UPDATE
CSE receives a host of questions each day concerning Dr. Hovind’s status.
The first one is, “Where is Dr. Hovind?” After five moves, Dr. Hovind is now in South Carolina. His address is:
Kent Hovind #06452-017
Federal Prison Camp Edgefield
PO Box 725
Edgefield, SC 29824
Legally, what happens next? Continue to WAIT. Dr. Hovind’s attorneys continue to work on the briefs to file for his appeal. Mrs. Hovind’s sentencing is now scheduled for June 29th.
There are several web sites and petitions that have been formed in an attempt to help Dr. and Mrs. Hovind. The most popular site is www.FreeHovind.com, although there are several others. Should God choose to use one or more of these petitions in expediting the release of Dr. Hovind and the end of this case, we would be very grateful. However, none of them are directly associated with Creation Science Evangelism. At this time we do not know of any need to oppose these petitions, and pray that if it is His will, God will use them as He sees fit.
Spiritually, what happens next? We must continue to serve God day by day.
We really honestly believe that when we pray for a miracle in our case, we are not just praying for selfish reasons. We earnestly believe that the cause of Christ is at stake. We really believe that souls are hanging in the balance because of God’s continued choosing to use this ministry to bring others to Himself. We honestly believe that HIS name and HIS glory are at stake.
Materially, what happens next? The CSE Team continue to focus on the organization’s goal—taking the creation message to the world. We continue to look to an exciting future sharing the Good News that people can actually have a personal relationship with their awesome Creator! We continue to receive heart-warming testimonies from those who have trusted Christ, or who have entered into a closer walk with him as a result of the Creation Seminar.
CSE is currently working with several charitable organization, tax attorney experts in order to insure a higher standard of fiduciary excellence and accountability. To those who have continued to support the mission of Creation Science Evangelism with their prayers, encouragement, and finances, we humbly say, “Thank you.”
The following is a writing that we recently received from Dr. Hovind.
It shares part of his experience in an unusual format—an e-mail exchange between himself and God.
“E-Mail”
From: Kent Hovind
Sent: May 23, 2007
To: GOD
Subject: Re: A few questions
KH: Do you have time for a few questions, today, Lord?
GOD: Son, time has no effect on me. I created it. I am always here to help you and guide you in any area of your life. Go ahead with your questions, son.
KH: These last seven months in prison have been rather difficult for me, Lord. In fact, in the last month, I’ve been in five different facilities.
GOD: I know, son. I’ve been with you the entire time (Hebrews 13:5).
KH: Thanks, Lord. I felt your presence many times. But there were other times that I was very sad and lonely.
GOD: I know, son. I saw your tears. I was there, but you were too busy acting like Jonah. You were more concerned about your own problems than the future of those men around you. You need to work on that.
KH: I’m sorry, Lord. You are right.
GOD: I am always right. Go ahead with your questions.
KH: Well God, yesterday was especially hard. I couldn’t sleep the night before because I expected them to call me at 3:30 a.m. to pack up for the bus ride up here to South Carolina.
GOD: I know, son. I was right there with you. I heard your prayers throughout that long night. We had sweet fellowship, didn’t we? Thank you for loving me and talking with me.
KH: Thanks for being there and for listening, Lord.
GOD: I’m always there and always listening, son.
KH: Lord, I asked you to let me sleep, because I knew the next day would be hard and I would need my strength. Why didn’t you let me sleep, Lord?
GOD: I did, son. You slept great from 3:00 – 4:45 a.m. Who do you think it was that made the guard forget to call you at 3:30? Didn’t you wake up refreshed at 4:45 and even comment on how hard you slept and how good you felt?
KH: Yes, Lord, now that you remind me, I did sleep real hard and woke up feeling great.
GOD: Did you have the strength to make it through the day, son?
KH: Yes, Lord. I did.
GOD: I will always supply your needs each day, son (Philippians 4:19). Quit worrying.
KH: I see that, Lord. But Lord, I was dreading that long bus ride locked in a cage like an animal wearing leg shackles and being handcuffed to a chair around my waist. It’s real uncomfortable, Lord.
GOD: Yes, son. I know all about being treated badly and being real uncomfortable. But, son, have other men gone through this before?
KH: Yes, Lord. Millions have.
GOD: Will you have more compassion for these men now, son?
KH: Oh, yes, Lord. I will.
GOD: How many men were on that bus, son?
KH: There were forty, Lord.
GOD: Whose name was called to be the orderly and pass out food and water?
KH: Mine was, Lord.
GOD: That got you out of wearing the chains for the entire trip, didn’t it, son?
KH: Yes, Lord. It did.
GOD: Who do you think arranged that?
KH: You did, Lord.
GOD: That’s right, son. I heard your prayer and answered it. Relax, son. I have everything under control.
KH: I’m sorry, Lord. I worry too much.
GOD: Yes you do, son. You need to work on that. Did you get to minister to those men and witness to Jerome on the bus?
KH: Yes, I did, Lord.
GOD: Did you know his mother was a prostitute and that he has no idea who his father is? Did you know no one had ever prayed for him or witnessed to him in his entire life (Psalms 142:4)?
KH: No, Lord, I didn’t know that.
GOD: Did you know he has been seeking me for three weeks now and I arranged everything for you to sit by him on that bus?
KH: No, Lord. I had no idea.
GOD: Did you know that he will meditate on My Word which you sowed in his heart and will get saved in seventeen days. He will later witness to his family and friends and by the time you all get up here for judgement day, eighty-seven people will be here because of him.
KH: I had no idea, Lord.
GOD: You have no idea about a lot of things, son. Would a two-and-a-half-hour bus ride in a cage be a small price to pay for eighty-seven souls? For even one soul?
KH: Yes, Lord. A real small price.
GOD: Quit griping, son. I know what I’m doing.
KH: I’ll work on that, Lord.
GOD: Son, when you were in Atlanta and they locked twenty-four of you in that 14′ X 20′ room for two hours waiting to be processed out, what did you hear?
KH: I heard constant swearing and using your name in vain, Lord. It was awful!
GOD: I heard it all, too, son. I was in there with you. I also saw how it grieved your soul (II Peter 2:7-8). That is good, son. Ezekiel was grieved when he saw the sin of Israel ( Ezekiel 8 ). Did you see the Asian man watching you from across the cell?
KH: Yes, Lord, I did.
GOD: His name is Sing. I’ve been working on him, son. I have great plans for his life. You can help him grow. Did you witness to Leroy while you were in there?
KH: I tried, Lord, but it was so crowded and so loud. I don’t know if any of it got through.
GOD: My Word never comes back void, son (Isaiah 55:1). It got through. He has been in prison for fourteen years and has five more to go. He is angry at the world and planned to seek vengeance when he got out. He has been talking to me since yesterday. You won’t see him again on earth, son, but his new cell mate is a Chrstian. In the next thirty days, he will witness to him and he will call on me for forgiveness. You will se him in Heaven, son.
KH: I had no idea, Lord.
GOD: You have no idea about lots of things, son. Quit griping and trust Me. I don’t make mistakes.
KH: I know, Lord. I’m sorry.
GOD: You also had time to talk to John, but you never did. You were too busy trying to rest and asking me to have your appeal granted. I will overturn your case, son, when I’m done using you for this special mission. Do you think the US government or the Bureau of Prisons could hold you if I wanted you out?
KH: No, Lord. But you opened the prison for Peter (Acts 12), for Paul (Acts 5:19), and for Joseph (Genesis 41), and even the grave for some people (John 11). I was just wondering if you loved them more than me or something, or maybe I had some sin you were punishing me for.
GOD: I love you more than your little brain could ever comprehend. You do have plenty of sin—though that’s not why you are there. We will keep working on that sin list regardless of where you are.
KH: Thanks, Lord. Please do keep working on me.
GOD: Oh, I will, son. I’ll finish the work which I started in you (Philippians 1:6). While I’m working on you, I will also work through you. Haven’t you asked me to do that?
KH: Yes, Lord, many times.
GOD: You have asked me to use you 173,216 times in the past thirty-eight years, son. I am using you and will continue. Are you wanting to restrict when and where I can do that?
KH: Well…uhh…no, Lord. When I said send me anywhere, I guess I wasn’t thinking about prison. We have given thousands of tapes and books to prisons and I’ve preached in dozens of them, Lord. I have traveled many miles preaching for the past seventeen years. Based on the calls and letters we have received, lots of souls have trusted You and many lives have been changed as a result. I was trying to obey You, Lord. I still want to serve You, but just not in here.
GOD: You are doing fine, son. You are still in my will. I’ve got you right where I want you. Do you remember how I called Philip to leave that great revival in Samaria to go to the desert and win that one black eunuch to me (Acts 8:26)?
