weakness of much of modern evolutionary thinking. I recommend this annotated work as showing the case for and against the modern theory. The antipathy between evolution and Christianity is sometimes denied. This idea is examined in "Creation, Evolution and the Christian" . The weakness of evolution as a "scientifically" defensible position and the truth that it is largely a religious question is very ably presented by Philip Johnson, professor of law at the University of California, Berkley. Johnson's position deserves some explanation. The "scientific" press is a tightly controlled unit which does not allow any neutral discussion of evolution, the time scale or Einstein. Any paper questioning orthodoxy, or submitted by a scientist known to be skeptical of orthodoxy, is simply denied publication. Any scientist questioning the orthodoxy is ostracized and outcast. Scientists are then able to set up a vicious circle to exclude debate. Such questions could only be seriously considered if they were discussed in the reputable journals. Any attempt to bring such discussion to the journals is prevented by editorial policy. The situation was brought into the spotlight in the chapter "The Scientific Mafia" in "Velikovski Reconsidered." A recent example can be seen in Persecution of Richard Sternberg. Philip Johnson is a highly respected professor of law. The secular humanist watchdogs apparently anticipated no danger from this field. They did not, apparently, set up a similar exclusion principle for lawyers. Johnson was able to question Darwinism by comparing the strength of the evidence put forward to support it with that required by a court of law - without the weight of his entire profession descending to crush and stifle him. His position is expressed very simply in an interview with Citizen Magazine. Johnson's examination of the stand of influential liberal Reformed Christian scientists can be seen in "The Hostage Takers." The internet has many of his articles examples being "What is Darwinism," a well reasoned account of what evolution really is - a philosophical necessity of atheism. "The Church of Darwin" is a look at Darwinists aims for education. "Shouting Heresy in the Temple of Darwin" and "Darwinism's Rules of Reasoning" reinforce his analysis of the way Darwinists operate. Johnson has been involved in may debates -on the subject. An example ("How Did We Get Here?" with Kenneth Miller) reproduced here is typical. Many more of his contributions on the subject can be found on the Internet. A major contribution to the question of the credibility of evolution was Michael Behe's book "Darwin's Black Box," in which he drew attention to many marvelous micro-biological systems which exhibit what he termed "irreducible complexity." The importance of irreducible complexity is that Darwin had stated that if any case could be brought forward where development could not have been achieved by small successive advances, then his theory would be disproved. Irreducible systems provide that disproof. Evolutionists have fought irreducible complexity fiercely, but many scientists have become convinced that intelligent design is an undeniable feature of living organisms, and a strong "Intelligent Design" group has emerged. Many articles by Behe and the Design group can be found on the internet. Behe explains his stand in Evidence for Intelligent Design. One of his colleagues, William Dembski's "Still Spinning" illustrates the tricky tactics of the opponents of design and how they can be dealt with. Non-biologists have increasingly entered the evolutionary arena. Examples are given from well know mathematician, and philosopher David Berlinski, ("The Deniable Darwin" and "Keeping an Eye on Darwin" ). Physicist Lee Spetner in A Scientific Critique of Evolution demonstrates an important point for anyone wanting to enter the arena. The claims of the evolutionist are expounded with intimidating authority, and a superior knowledge of the scientific literature is needed to show up their fatuous claims for what they are. Despite the evolutionist's bluster and the total commitment of the scientific establishment to supporting it, I believe most would concede that evolution is in its weakest and most unconvincing state for many years. (See for example, Atheism In Decline Everywhere) However weak or strong the orthodox evolutionist's position may appear to be though, it would be unwise to be swayed simply by the strongest "scientific" argument. As can be seen by contrasting Darwin and Colby, "science" changes its mind - sometimes very quickly. Whichever side is considered to have the strongest arguments today may find itself discomfited by new arguments tomorrow. The Word of God though remains the same for ever. God is true though all men be liars. Links on this page and in this section: 01 Arthur S. Lodge's Search for a Definition 02 The Mystery of Life's Origins 03 Charles Darwin Biography 04 HOME: Origin of Species: Intro 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 05 Introduction to Evolutionary Biology 06 Creation, Evolution and the Christian 07 Persecution of Richard Sternberg 08 Darwinists Squirm / Philip Johnson in Citizen Magazine 09 Comparing Hostage Takers: Fundamentalism and Scientism 10 What is Darwinism? 11 The Church of Darwin 12 How Did We Get Here? 13 Shouting Heresy in the Temple of Darwin 14 Darwinism's Rules of Reasoning 15 Evidence for Intelligent Design 16 Still Spinning Just Fine 17 The Deniable Darwin 18 Keeping an Eye on Evolution 19 A Scientific Critique of Evolution 20 Atheism In Decline Everywhere Other related articles: 30 Do Creationists Publish in Notable Refereed Journals? David Buckna 31 Pseudogenes: Are They Non-Functional? Pierre Jerlström 32 Unseating Naturalism: Recent Insights from Developmental Biology, Jonathan Wells Links to sites dealing with evolution : Revolution against Evolution | True.Origin Archive Answers in Genesis | Center for Scientific Creation Access Research Network (ARN) | Design Inference Charles Darwin -- The Truth? | Amazing Discoveries Arthur S. Lodge's page on Evolution | Biblical Creation Society Creation Research Society | California Institute of Omniology Lambert Dolphin's Library | Creation Compass Creation Perspective Studies in Evolution - Reformation International Schools