KH: Yes, Lord.
GOD: He left his family for a while too, son. The revival continued in Samaria without him, and your ministry will continue without you for a while. Your son is doing a fine job and that staff I sent to work with you is totally dedicated to me, son. Everything will be fine. The videos and books will win souls for many years yet. Relax. By the way, son, that one black man that Philip reached that day in the desert spread my gospel to his entire country of Ethiopia and later, all of Africa was opened to the gospel. Philip wondered why I pulled him out of his busy, successful ministry to go reach just one soul. Now that he’s been here for two thousand years and has seen the fruit still coming in from his effort in the desert, he understands real well. Philip is watching you (Hebrews 12:1). He’s cheering you on. He says, “Hi.” His mansion is near yours. You two have a lot in common, son. His family worked in his ministry as well (Acts 21:8-9). You and he will have plenty of time to talk when you get up here.
KH: Lord, tell him I said, “Hi, and thanks for cheering.”
GOD: When you get out, son, you will be a lot better equipped to reach even more people than before. Now you understand what thirty million other Americans have been through, plus many millions more in other countries. By the way, son, how did you like that three week transit getting to South Carolina?
KH: It was awful, Lord, and wonderful at the same time. When they put me in the suicide-watch cell because that was the only open bed, I thought I would die. It was awful being locked in solitary for twenty-three hours a day!
GOD: I know, son; I was with you. You didn’t die, did you?
KH: No, God, I made it, but sleeping on that concrete slab was real uncomfortable and hurt my back. I was so lonely.
GOD: I know a lot about back pain, son. I know about loneliness as well. I was with you.
KH: I know, God, the fellowship was so sweet. I feel like I know You now better than ever before in my life. I learned a lot. Why did you let them do that to me, Lord? Why solitary confinement?
GOD: Have any other people in history ever been locked up in solitary confinement like that?
KH: Probably millions have, Lord. I shudder to think of all the pain man has inflicted on his fellow man over the centuries!
GOD: Son, you wouldn’t believe me if I told you all that I’ve seen man do to his fellow man! Now that you have been through that trial, do you notice an automatic kindred-spirit bonding when you meet someone else who has been through that?
KH: Yes, Lord. It’s amazing! Our shared suffering immediately opens a door for me to witness. Is that why you allowed that?
GOD: You are catching on, son—a little slow sometimes, but there is hope. When they took you from Marianna to Pensacola and then back to Tallahassee, you were shackled and chained for six and a half hours straight. Did you like that?
KH: No, Lord. It was awful! My wrists and ankles hurt bad for a long time afterwards. Why did you allow that?
GOD: Son, do you feel more compassion now for all prison inmates who have suffered that treatment?
KH: Oh, yes, Lord, I do! No one should be treated like that!
GOD: Do you see why my perfect law (Psalms 19:7) allowed for beatings (Deuteronomy 25), fines (Exodus 22), and death (Exodus 21:12), but never prison?
KH: Yes, Lord, I do. The more I meditate in your law (Psalms 1:2), the more I see of your great wisdom.
GOD: As for your feet and ankles, son, you should see what they did to Joseph’s feet in Egypt (Psalms 105:18) or Paul’s feet (Acts 16:24). They were watching you, son, and whispering to each other saying, “Yes, that hurts him, but you should have seen my ankles.” You all can swap war stories when you get up here. They are cheering for you as well. Paul says to keep running the race! Finish your course (II Timothy 4:7)! Your dad and mom, your father-in-law, your first three children, your son-in-law, and a lot of others are cheering you on, son.
Trust me. I built this place up here. It will be well worth all the minor problems you face down there (II Corinthians 4:17). I’ll wipe away all tears, son (Revelation 21:4).
By the way, that experience made you a “brother” to many millions of men and women. Now you can better minister to them as well. Joseph carried scars on his feet for life, but the experience made him a kinder father and husband and prepared him to be a great ruler. He says hello as well.
KH: Thanks, God. Tell him hello for me. I love reading his story. It is a real source of strength and encouragement to me.
GOD: Your story is encouraging a lot of people too, son. Even some outspoken atheists and evolutionists are rethinking their rejection of Me based on what has happened to you this past year.
KH: But, Lord, my reputation has been destroyed!
GOD: First, son. I made myself of no reputation for you (Philippians 2:7). Second, none of that will matter when you all face Me. Third, let Me handle that stuff, son. Quit griping and win souls.
KH: Okay, Lord. I’m sorry. I’ll try. Lord, when you sent me to the Tallahassee prison for a week, no one got saved. Why did you send me?
GOD: Mike was there, son. He’s been saved for many years but was taught in his church that he could lose his salvation. When he was arrested two years ago, he got bitter at me. He thought he had lost his salvation and hadn’t spoken to Me since his arrest. He talked with you there for several hours.
Do you remember that?
KH: Yes, Lord. I remember. He did seem to get a glow of hope when I explained salvation is a gift from you and that he cannot lose it.
GOD: It is a lot more than a glow, son. He is fired up and praying to Me all the time now. He will serve Me for many years. His life will touch hundreds for My kingdom. Was a week in a Tallahassee prison worth changing hundreds of lives?
KH: Yes, Lord, of course. I had no idea.
GOD: I told you, son, you have no idea about a lot of things. Quit complaining and trust me.
KH: Okay, Lord. I’m trying.
GOD: How did you like the prison holding unit in Atlanta, son?
KH: It was terrible, Lord! Worse than the suicide-watch cell in many ways. The food was bad and never enough. I lost five pounds in eight days. They have three men in a 7′ X 14′ room for twenty-three hours a day. The rooms are designed for two, but I wouldn’t keep a dog in one overnight. I never saw the sun for eight days.
GOD: You needed to lose a few pounds, son. How do you feel?
KH: I feel great, Lord! I only led one man to you, Lord. We only got out for one hour a day to shower, see the counselor, clean the room and change the laundry.
GOD: Yes, son, the man was Lavan. Pretty tall, wasn’t he?
KH: Yes, Lord! Seven foot one! The biggest man I have ever witnessed to.
GOD: He seemed eager to trust Me didn’t he, son?
KH: Yes, Lord. When I told him I was an evangelist, he lit up and said, “I wish I could be a Christian!” He was “ripe” for the pickin’. I couldn’t explain it fast enough for him. He prayed in fifteen minutes and really seemed genuine. Did I go too fast, Lord? I worry about converts like that.
GOD: No, son. He was just real ready to accept Me as his only hope of heaven. His mother has been praying for him without ceasing (I Thessalonians 5:17). He has eleven children. He has been selling drugs and ruining lives for years. When he gets out in fourteen months, he will be a new man. Those quick Bible study tips you gave him and his Christian cell mate will help him grow. His children will all be tall and natural “kid magnets.” With dad’s new godly influence, many will come to me. You did what I wanted, son.
I’ll show you the results one day. Trust me. As for not seeing the sun for eight days, how many people have experienced that?
KH: Probably millions, Lord.
GOD: My daughter Fanny Crosby was blind from age six weeks until she died at age ninety-five. She never saw the sun. How would you like that, son?
KH: That would be awful, Lord.
GOD: She wrote eight thousand songs to praise Me during those years, son. She sees fine now and is also watching you. I thought eight days would be enough to help you understand. By the way, son, where are you now?
KH: Lord, I’m outside enjoying Your glorious sunshine on a gorgeous day in South Carolina. I really need the sunshine for my health. Thank you, Lord!
What is my next assignment while I’m here?
GOD: One step at a time, son. I’ll guide you. What happened after lunch today?
KH: I was sitting in the sun writing to you and Don came over and sat down to talk. He sure was eager to learn about the Bible. He gladly asked You to forgive his sins and trusted You as Savior.
GOD: Yes, I was there with you. Don is twenty-seven years old. His life will do a complete 1800 turn during the next twenty months in prison. I have big plans for him, son. Thanks for being obedient to my leading, son. Sometimes, I have a hard time getting you to listen to me.
KH: I know, Lord. Sorry about that. I have another question, Lord. Why did you let them more me five hundred miles away from my family?
GOD: I know this is hard for you. How many men in there are away from their families?
KH: Nearly all of them, Lord. Some only see their family once a year—and some not at all. I know what you are going to say, Lord, that now I know how they feel and can be a better witness to them, right?
GOD: Very good, son. You are starting to get the picture!
KH: But, Lord, five hundred miles away?
GOD: You are still in America, son. Would you prefer…Siberia?
KH: Oh, no, South Carolina is just fine! Hey, Lord, why did you let me slip on those steps in Atlanta and bruise my ankle so badly?
GOD: I needed you to see the new prison doctor that just came from India. He knows almost nothing about Me, son. I know you didn’t have much time with him, but you did tell him about your Website. He will look at it and read the “How To Be Saved” article. That will start him on the road to salvation later this year.
I’m sorry about the bruise, but you can’t see the doctor in there unless you are hurt. Would you rather I break it next time—or bruise your head?
KH: No, Lord! The ankle was a great idea. I have one more question, Lord.
GOD: Yes, son, and I know what it is. You want to know when you will get out of prison, don’t you?
KH: Yes, Lord. I sure do.
GOD: Son, when Daniel went into the den of lions, did he know when or even if he would come out alive?
KH: No, Lord.
GOD: Did Shadrach and his friends know when they would come out of the furnace?
KH: I don’t think so, Lord.
GOD: Did Noah know how long the Flood would last when he went into the ark?
Did Abraham know how long he would wait for the promised child? Did Moses know how long it would take to lead those stubborn Jews to the Promised Land?
KH: I doubt it, Lord. So, none of them knew how long it would take?
GOD: Don’t you want to experience what these heroes of the faith experienced so that you can bond with them when you get up here?
KH: Well….. If that’s what you think is best, Lord.
GOD: It is best, son. I know this is a tough assignment, but I never give out more than you can bear (I Corinthians 10:13). By the way, son, this experience has humbled you and our relationship is much closer.
Job never knew when or even if his test would end, but he is fine now. He says, “Hang in there, Kent! I know how you feel!”
Son, if I told you when you were getting out, these guys up here would all say, “Hey God, You never told us!” That might start a riot up here, son!
I’m sorry, but you will have to wait like everyone else.
KH: But, Lord. I miss my family so badly!
GOD: Those men you are with all miss their families, too, son. Your family is fine. I’m watching over them. You will be back with them. Son, lots of people are watching you. You are helping people who are not in prison by your being in prison. You are doing my will, son. You just need to do one more thing for me.
KH: I know—quit griping!
GOD: You got it, son! You catch on slowly, but there is hope.
KH: Thanks for your patience, Lord.
GOD: Son, I’ve given you a wide variety of cell mates as part of your training. You’ve had to live with big ones, little ones, loud, obnoxious ones and quiet ones. I put you in with Muslims, Catholics, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jews, Baptists, Buddhists, Nazis, communists, pagans, Wiccans, Methodists, Mormons, and Lutherans.
You have lived with African Americans, Asians, Caucasians, Hispanics, Native Americans, and every mix in between. You’ve seen a wide variety of lifestyles, personalities, diets, beliefs, and various degrees of bodily cleanliness. You have slept on concrete, steel, old bags of cotton, blue foam pads, and two-inch mattresses.
You have been real cold, real hot, and just right. You’ve had good food, bad food, boring food, and no food. In short, son, I have let you get a royal education in a short time.
You have experienced the twenty-two man pod, the twelve-man crowded room, solitary lockdown, two-man cells with eight-hour lockdown, two-man cells with three in it with twenty-three-hour lockdown, and now, the one-hundred-fifty-man open dorm with three-man cubicles. Which do you like best?
KH: I’ll take my short, Scotch-Irish wife with her sweet smile, sweet spirit, good cooking, and good looks, my own bed, my children and grand-children, my ministry.
GOD: I understand, son. All the men with you want to go home as well. Will you be a better husband, father, and preacher because of all of this?
KH: I think so, Lord. This has been good for me in thousands of ways. I think I have learned a lot! But I want to go home!!
GOD: I know, son. Home will come. Be patient.
KH: I’m trying, Lord. What’s up for tomorrow?
GOD: We’ve been over that before, son. One day at a time—I’ll guide you. Go to sleep.
KH: Okay, Lord. Good night. Thank you for being so awesome!
GOD: Good night, son. I’ll be here when you need me. I never sleep (Psalms 121:4).
285 Responses to “UPDATE”
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Jason
Said this on June 12th, 2007 at 6:07pm:Hi Kent,
What a testimony you are getting. It was wonderful to read, yet at the same time it is near impossible to relate to while sitting in the comfort of my home.
God’s word will not come back void, and you are an inspiration to all who read.
Whist you are suffering what I am sure is the worst you have ever suffered, your heart is still focused upon the work of spreading the Gospel, that people might turn and repent of their sinful ways and receive the free gift of forgiveness. Keep running the race Kent, like God said, “My Word never comes back void”.
Lots of love to you and your family
Jason x
baliset
Said this on June 12th, 2007 at 6:37pm:An Email from God to Kent:
GOD: Kent, you lunkhead. Stop putting words in my mouth. Yes, [...EDITED...].
Do you think I am more concerned with your efforts to proselytise a captive audience than with what’s going on in your heart? My ’special mission’ for you might not have as much to do with the men around you- they also made choices in their lives and are now reaping the consequences. Maybe my special mission involves you owning up to what you did and saying sorry. Maybe it involves teaching you [...EDITED...], and thinking you’re clever.
Kent, if putting you in Solitary confinement is the only way to ensure your big mouth doesn’t get you into more trouble, then indeed, ‘I have you just where I want you’. If the message you’re taking to those beloved souls in prison you are with goes along the lines of “Believe in Jesus. You know you can because Dinosaurs and people lived together” then I’m sorry, but you’re leading them to a false foundation and they will be worse than before they ever met you. Don’t be yeast in my message (Galatians 5:9).
(Sigh). I love you, Kent. Will you ever learn?”
campsuz
Said this on June 12th, 2007 at 9:00pm:I am so thankful for this update.
Enoch, my 14 year old son who can quote nearly all of your 7 DVD Seminar and who has watched all of your debates as well as watching CSE 101, 102, 103 and 104 multiple times, now prays for you and your ministry every morning. You have taught him so much. Now you are teaching both of us how to glorify God while unjustly suffering for the cause of Christ…
We love you. Much good fruit will be credited to your account in heaven.
mrthrun
Said this on June 12th, 2007 at 9:04pm:Job was faultless as far as the outward appearance of a man, yet he was humbled before God and had to repent before he was restored. Jesus told Peter to collect a coin out of a fishes mouth to pay taxes for himself (Jesus) and for Peter. “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s” Jesus said. So if Jesus, the Son of the Almighty God, Creator of heaven and earth paid taxes even though he was exempt, how much more should Kent have being paying taxes? If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. Kent needs to confess his sin, repent and then God will deliver him. He needs to stop feeling sorry for himself. Read the book of Job especially the chapters toward the end where God rebukes Job and Job repents. Sincerely in Christ. Peter Thrun.
ibelieve2
Said this on June 12th, 2007 at 9:12pm:First of all I would like to thank the CSE ministry for keeping us updated. I hadn’t realized he had been moved so much.
Brother Kent,
It’s amazing how you can make us laugh & cry at the same time. WE MISS YOU!!!! We want this to be all over for you too. You are still in our prayers…JO too!!! And your family!!!
I can’t even imagine what it all must be like. I hate to think of what you are going through. God is using you in ways I am sure you can’t even imagine, just as your story revealed. You have touched so many lives with your ministry & those lives you have touched are touching others & using your CSE tools to reach others. You have started an AWESOME ministry!!!! And blessed so many more people by not making your material copyrighted. When I was first saved I shouted it from the roof tops but then I slowly came to the conclusion no one else really wanted to hear me. I was told that on several occasions actually,but I was excited about my new salvation & rightfully so. I made copies of your dvd’s & handed them out to everyone in my family. I am sorry to say I think most of them went right in the trash without even being viewed. Then years later my sister asked for a set of your dvd’s…I almost fell over…my heart actually leapt in my chest. God is at work even when we think we’ve failed. This has happened several times since, & it always amazes me when later they come & ask questions & are hungry for the Word.
I can’t express how greived I am about your situation but it is all for His Glory. And His will must be done! i know you know that I am just reminding myself.
Blessings.
ibelieve2
fuzzi
Said this on June 12th, 2007 at 10:56pm:What a blessing, thanks for posting that ‘exchange’.
Whenever we think we’re suffering, we need to take our eyes off ourselves, and not only look at those in worse situations, but to put our eyes on our Lord and Saviour, Who suffered most of all.
God bless you, Kent for what you have done, and may He bless all others who preach the Gospel, wherever the Lord has seen fit to place them.
Lor
sballinger
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 4:53am:Thanks Kent, your courage, faith, and sense of humor are a great testimony of what God is doing.
My family and I recently discovered your DVDs. We are enjoying them very much and sharing them with friends and family.
We’re praying for you.
Sade Tennyson
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 5:27am:Hallelluyah, praise the Lord Jesus!!!!
Thanks CSE family for the updates.
Brother Kent Hovind, it is refreshing to read your conversation with our understanding, loving, kind, infinite in wisdom Lord God Almighty. I am delighted to know that He is keeping you through it all. How worthy is our God in helping you to resign to His will in this difficult moment.