I think most scientists would disagree with your claim about explaining just about everything. I would suggest you get two books by scientists who refute the theory of evolution. A theory is not a proven fact either. One book is called "Refuting Evolution" by Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D. I think you may be able to read some of this material on the website creation.com Another book called "Vital Questions" by Philip Stott. He was a mathematician but is also a scientist with great knowledge on the subject of creation versus evolution and related subjects. He has a lot of information on the subject at the following website: Philip Stott: General Science: Table of Contents | Reformation International College

I never heard politicians saying on the news that they believe in God. Maybe you are guessing on that.

The majority of scientists falsely believe in evolution. The reason is because that is the way they have been taught and most have not been taught anything else. The school and university curriculums are decided by agnostic or atheist theory of evolution believers. Yet you can't explain where everything came from and where the complex structures in cells, biology, and physical laws of the universe came from. Scientists, if they are being honest, will even admit they can't explain it.

What is "theocratic thinking"? Are you saying Christian beliefs have no place in government or society? If so I think you are dead wrong. Historically it is Christian beliefs that brought us respect for human rights and an end to slavery. Laws against murder, stealing, and the right to own private property are all things that came from historic Christian beliefs such as the ten commandments in the Old Testament. Your terminology does not really explain it because theocratic thinking could refer to any false religion as well, such as Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. and not just Christian theology. One needs to be more precise. There is nothing wrong with Christian thinking in society, government, or anywhere. That is what opposes evil and stands for what is right. It is hugely important. The difference between right and wrong is at stake here. The Quebec government has been making a huge mistake in the past sixty years or so. They are trying to create a so-called "secular society" by banning any outward forms of religion. The problem is Quebec has never been a completely free society. In trying to ban any outward forms of religion, the government becomes at kind of authoritarian human rights denier and ends up crushing personal religious freedoms. This will not end well for Quebec. Once a government starts down that path, there is no end and people will start losing all kinds of freedoms. Government thinks they are a kind of god and then believe they can and should do anything.

I haven't heard anyone say I'm right because God appointed me. That would be a foolish way of speaking to begin with. Nobody does that. But if you are talking issues that are based upon the historic Judeo-Christian beliefs such as the ten commandments or teachings in the Bible, I think it is reasonable to make reference to that. A good example would be kids being groomed in LGBTQ or trans gender ideology in schools. It is proper to oppose that on the basis of it being against our historic Judeo-Christian culture and belief system. The Judeo-Christian beliefs are supported by the Bible and that teaches there are only two genders, male and female. That is what provides a stable family structure for kids to grow up in also. It teaches the correct relationship is a married man and wife as the proper family structure. The fact is now the family structure as God created it is under attack by the so-called progressives. Unless you can produce some good reasons why you argue one way, you lose. Do you believe in the traditional family structure and only two genders? What would be your reasons.