I pray the Lord will keep us all on the narrow way that leads to life & help us to successfully make our pilgrimage to our real home – HEAVEN.
Dear Heavenly Father, thanks so much for sustaining the spirit of our beloved brother Kent Hovind & for your purpose in this new mission field. Thanks so much for those precious souls that you have led him to in the past 7 Months for the salvation of their souls. Thanks Lord Jesus for the grace & the enablement given to him to share the gospel with them. Father, please continue to help brother Kent Hovind to stop griping & follow your plans joyfully. Surely it’s hard not to, but you are well able to help & sustain Him. Thank you dear Lord for all the prunning on him, Father please keep using His expereince to build all of us your children up & to prepare us for what you have for us. Surely, your POWER is the ULTIMATE POWER, & when you say YES, no man can say NO, neither can any SHUT A DOOR that you choose to open nor OPEN a door that you CHOOSE to SHUT. Blessed be thy worthy name oh Lord God.
I pray for those evolutionist & atheists that are re-thinking their position as a result of what is done to brother Kent Hovind, that you kindly in your mercy & love (that made you to humble your self & take the form of man to rescue us from the captivity of the devil), reach out unto them by your Holy Spirit & convince them of sin, of righteousness & of judgement in the mighty name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.
Dear heavenly Father, if you need brother Kent Hovind in this mission field longer that today, THY WILL BE DONE. I desire him to be out of prison today BUT let your perfect will for Him prevail in Jesus name. Let your wisdom keep confounding the enemy & let the devil keep saying, had he known he wouldn’t have brought this upon brother Kent Hovind in Jesus name.
Sister Jo, I pray that the merciful Lord will go ahead of you on the 29th of June & THE POWER OF THE LIVING GOD to VINDICATE will be your portion that day in the mighty name of our Lord Jesus Christ. I pray that Jesus Christ our righteous advocate will advocate for you that day in Jesus mighty name. Amen. I pray that the peace of our Lord Jesus Christ will rest mightily upon you in Jesus name. Amen.
Brother Kent Hovind, be strengthened in the Lord Jesus – He is over all & He will see you through in the mighty name of our Lord Jesus Christ. The joy of our Lord Jesus will remain your strength & the Lord will continually put the enemy of your soul to open shame in Jesus name. Amen.
Sade Tennyson.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 5:33am:Endtimes,
please do not waste any more of your time or the space of this blog on Samphire/ FuManChu:- when writers descend to the ad hominem their wits are at an end. They have nothing to say. Jesus himself spoke very specifically about those who shoot the messenger – it really is not pretty viewing.
You may have me fooled still though Endtimes. You’ve made a lot of noise without anything much in the way of prescription.
Do you know anything about Revelation 12.6 Then the woman fled into the wilderness …… . Does “wilderness” here have compound/ parallel meanings, some of which are precursor events? Obviously the 7 churches beginning Revelation are both historical time-place events and a chronology through the 2000 years of a gentile bride.
I have wondered who was paying for your tuition; at “Moody” was it? While “darling” looks so crude, you look so very subtle. Perhaps you leave him for dead; if indeed he is a professional “just hanging around” a randomly picked tax-denier website
Over to you “Endtimes”
Even the nom de plume has me stumped – a real eschatologist I thought would not have called the beginning of this next thousand years an “Endtime” [perhaps you should change your Juridical title to "milleniumjumper"]. Before time is done away there is a great deal more of it to run. Like the “raptureready” website you seem to leave out a great deal of information.
cheers to all the Watchers
Adam McGoldrick
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 6:40am:Dr Hovind, I am at awe at how you are carrying out the Lord’s work even now when you are in prison. I was devastated when you were convincted but if it’s God’s will, then I would wait because your case will soon be overturned. I read through your email with God (I wonder if he uses AOL?) and it inspired me to carry on with things that may seem difficult at first but ‘all things work together for good’ (I remember you quoting this in your seminar).
I am praying for your release daily, your wife’s sentencing to be thrown out and for CSE. God Bless and I will see you released soon!
As a side note, AnswersInGenesis has a new £27Million creation museum, I don’t know why Ken Ham doesn’t like Kent Hovind but Dr Hovind has sold their materials for years and always supported them. Maybe they could use their influence in this matter – just a thought…
Paulus
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 8:02am:I can’t help but think that committing fraud, getting convicted, and going to jail is quite a strange way to spread the gospel.
Besides, Kent Hovind’s conviction got a high profile in the press, and I fear has confirmed the opinion of many Atheists and Christians that evangelists are just crooks. Kent would need to witness to half the US jail population to make up for all the people he has driven away from Christianity by his fraud and conviction.
FuManchu
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 10:25am:Substitute the word ‘God’ in that conversation for any other name and you have the transcript of an abusive relationship. I just thought I’d mention it.
Presumably it’s not a literal transcript, or else we could check its predictions against what actually happens. But I challenge anyone to read it and not feel pity for the ‘Kent’ character and intense dislike for the ‘God’ character. I’m deeply sorry for Kent – I used to simply dislike him, but it now becomes apparent that he’s been trapped in a mental prison of his own making for some time.
Three Crosses
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 11:56am:Dear Paulus You WROTE
” I can’t help but think that committing fraud, getting convicted, and going to jail is quite a strange way to spread the gospel.
Besides, Kent Hovind’s conviction got a high profile in the press, and I fear has confirmed the opinion of many Atheists and Christians that evangelists are just crooks. Kent would need to witness to half the US jail population to make up for all the people he has driven away from Christianity by his fraud and conviction.”
Sir I’m so so so… sorry for the position you will be in when what you’ve said comes to bear. Why didn’t you say “I can’t help but think that preaching the Word ,getting convicted, and being hung on the cross to die while beaten and ridiculed is quite a strange way to spread the gospel.” I don’t mean to imply that Kent Hovind is the same as Jesus Christ but if you beleive that loving your brothers is a crime and that teaching the truth is a crime ….
I’m sorry once again this is to Paulus.
Hi Jesus died for us!! but, did you know he would have died just for you? Even if it wasn’t going to save anyone else. Jesus made this sacrafice so that we, as sinners, could have eternal life . We have all sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God . If you are interested in salvation and eternal life you have to recognize the sacrafice Jesus Christ made for you and know that God the Father raised him on the third day . I don’t think a prayer of salvation has to be to specific, the Holy Spirit translates for us . I would pray something like ” Dear Father that art in Heaven I know I’m a sinner and deserve to go to hell. I accept that Jesus, the Son of God, died for my sins and that you raised Him on the third day. I ask that you come into my life and give me the peace I so desparately need Amen” . Then just tell anyone that you believe. You are not instantly going to be perfect but you will be saved ! I’m sure I sin everyday. I’m not perfect, and I do regret the wrong I do . I will have to answer for my sins. So don’t get discouraged… we all have to grow . I’m sorry if this seems thrown together. My computer crashed.
Mr. Paulus please pray not to be deceived and I will pray that you are never wrongfully accused of a crime only to be beaten and ridiculed by people who know not what they do.
God bless America and God save us all!
andries
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 1:54pm:Dear Paulus
When I read your comment, I was really amazed. In my home languages, the name of Paul is translated as Paulus.
Several things came to me while reading it:
1. David was a murderer, but God call him “a man after My own heart” – Acts 13:22.
2. Paul has murdered many Christians. When he meet Jesus, what is he saying about himself? Rom 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, a called apostle, separated to the gospel of God.
3. Rahab was a prostitute, but her name is mentioned as one of the hero’s in Heb 11.
4. Abraham believed in his own flesh to fulfil the promise of God and Ishmael was the result. What is God calling him? The father of faith – Gal 3:5.
In the same way do God see Kent Hovind. Are you a better judge that God Almighty?
Some other Bible verses and principles are applicable on you:
1. Mat 7:1-2 Judge not, that you may not be judged. (2) For with whatever judgment you judge, you shall be judged; and with whatever measure you measure out, it shall be measured to you again. Are willing to take the risk? Jesus call such people hypocrites – verse 5. Read also Mat 12:37.
2. Gal 6:7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked. For whatever a man sows, that he also will reap. This is a principle. Are you ready for it? Don’t even dream to do what is so favourable today: blame-shifting.
3. Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you. 1 John 3:16 By this we have known the love of God, because He laid down His life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers. Joh 13:35 By this all shall know that you are My disciples, if you have love toward one another.
Obey you these commands and principles?
Kent Hovind is doing what he is called to do: winning people to Jesus. Are you fulfilling God’s call on your life? When was the last time that you lead someone to Christ?