That's not how it works in reality because everyone has their beliefs regardless what they profess publicly. Everyone has beliefs that affect how they think about political issues. Atheists and agnostics are for example more like to support euthanasia (assisted suicide that uses the smokescreen of MAID and freedom of choice). Same with abortion or killing of pre-born babies. They pretend it is just freedom of choice and completely ignore the fact they are killing human beings.

This article gives a detailed answer. This is one of the most important questions you could ask. quote This is a profoundly important question. Because we live in a world with many competing truth claims—and many so-called gods—the identity of the one true God matters. The one true God is distinguished from all the false gods that have been foisted upon mankind by evil spirits and deluded men. Gods that are fashioned by the imaginations and hands of men are absolutely worthless (Isaiah 44:9–10), but the one true God is full of glory, grace, and truth (John 1:14). The Bible says that the one true God is the sovereign, self-existent Creator of the universe (Isaiah 42:5; Ephesians 1:11). He is spirit (John 4:24), He is eternal (Psalm 90:2), and He is personal (Deuteronomy 34:10). The one true God possesses all knowledge (Isaiah 46:10) and all power (Matthew 19:26), is present in all places (Psalm 139:7–10), and is unchanging (James 1:17). There are many false gods—Hinduism alone supposedly recognizes as many as 330 million gods—but none of them possess the attributes of the one true God. The Bible says that God is just (Acts 17:31), loving (Ephesians 2:4–5), truthful (Numbers 23:19), and holy (Isaiah 6:3). God shows compassion (2 Corinthians 1:3), mercy (Romans 9:15), and grace (Romans 5:17). God judges sin (Psalm 5:5), but He also offers forgiveness (Psalm 130:4). Any god that is not just, loving, truthful, holy, compassionate, merciful, gracious, and forgiving is not the one true God. The one true God exists in tri-unity. The Bible speaks of three divine Persons who share the same nature and essence in one God. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three in one (Matthew 3:16–17; 28:19). This characteristic of the one true God separates Him from all other gods of monotheistic religions: Islam, for example, teaches one god (Allah), but it is a false god, since Allah is not triune. Any concept of God that excludes Jesus Christ is faulty. As Scripture says, “No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also” (1 John 2:23). The one true God wants to be known. He has revealed His power and glory in creation (Romans 1:20). He revealed Himself to Abram in Mesopotamia, calling him to a new life of faith and making of him a new nation (Genesis 12:1–3). The one true God later identified Himself as the “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob” (Exodus 3:6) and revealed Himself to Moses in Midian (verses 1–5). Using Moses, the one true God began to reveal Himself more clearly through His written Word, the Bible. And, finally, the one true God has given us the ultimate revelation of Himself in the Lord Jesus: “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son” (Hebrews 1:1–2). Jesus is “the exact representation of [God’s] being” (verse 3). Jesus is the Word of God made flesh who “made his dwelling among us” (John 1:14). We all have a choice of whom to worship. Joshua told the Israelites it was time for them to choose the one true God over the gods of the Amorites (Joshua 24:15). Elijah told the people on top of Mt. Carmel that they could no longer stay ambivalent concerning God: “How long will you waver between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him” (1 Kings 18:21). Today, people worship some of the same pagan gods mentioned in the Old Testament; or they worship more recent false gods such as Mami Wata and Cernunnos; or they worship themselves. But the worship of false deities leads only to death in the end. “This is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3). May we be like Ruth, who chose the one true God over the idols of Moab (Ruth 1:16). unquote Who is the one true God? | GotQuestions.org

So if government decides to take away your freedom as Hitler and Stalin did, you think that is government's right? If governments go against the Bible and against God, Christians have a right and moral duty to peacefully oppose the evil government does. They always did and millions of them were killed for opposing tyrannical rulers. Atheism means there is no higher authority than mere mortal, sinful man. That has proven a disaster in history and it is unbiblical.