How serious are you in your relationship with Father God? James 3:10-12 Out of the same mouth proceeds blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so. (11) Does a fountain send forth at the same hole the sweet and the bitter? (12) Can the fig tree, my brothers, bear olive berries; or a vine, figs? So no fountain can yield both salt water and fresh.
I don’t know the tax laws of America, but what I do know, regardless if Kent Hovind is guilty or not, what you are saying is anti-gospel. God will be one day the judge. I really hope that you has given your life to Christ. If not, I am afraid that u are in for a terrible surprise. If you are a child of God, rethink the following verses: Luk 6:37-38 Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you shall be forgiven. (38) Give, and it shall be given to you, good measure pressed down and shaken together and running over, they shall give into your bosom. For with the same measure that you measure, it shall be measured to you again.
tinyfrog
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 2:52pm:Great post, Dr. Hovind. Sounds like you have a really good relationship/communication with God. Could you ask God why He doesn’t talk to Christian evolutionists (like Ken Miller) and straighten those guys out? Their evolutionist claims are leading millions to hell. God should tell them how wrong they are – afterall, millions of souls are on the line. They are already Christians, so I’m sure they’ll listen. Also, I had a strong Christian friend who died from pancreatic cancer when he was in his mid-twenties. Could you ask God to give us the cure for cancer? I mean, I know it’s important to hear that Philip is cheering for you and everything, but maybe a short request for a cure for cancer could be squeezed in somewhere. It would sure help things out a bunch. And please ask God to reveal Himself to the Middle East ASAP – those guys are killing each other because they actually believe they are acting in God’s name. They aren’t acting in God’s name though, and no one can convince them otherwise, except, perhaps, God Himself. Maybe God could come down as a pillar of fire – like He did when He was leading the Jews out of Egypt. That would sure help out a bunch! Thanks!
Achilles2525
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 3:21pm:Does god really cite what he says with parenthetical references to the Bible, because if he does it must be pretty awkward to talk to him. Does he actually say “parenthesis” when he talks, as in “I will always supply your needs each day, son” “parenthesis” Philippians 4 “colon” 19 “close parenthesis”?
This was my favorite part: “Do you see why my perfect law (Psalms 19:7) allowed for [...EDITED...]
Yeah, god is so merciful by calling for [...EDITED...]. Give me a [...EDITED...] break.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Hmmm ... edited for the level of "meanness" and scorn, to this editor's reading of it. You are a smart person though, I think. May the God of the Bible bless you. P.A. ]
GORGE
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 3:46pm:Thanks for the update.
When I was at my prayer meeting on monday, the members of the house group where I go were praying much for all at Dr. Dino.
You are in on our hearts.
TwoCarpets
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 3:46pm:GOD: Son, do you feel more compassion now for all prison inmates who have suffered that treatment?
KH: Oh, yes, Lord, I do! No one should be [...EDITED...]
I’m assuming that ol’ Kent would have been happy to have had any of the three biblical punishments above administered rather than imprisonment then? In fairness the amount he’s made through tax evasion could have paid a fine…
GORGE
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 4:33pm:Dear andries
You said;
“Several things came to me while reading it:
1. David was a murderer, but God call him “a man after My own heart” – Acts 13:22.
2. Paul has murdered many Christians. When he meet Jesus, what is he saying about himself? Rom 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, a called apostle, separated to the gospel of God.
3. Rahab was a prostitute, but her name is mentioned as one of the hero’s in Heb 11.
4. Abraham believed in his own flesh to fulfil the promise of God and Ishmael was the result. What is God calling him? The father of faith – Gal 3:5.
In the same way do God see Kent Hovind. Are you a better judge that God Almighty?”
These famous biblical characters mentioned REPENTED fronm their sin (see david’s cry in Psalm 51). This was essential again as you say whatever a man sows that shall he reap. As for judgeing. We all must judge, the bible says to Test every spirit and the the spiritual man desirns all thing. Not to utterly cast out but to plead and solemly warn them to turn to God. Sin will alweays sepereate us from God and leaven be righty checked within a fellowship[that we have biblicaly judged.
amigas
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 4:36pm:Dear FuManchu;
You said “Substitute the word ‘God’ in that conversation for any other name and you have the transcript of an abusive relationship. I just thought I’d mention it.
Presumably it’s not a literal transcript, or else we could check its predictions against what actually happens. But I challenge anyone to read it and not feel pity for the ‘Kent’ character and intense dislike for the ‘God’ character. I’m deeply sorry for Kent – I used to simply dislike him, but it now becomes apparent that he’s been trapped in a mental prison of his own making for some time.”
***
Most of the past military generals by your statment would have had abusive relationships with their subordinates, but we can not replace God with any one elses name to justify or not. No matter who’s name you use they are part of the created and not the creator. The creator can do as He (I us He but understand He is spirit and genderless) chooses.
It is appointed unto man once to die, and to my knowledge no one has ever lived long enough to escape that appointment. Some die quickly and others over a long period of time, nonetheless we will all die. As human beings we want to judge God based on our very limited understanding of righteousness and from a secular paradigm at that.
Romans 8:28
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
This verse does not say that all things work out for good but that they work together for good to them that love God. It has a restriction, it is for believers and it seems as foolishness to those who do not believe. Those who do not believe can not understand Paul when he said to die is gain.
I do not see it as an abusive relationship, granted I do not understand all of the whys for what is happening to Dr. Hovind and his family.
I do not feel pity, but I do have compassion for Kent and his family. I am encouraged because of his faithfulness, and am confident that when he is convicted (by God) he repents and when he is in error he is the type of man that owns up to it publicly.
It is my privilege to be associated with Dr. Hovind and the CSE Minitry.
Kind regards,
Gene Schmeling
fuzzi
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 5:04pm:>Presumably it’s not a literal transcript, or else we could check its predictions >against what actually happens. But I challenge anyone to read it and not feel pity >for the ‘Kent’ character and intense dislike for the ‘God’ character. I’m deeply >sorry for Kent – I used to simply dislike him, but it now becomes apparent that >he’s been trapped in a mental prison of his own making for some time.
So, you think Kent is foolish, crazy?
I think it is a blessing, an uplifting bit of writing, and I thank him for it.
“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;” (1 Corinthians 1:18-23)
Before I became born again, after forty years of living for myself and not for God, I thought like you do. I thought born again Christians were a bunch of mind-numbed robots, loonies, idiots, or so it seemed to me.
Now I’m on the other side. I’ve lived both as a mocker, someone who ridiculed those who had faith in God…and then I’ve lived for the last seven years as a born again child of God. I can see your side, your thoughts, your beliefs, and I remember being the same way. I’ll tell you as simply as I can: you are wrong, mistaken.
God is not being cruel to Kent, nor is He cruel to any of His children. We are grateful for all He has done for us, and should be willing to do whatever He would have us to do in order to tell others. And no, He would not ask us to attach a bomb to ourselves, that’s not the way He works.
If you don’t care to listen to more Scripture, let me leave you with some Shakespeare: “There are more things in Heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy…”
God is real, His Son offers salvation to all.
And time is short, you do not know if you have another day to live. Consider it, well.
Lor
baliset
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 5:28pm:Wow, I must have touched a nerve with this site’s editor. Not that the edited portions of my last post were more reactionary or accusing than a lot of what actually makes it through. Just wanted to let you all know that the flavor of my “letter from God to Kent” lost a lot by the [EDITS] it got, probably based on the argument it advances for Christians to wake up and see that Kent’s continued (incredible at this stage) claim that HE’S DONE NOTHING WRONG TO PUT HIM IN JAIL is an insult to God and to you. I’ll take that as a concession of defeat from this site’s editor.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: A few more "hit messages" came in this morning. I've set them aside for now. I will probably have to excise most of their mean content prior to posting. Please use words to inform and to persuade and to build up, not to tear down and to mock derisively. You are better than that. A man builds up; any child can tear down and then walk away smiling. P.A. ]
Samphire
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 6:19pm:Hi Endtimes,
Did I say that I had a famous relative? I don’t remember doing so. However, with respect to Chamberlain, I can say with some considerable relief that I have no relatives whatsoever from in or around Birmingham.
Remind me but wasn’t it in the Land of the Free and the Brave that the Indians were massacred some 150 years ago? Not so many Braves now – you ask Warocuya. And your Civil War was the last which the US fought without conscription. Like most patriotic aspirations ideas of freedom whether we like it or not tend to be illusional. In all societies benefits bring burdens.
As you have quoted Those that don’t remember history are doomed to repeat it but, of course, history does have a habit of repeating itself because Man is incapable of learning from experience as George Bernard Shaw pointed out. However, what gave rise to Naziism is most unlikely to repeat itself in the US because the historical, social and economic conditions which applied then do not apply now nor ever will as those who know some European history will attest.
No, I don’t think you are a raving lunatic (there is only room for one on this blog) to cherish freedom and peace but as Thomas Jefferson stated “the price of peace is eternal vigilance”. He should also have added the words “and preparedness”. The attack on the twin towers was a great shock to Americans – war had never come onto their shores before. But the world is changing and just as the Monroe doctrine was effectively wrecked by the Zimmerman telegram so the threat of international terrorism in America will inevitably change the relationship of the States to the Federal Government. I think that Bush’s acquiescence to the establishment of Guantanamo Bay will haunt the US for a great many years. The US has lost the moral high ground and, with respect, you should worry more over this aspect than over the perceived loss of freedom which you claim to suffer.
As for conspiracies, the burning of the Reichstag was probably not one but a fortuitous event for the Nazi party of which they took immediate advantage. Similarly for the USS Maine – what evidence do you offer? And also Nero. Nasty and mad as he was I doubt that you have any more evidence that he set fire to Rome than that Elizabeth I started the Great Fire of London. In any event, my previous post restricted conspiracies to the post-war period otherwise we shall go back so far that we shall end up with you alleging that the fall of the Tower of Babel was due to Halliburton’s poor construction methods and a conspiracy to cut costs.
As for Katrina, if only you had still been in the Army things might have been a lot different……………
But back to Chamberlain. You are quite right; Chamberlain did not believe that the American Government was fascist (I know that’s not what you meant) but, had he lived, he certainly would have thought your Joe Kennedy a defeatist, a position which reflected itself in the US public’s unwillingness to send materiel to assist Europe in opposition to FDR’s wishes.
I do not believe that the Munich Agreement advanced Hitler’s annexation of the Sudetenland. He had already marched into the Rhineland and annexed Austria. Hitler needed time to build up his forces as indeed did Britain and he only moved when he was ready. Chamberlain was pretty irrelevant to the entire process. The Munich Agreement helped his PR briefly but he would have gone in anyway just as he had been planning to do for the four months prior to Munich. As he wrote to Keitel in May 1938 “It is my unalterable decision to smash Czechoslovakia by military action in the near future” (Hitler & Stalin – Alan Bullock p.635).
Why am I not surprised that you believe in a Pearl Harbour conspiracy? I disagree with you. While FDR and the US Navy were helping us in the Atlantic without which we would not have survived 1941 we were able to defend Malaya and Burma against the Japanese. The last thing Churchill would have wanted under these circumstances was the destruction of the US Pacific Fleet and who could possibly imagine any U.S.Commander-in-Chief contemplating such an idiotic sacrifice? What the pro-war but politically weak FDR wanted and needed was a victory not a defeat. I admit FDR wanted an “incident” to bring Congress onto his side but what he was looking for was more in the nature of another Lusitania rather than a Taranto. Ironically, it was the anti-war Senator Wheeler who unknowingly at the time did FDRs job for him by inveigling Hitler to declare war on the States. Instead of internet conspiracy theories may I recommend Gordon Prange’s At Dawn We Slept – 37 years of research into the Pearl Harbour attack and its consequences.
The last major London smog was nearly 45 years ago. Smog when it occurs requires a period of high atmospheric conditions and relatively still air conditions so your allusion to storm clouds being blotted out is an unscientific metaphor. Where this place is in the Atlantic to which you refer remains a mystery as, yet again, you delight in hiding your meaning.
Finally, what is hope for you is hope for me. While you remain safe in your hope so shall we all.
Kind regards
Samphire
P.S. As you no longer live in bear country why do you still need your armoury?
EndTimes
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 6:28pm:Jun 13 Paulus
Said this at 8:02am:
“I can’t help but think that committing fraud, getting convicted, and going to jail is quite a strange way to spread the gospel.
Besides, Kent Hovind’s conviction got a high profile in the press, and I fear has confirmed the opinion of many Atheists and Christians that evangelists are just crooks. Kent would need to witness to half the US jail population to make up for all the people he has driven away from Christianity by his fraud and conviction.”
Dear Paulus,
You have a very valid criticism to make unfortunately. Who can deny that Dr. Hovind’s current status has been a detriment to spreading the gospel in the eyes of many? Unfortunately, his conviction and trial have lead many to the conclusion that he is just another in the list of men who have had scandals such as Jim Baker, Jimmy Swaggert and most recently Ted Haggard. The difference between these men was that the first three here fell due to the sinful lust and greed in their heart, while Dr. Hovind was desperately trying to find a way to defend the sovereignty of his ministry from overt governmental intrusion based on his interpretation of the constitution.
Dr. Hovind, on the other hand was lead by Godly principles in defense of the faith whether you believe that there is any virtue in his tax stand or not, I have never once seen or heard of any of the usual sexual escapades or lifestyle enrichments of the likes of Ted Haggard or Benny Hinn or the TBN crowd.
No my friend, there has indeed been damage to the cause of Christ, mainly in the loss of a true brave and valient man if nothing else. I would ask you to look beyond the obvious and to seek out what it was the Dr. Hovind was trying to accomplish even though I am quite critical of the man that he chose to help him, Glen Stoll. Is there virtue in seeking separation of church and state to the point that you are willing to take on a very big Goliath called the IRS? I believe that there is virtue in this, even if at times it can sometimes be a possibly misplaced virtue that then leads to the unwitting effect of bringing censure on the ministry that he was trying to protect in the first place.
I know my friend that if you were ever in a tight situation that you would wish to have the benefit of the intent and purposes that set your course of actions. Simply looking on the surface of any affair can often lead to incorrect judgements of other men’s actions.
Just something for you to consider and I pray that you will not use this as an excuse to castigate the ministry of the one man that did walk in truth and perfection here on this earth. I pray that you will be able to know him, and then perhaps you will gain a love of a great man of faith that has lead many to the Lord by his unselfish work for many years named Kent Hovind. Yes, my dear brother in arms, Kent Hovind has fallen, yet I have no doubt that after he has suffered rightly or wrongly the consequences of his own actions, the loving Father in heaven shall reach down to him and lift him up into eternal peace and joy. Don’t you miss out on the same simply because a sinful man as we all are has not been perfect in his walk. The last time that I checked, you are not perfect in your walk as well.
With the love of Christ,
EndTimes
nmajormom
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 7:12pm:Well Bless My Soul! I have very few sermons that blessed my soul more than this. Our God is an awesome God and I just hope that I can remember half these Kent has learned when it is my turn. All the answers to “Why me?” Thank you so much for a profoundly rich blessing!
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 7:13pm:It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.
Henry Ford
History is bunk….
Henry Ford
djhouk,
were you actually a member of the Jury?
you have said the trial established that they were “employees”; this you call a “fact”.
It is essential you qualify this comment or retract it as inadmissable to this austere place of review.
Did one of these “employees” testify to that effect or did they not?
If all of these “employees” are prepared to testify under affirmation that they are not “employees” in a “business enterprise” then I would have thought the whole thing collapses; nearly instantly, just like in one glorious heap – like WTC 7.
canon 662: Religious are to find their supreme rule of life in the following of Christ as proposed in the Gospel and as expressed in the Constitutions of their own institutes.
[about 1.2 billion catholics agree with these words]
So about the Constitution again: Did anyone ask the question: [please shout this from rooftops]
Is/ Was the court a court of constitutional due process?
If it is not/was not, something desperately wrong has occurred, while “in plane site”; something very evil indeed.
where is your line in the sand?
what is your testimony on these pages.
I am not Kent Hovind’s cellmate. » Blog of the Gods
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 7:27pm:[...] Creationist criminal Kent Hovind, who is serving a much-publicized prison sentence for large-scale tax evasion, has just published an alleged conversation with Me. I know I’ve made Myself scarce lately, but this slander forces Me to break My silence and clear the record. I am not, nor have I ever been, incarcerated in a federal penitentiary. More importantly, I do not love Kent Hovind. [...]
joshrjb
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 7:40pm:Brother Kent,
You have served as an inspiration for many Christians, including me. Your faithfulness in serving the Lord in the midst of your trials has helped me to share the message of Christ with many through door-to-door gospel tract distribution, talking to people about the Lord, and also helping with our church’s vacation Bible school.
I pray for you every day. Perhaps prison ministry can be one of the main missions of CSE after you are released. I know you said that many of your videos were distributed to prisons, but perhaps visitation would be more effective.
Keep your focus-of-vision on Jesus.
-Josh
God
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 7:51pm:This conversation is a fraud. Kent Hovind made it up. Kent Hovind and fraud… who would have thought?
Although it is completely fabricated, I saw fit to debunk a few pieces individually on My blog:
http://www.blogofthegods.com/…EDITED…
If you delete My post, I will send a plague of locusts to devour your flower garden.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Too late about the flower garden. P.A. ]
EndTimes
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 8:39pm:Dear Baliset,
This might be a converstation that God has with you on judgement day.