God's law and his word, the Bible, is supreme and above any earthly rulers. No government has the authority to over-rule God and his laws. Many rulers did that in the past and millions of people were tortured and killed for resisting the authorities in the Holy Roman Empire. They followed God rather than mortal men. Caesars lived 2,000 years ago. We don't live in an absolute dictatorship, at least it is claimed we have a democratic system with basic freedoms such as freedom of speech. Even before democracy was developed in the west, if Caesars or Kings did things that were blatantly against the Bible, I think God would recognize the Christian's right to oppose them. Even in the first 300 years after Christ, thousands of Christians were burned at the stake or thrown to the lions for disobeying Caesar in the Roman Empire which made Christianity illegal. Do you think Caesar was doing the right thing in persecuting and killing thousands of Christians and burning Bibles??? Throwing Christians to the lions was the common form of entertainment in Rome in those days. Don't forget millions of Bible-believing Christians were tortured and killed by the authorities down through the centuries (dark ages/middle ages) for rejecting the Roman Catholic system or questioning the papacy or clergy. It was a false religious system and still is. They were not following Caesar because Caesar was a cruel tyrant. Read the history of the Holy Roman Inquisition that lasted for centuries. There are books online you can read for free on it at archive.com. Absolute rule by kings ended long ago in the western nations such as Canada. The ordinary people have been granted democratic rights. That is why we have elections and choose our leaders. As part of that we have the right to peacefully criticize government. Let me make it clear, even if government removes certain democratic rights such as freedom of speech, Christians still have the right to peacefully oppose and speak against anything government does that is against God and his written revelation, the King James Bible. That is an absolute right man has been given by God. It appears you are grasping for straws in your effort to discredit the Bible or discredit Christianity. It's not working. It is perfectly biblical in our system to criticize governments in a peaceful way when they act in unbiblical, evil ways or against God. It is perfectly Biblical and right to oppose evil things that governments do, but that must be done in a peaceful way. That is why it would have been correct to oppose Hitler or Stalin in the evil things they were doing as well. That is what allows Christians to peacefully protest abortion or killing of pre-born babies and other things that go against the Bible.

Perhaps you are referring to this thread's subject. It is perfectly Biblical to criticize government in a democratic society. If government does wrong, it should be pointed out. Isn't that what democracy means? There are many verses in the Bible that can be misunderstood if you don't understand them in their context. Many verses can also be pulled out of the Bible and mis-applied. That is done frequently.

The word "religion" has a negative connotation in many people's mind. I would rather talk about the God of the Holy Bible, in English, the King James Version of 1611. The Bible gives us the truth of where we came from, why we are here, what God revealed about mankind, the problem, and the solution. The truth revealed in the Bible is what matters. You love to throw out nonsense such as the bit about a social club. A Bible-based church does not exist to be a social club, but rather to worship God, learn about Him, and have fellowship between like-minded believers. God has said there should be a fellowship of believers. It is a community of like-minded people who should encourage each other and worship God together. That is good.

We are here at least in our current form and condition by an accident of the cosmos. It makes perfect sense. You have a problem with the idea of an accident of the cosmos. It simply doesn't explain where all the laws of physics came from. Gravity for one thing. But the laws of physics are very precise and absolute as are the laws of chemical interactions, atoms, molecules, the light spectrum, radiation, etc. etc. Where did it all come from? Why does it all interact so perfectly to give us this functioning universe with life forms? No, claiming is was just an accident just doesn't cut it. It is far too complex and intricate. An accident simply doesn't explain anything. You really need to read the book "Darwin's Universe -- From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing-- Survival for Nothing" by Yan T. Wee. Available on Amazon. Here is what the back cover says in the first paragraph: "Darwinists hope to bury God in an avalanche of a causeless universe and a godless evolution. But instead of liberating us, they plunge us into a cosmic depression. We are reduced to From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing -- an accidental leftover from the Big Bang, evolved by a lucky chance, and are here for no ultimate purpose." Why anybody would fall for that is hard to understand. Chapter 1 says this in part: A scientist approached God and said, "Listen, we've decided we no longer need you. Nowadays, we can clone people, transplant hearts, and do all kinds of things that were once considered miraculous." God patiently heard him out, and then said, "All right. To see whether or not you still need me, why don't we have a man-making contest?" "Okay, great!" the scientist said. Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam," God said. "That's fine," replied the scientist, and bent to scoop up a handful of dirt. "Whoa!" God said, shaking his head in disapproval. "Not so fast, pal. You go get your own dirt!" 'Get your own dirt' - that is basically the crux of the matter. Despite all the latest discoveries in every discipline of science, all the cosmologists, physicists, and biologists will inevitably converge at the edge of a vast cosmic chasm they cannot cross - where did the 'first dirt' come from? And to go a step further, where did all the physical laws governing this material universe come from - from gravity to electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force? Who defines these and the many other laws of nature and calibrates them with such fine precision without which matter and life can never exist. Scientists today are both stunned and stumped by this exquisite fine tuning of the universe and by what is now commonly known as the 'Anthropic Principle' - the universe appears to be patently contrived to permit intelligent life. unquote Nobody can come up with a reasonable explanation about where this complex universe and life came from other than a Creator we call God. The complexity and all the physical laws that govern the universe are just something nobody can explain apart from a Creator. Simple logic. To say it was an accident is really an incoherent answer when you even begin to consider all the complex laws of physics that governs everything.

If that were true, which it isn't, life would have no meaning. We would all be here by a an accident of the cosmos. Here today and gone tomorrow. This doesn't make much sense. I think the Bible makes far more sense when it says God created man in his own image, not physically, but perhaps emotionally and psychologically. We can reason and think. Without God then what makes right and wrong? Without God there would be no such thing as right or wrong and any criminal would think he can do whatever he wishes and get away with it. That doesn't seem like a reasonable universe. God created man with a soul and a spirit. Life does not end at death. There is a supernatural domain. The Bible says after death is the judgment. Better study the Bible and learn what life and eternity is all about. There are only one of two places to go after this life: heaven or hell. Now is the day of salvation. Don't waste it.

No. God is not real. Even if you do believe in the bible there’s nothing relevant to modern geopolitics. You are entitled to your opinion. Do you have any explanation for why we are here and what the meaning of life is? Or even how we got here?

Like what? The KJV Bible explains a lot. Do you believe God owes man anything or any explanation about anything? God is the Creator of the universe; man is a created being. First of all you have to accept that God is eternal, omniscient, omnipotent and merciful. If you want to think man somehow is superior to God and that God somehow must justify anything or owes man anything, then you haven't really understood much about God. We need to remember our place in God's creation. He is the Creator and we are mere specks in God's creation. God loves man even though man rebelled against Him. He gives man a second chance. But that is an individual choice how one responds. That is what the Bible is all about.

I ask this because there are news articles that point out Trump is doing a lot of dictatorial things that totally disrespect the human rights of the individuals targeted. One example is the 17 people killed on the Caribbean sea without any due process to prove their guilt as drug smugglers. How is it possible in a democratic society, that claims to respect the rule of law, that one man, the President can just arbitrarily issue orders to kill people without any kind of proof that the people being killed are the actual criminals or actually the ones guilty of the crimes? How is it possible without doing it through a justice system and fair trial? Second example is all the students from foreign countries that have been targeted, some incarcerated for months, and then deported for allegedly demonstrating and saying things that the administration doesn't like? I thought everyone has freedom of speech in America, but apparently that is not true. One man can apparently take action and do whatever he feels like to anyone whose speech he does not like. Is this liberty or freedom of speech? I don't think so. It's not just that Trump is nuts | Opinion I think Americans are living in dangerous times. If what is happening is accepted by America, then anyone could be a target. Nobody is safe. Is this the new normal? I don't know. Another article says: "Donald Trump's nominee to lead the Pentagon has openly fantasized about a violent clash between the U.S. military and his political rivals, whom he describes as "domestic enemies." Fox News host Pete Hegseth, the president-elect's choice for secretary of defense, published a book in 2020 imagining the outcome of that year's election would lead to “national divorce” and a "civil war" that would involve the military and law enforcement taking up arms against president Joe Biden's supporters, reported The Guardian. “The fate of freedom is what is at stake in the 2020 election," Hegseth wrote in the book "American Crusade." "The immediate years that follow will, once and for all, determine whether the American experiment in human freedom – the America of our founding – will die, get a national divorce based on irreconcilable cultural and political divisions, or return to its founding principles.” Trump's defense pick openly fantasized about military attack on 'domestic enemies': report - Raw Story It is hard to understand what exactly he means.

That is entirely unbiblical. You can't leave God out of anything. "11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible. " Isaiah 13:11 KJV