God:
Nathan Zamprogno, why have you blasphemed my Holy Word on Australian national TV and denied the truth of my Son who created all things? By the way Nathan, AOG is Pentecostal and not protestant; perhaps you should have learned to be more diligent in your comments. Don’t you know that my Son Jesus is not only a creationist, of which people you despise, He is actually your Creator. Who was it that PLANTED your ears and FORMED your eyes? (Hmmm, you should have studied embryology more closely and known that this is a statement of profound scientific facts). Where were you when I created the sun and the moon and the stars to give you light? Nathan how is it that you not only call my Son a liar when you deny that He is your Creator, but you also have judged wrongly my servant Kent Hovind? Why is it that instead of compassion and grief over his situation, you instead ridicule and denigrate him even as he is humbled by shackles of steel and iron? Where my son is your compassion for your fellow brother in Christ? Where have you shown the love of Christ for this man?
I am sorry Nathan Zamprogno, but I have no choice but to judge you by your own judgements against Kent Hovind. Depart form me into eternal blackness for those that do not forgive shall not be forgiven, the Scriptures cannot be broken.
Excerpt from Baliset website:
1)NZ: The AOG is a mainstream, Protestant church. We believe Jesus is our Lord and Saviour, and we believe those other mainstream trappings of the old and new testament. I suppose what we add to that it a contemporary relevance. We have to meet people in the culture that they’re at. We also believe that if you live your life according to the model of Jesus then you will live a satisfied, fulfilled, maximised life as well.
JW: And where do the AOG churches stand on issues like Creationism?[16]
NZ: The AOG is full of closet Creationists, but Family First would be very unwise to let that cat out of the bag.
JW: But in terms of the AOG’s beliefs, many of them would believe in Creationism.
NZ: Certainly, and unfortunately.
JW: So that’s not something that you believe in?
NZ: No.
JW: But when you say that the AOG is part of the mainstream, that is what we would call a fundamentalist belief, is it not?
NZ: The word “fundamentalist” has had a number of unfortunate labels attached to it. I mean, in it’s purest sense it means you believe in “the fundamentals” of the Bible. It doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re a “crazy”, or that it’s a cult or anything like that.
JW: But one of the “fundamentals” of the Bible was that the Earth was created in seven days.
NZ: People would argue that point (laughter)… Look, I would argue that point!
http://www.pnc.com.au/~jwcs/Nathan%20Zamprogno%20Interview%20with%20Jana%20Wendt.pdf
2) “Well, the first and most important thing is for us to each watch our own attitudes. Trust me, I’ve been royally p**** at a dozen different things over the years but, each and every time, I center myself and apply the desideratum “A bad attitude means that the possibility I’m feeling what I am because God wants me to change it is probably zero.” There are plenty of times where I’ve stopped myself from doing things (like writing letters to bonehead Creationists. There, I’ve exposed my secret vice), because a moment of reflection causes me to realize that my motives were wrong. They were personal, and not based on a conviction that my actions were a) helpful and b) directed by the Spirit.”
http://baliset.blogspot.com/
Yes, Nathan, you are finally correct, none of your comments that I have read from you are directed by the Spirit since they are all against the Holy Scriptures. It’s hard to take seriously your claim of you being a Christian when your teachings directly contradict those of Jesus Christ Himself. I would carefully ponder your eternal future my friend for only those that have a love of God’s Word shall see heaven. It does not appear by your own volumes of writing that you believe what the Bible states quite plainly. If I were your pastor, I would be gravely concerned over the future of your eternal soul when you can stand publicly against the simplest of Scriptures. In fact, I am greatly ashamed of any one that will stand against the Scriptures and call themselves a “Christian.” Go get a love of the Bible including those verses that talk about His Creation and then I will be ready to call you my brother. Until then, the Bible clearly tells that those that preach any other gospel are to be accursed. Sorry, chap, but the gospel also includes the little detail you have overlooked that the Saviour of this world is also the Creator of this world.
John 1:1 IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
So Nathan, stop deceiving yourself and others, you are not here to lift up the Word of God, but instead you are here to destroy the Word of God and I for one will call a spade a spade. Go dig a hole some where else where you can spread your lies and deceptions among those that hate the Bible as do you.
Nathan, I take great umbrage against your evil messages against the truth of Jesus Christ, our Creator and Saviour that is spoken in the name of a Christian, but not in His Spirit as you yourself have testified.
Jude:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. . .
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.
17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
II Peter 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
I have quiet patience with men such as Samphire who openly state apparent logical difficulties with the stories of creation yet also do not claim to be a Christian. However, I have no patience against any man that will call himself a Christian and lead other brethren astray against the truths of the Scriptures. Nathan, I will contend with you to the greatest extent of my abilities at all times and in all ways as you are a deceiver and a liar when you deny Jesus as your Creator and then state that you stand by the Scriptures. Either get in the boat or get out, but don’t try to stand both ways. Christian you say!! Not according to any of the Scriptures that I have read.
Endtimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 8:41pm:Dear fellow CSE bloggers,
In case any of you believe that my comments to baliset are harsh, I am only returning his words in kind. Please note his mindset from the very bottom of his blog. This is how he started his diatribe against creationists, by calling into question their salvation. I have simply responded in defense of God’s Word. We are not to be trampled upon especially by those that call themselves “Christians.” We are to instead to earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
This I have done and will continue to do.
“WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 2004
In the beginning
In the beginning, the world was formless and void. And the spirit of the Creationists hovered over the waters, proscribing just how God was permitted to create the Universe, lest the creationists’ faith be bruised by the knowledge that the world was in fact older than 6000 years. And lo, God spake and said “has it occurred to you that I’m quite capable of doing this without your input?” Verily, the creationists were astonished by this hubris and said “well, when your Son comes down in some future age and he gives his life for the sins of the world, we’ll make sure that when we spread that message, we’ll encumber our audience with unlikely claims of lions eating vegetarian and Koala bears walking across two continents and swimming an ocean to get to their habitats. And we’ll also insist that if they don’t beleive our claims, then they can’t really be saved, can they?”
And God said “Do I know you?”
http://baliset.blogspot.com/
Ekkman
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 8:50pm:12ukulelemike
Said this at 2:43pm:
——————————————————————————–
“I haven’t read all the blog entries, and don’t know if anyone has mentioned this, but here is an interesting comparison: When “Rev.” Sun Myung Moon, leader and founder of the Unification Church, (Moonies), was arrested for tax evasion, and we’re talking millions of dollars, he got an 18 month sentence-18 MONTHS! And he probably didn’t serve it all. Now, a couple years ago, he was crowned, yes, crowned, King of Peace in one of our own congressional buildings in Washington DC by members of congress, both parties, and many religious leaders. And Kent Hovind, a good man who, at the worst, made a mistake with who he hired to advise him on his taxes, owning less than $50,000.00 in taxes, is given 10 years, and has been sent into solitary in a maximum security facility, that holds murderers and such. Go figure! “
Something to think about! The “Sun M Moon” has gone out for a while but now he is back shining on our government, giving them “peace” in the midst of their storms and they are causing a lot in these last days. Kent is innocent and needs to go free. But then again it is hard for people who are filled with hate and anger to think correctly in order to make the right desisions. Their pride being the hardest hurdle to overcome.
Ekkman
ibelieve2
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 9:08pm:andries & three crosses:
Well put Andries & Three Crosses!!!!! I pray the Lord blesses me, with the wisdom the Lord has given you, to answer the critics someday.
Blessings,
ibelieve2
ibelieve2
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 9:09pm:I am trying to get on the drdino web-site is it down or is it my computer? Just wondering?
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Oh, http://www.drdino.com (Creation Science Evangelism) does appear to be down. I would expect it back up sometime this morning. Sorry for the inconvenience. P.A. ]
jwalker
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 10:31pm:Dear Brother Hovind,
such a simple conversation but filled with meaning and sincerity. many will look at your “conversation” as a mental break in clarity and sanity but i boldly believe your perspective and clarity has never been greater! but then again, when has it ever mattered what “they” think, the only thing that matters is what HE thinks. we all forget about how small our problems are compare to such an amazing and great God that we serve. have heart and be in His care good brother.
-jwalker
Harriet
Said this on June 13th, 2007 at 10:34pm:So good to hear from you, Bro. Kent! I hope that you’re well.
Praying for you and your family. I will be mindful of your wife’s court date, June 29, and will pray.
Three Crosses
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 1:12am:DEAR BROTHERS IN CHRIST:
I’m deeply disturbed. I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one to notice this. First of all we seem a bit short on stones and a bit long on those without sin. There seem to be alot of people that think the law is infallible. In my home state of Tx. there were so many innocent men getting out of prison after being proved innocent with DNA testing that most of the judges have started refusing to admit DNA evidence. While it’s unfortunate that these innocent men will probably never see the light of day. The law worshippers can say they were convicted and don’t deserve a retrial. I only know of a couple of cases where personal bias of a judge sent innocent people to prison. I do know of a Tx celebrity let go after confessing to brutally raping a little girl over and over again with a $4,000 fine and he doesn’t even have to register as a sex offender(because his buddy was the judge)!
Then I read on some blog sites where these up and coming law students are so devoted to their religion of evolution that the attack blindly at the truth and science. I can’t help but wonder if it’s not like the crazy person who becomes a psychiatrist to try and figure out what’s wrong with him. Then he spends the rest of his life trying to screw other people up as bad as he is. These people seem to confuse legal with right. There are many things that are legal and are not right. For instance false advertising, is legal but not right. Feeding booze to your kids, is legal but not right. Stealing a man’s property and claiming imminent domain because: you can make more money with it than he can, is legal but wrong.
The really scary thing is that these people who think they’re better than everyone else because they bought a law degree and drive an expensive car. They will cheat accident victims out of there claims for the insurance companies, leaving their victims crippled and helpless. They will defend murderers, rapists and child molesters for the love of money. Then if they’re in good enough with the judge or carefully selected jury (NOT PEERS)for enough money they’ll get them off. Following that if they keep from making mistakes or getting caught they can become the judge then get into politics and finally become a congressman with his very own lttle boy page. Then pass laws to protect themselves and their owners. There it was the truth, legal but wrong!!
The most comforting part is we are all sinners, not one of us is any better than any other. The only difference is that some of us recognize are sins and repent of them, accepting the Blood Sacrafice of Jesus Christ and some of us haven’t. Please try to keep this in mind. These young men are looking for answers, something to fill that God shaped hole. The law won’t fill it, believing your a monkey won’t fill it, lust won’t fill it and no matter how full of yourself you are, you can’t fill it!
In closing I’ve put alot of thought and alot of expression in this. Before I wrote this I had very little or no love for politicians, lawyers or judges. You wouldn’t believe what a difference that last paragraph had on me! I hope and pray one person can proffit as much from me writing this as I did. God bless America, lawyers, judges and politicians God save us all!
Paulus
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 1:56am:Three Crosses
Said this at 11:56am:
…Sir I’m so so so… sorry for the position you will be in when what you’ve said comes to bear. Why didn’t you say “I can’t help but think that preaching the Word ,getting convicted, and being hung on the cross to die while beaten and ridiculed is quite a strange way to spread the gospel.” I don’t mean to imply that Kent Hovind is the same as Jesus Christ but if you beleive that loving your brothers is a crime and that teaching the truth is a crime ….
Dear Three Crosses, I certainly agree that Kent Hovinds case is different from Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ was innocent, while Brother Hovind really committed what he was accused of. I think he didn’t deny not having paid his taxes and having adjusted his back withdrawals just so to hid his income.
Jesus Christ died for all of us. But Kent Hovind obviously didn’t keep the tax money for all of us. He kept it for himself for all I know.
andries
Said this at 1:54pm:
Several things came to me while reading it:
1. David was a murderer, but God call him “a man after My own heart” – Acts 13:22.
2. Paul has murdered many Christians. When he meet Jesus, what is he saying about himself? Rom 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, a called apostle, separated to the gospel of God.
3. Rahab was a prostitute, but her name is mentioned as one of the hero’s in Heb 11.
4. Abraham believed in his own flesh to fulfil the promise of God and Ishmael was the result. What is God calling him? The father of faith – Gal 3:5.
In the same way do God see Kent Hovind. Are you a better judge that God Almighty?
Dear andries, I am certainly not a judge over Kent Hovind. You have given many examples of good men who sinned. However those men admitted their sins.
There are three judges over Kent Hovind, the first one was the secular judge who sentenced him to ten years. The last judge will be God. The second judge will be Kent Hovind himself, and this is where I see him fail.
In all his posts on this blog he found dozens of excuses and explanations why he’s suffering, but not a single word of remorse and acceptance of his failure. Why?
pistolpete_1980
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 5:05am:Dr Hovind,
That was very enjoyable to read. Hope you are well.
Pete
Elethiomel
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 5:23am:andries suggests that Hovind is winning people to Christ whilst in Jail. I wonder whether that is really the case. If we look at a number of the examples in Hovind’s recent Platonic dialogue with God, one wonders how much Hovind is just making up. For example, what “God” told him about “Sing” (I use the scare quotes not to doubt God, but to question whether anyone told anyone anything) – Does Hovind really believe that? How could he know? There are a number of other examples in there too.
What also concerns me is when people find out about the blatant errors in Hovind’s DVDs, such as campsuz’s son, Enoch, who he proudly claims can recite almost all 7 DVDs. What happens to Enoch when he finds out that the speed of light emitted from a car is not “the speed of light plus the speed of the car” – what happens when he finds out how the Conservation of Angular Momentum really works, or that Hyracotherium and the Hyrax are completely different, despite similar names. What happens when these people find they have been deceived by this nonsense? They will often link their belief in God with this stuff and fall away totally. It’s sad and I have seen it many times.
Perry
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 5:56am:Dear Dr. Hovind,
I appreciate what you are doing for the Lord. I have enjoyed your Creation Seminars and continue to thirst for and seek God and knowledge about His Creation. Growing up, I had always heard from teachers and friends that evolution was the only possible explanation of everything, and that God was a cute story in a book called the Bible.
However, my family, (and especially my mom and dad,) claimed that God created everything!
I was saved very young and always believed that God created everything. I was ridiculed by friends that I just wasn’t very knowledgeable about evolution. I couldn’t understand why they believed something so utterly false. I would keep asking them: Where did the earth come from? Where did the stuff to make the earth come from? How can you just accept that it was just there to begin with? They had no answers. Then as time went on, holes in the evolution theory started to appear.
Yet, still they believe this stuff. I have even noticed that scientists used to say there was no flood. Now they are saying there was just a localized flood. If science is correct and the Bible is not, How come scientists have to keep changing their view and The Bible does not? I feel that we already know how the Earth was created and are just waiting for scientists to catch up!
God Bless You Dr. Hovind. I believe that when you get out, and you will be out soon, God will use you more than ever to win souls and teach the truth about God’s creation! Take care.
JR Turner
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 7:52am:Read this article then pray for your children and grandchildren. They deserve better.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd277.htm
Kent and Jo Hovind are INNOCENT!!! The FRAUD continues!!!
djhouk
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 10:05am:Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this at 7:13pm:
——————————————————————————–
djhouk,
were you actually a member of the Jury?
you have said the trial established that they were “employees”; this you call a “fact”.
It is essential you qualify this comment or retract it as inadmissable to this austere place of review.
My dear P-G,
No, I was not a jury member. There was testimony from witnesses at the trial that Kent treated the folks that worked for him as employees – e.g., he set their working hours, docked their pay if they arrived late, directed their assignments, etc. In U.S. employment law, these are the kinds of things that classify folks as employees and not independent contractors as Kent alleged.
The jury established that his workers were employees. I believe that this was a specific finding of fact from the jury instructions. In any case, it would be a requirement that the fact be established by the jury in order to proceed with finding him guilty of failing to withold payroll taxes; something that would not be required if they were independent contractors. And the jury did find him guilty of those charges.
As to Kent calling his workers to the stand to testify that they were not employees; he chose to offer no defense to the charges, so we don’t know what they thought.
Three Crosses
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 11:59am:Dear Ibeleive2 and EndTimes
Thank you both so very much. I’m afraid after yesterday’s posts, I will try to tone mine down a little. You should hear my brother speak. Ibeleive2 that’s one of the nicest things anyone’s ever said to me. I would appreciate any good links to secular evolution and law debates. I would also suggest to anyone a free online Bible called Bible plus it alows you to search by phrase I got mine at dansmc.com . God bless America God save us all!
P.S. Paulus you were wrong Jesus was guilty of spreading the gospel “And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.” (Matthew 4:23)KJV
EndTimes
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 12:12pm:Dear Samphire,
As always, even if I do not always agree with you, your posts are based on an extensive research and they are for the most part informative. In fact, I am at a complete loss for what the Zimmerman telegram is and it sounds as if I should know about it. Please educated me on that issue.
I do agree with your comments on Guantanamo Bay with the exception that you imply Bush was somehow forced into this maneuver. My take on his presidency is that he has been at the lead on all of the actions that have abrogated our constitution. In any case, the loss of the moral high ground is an irretrievable loss that shall indeed haunt not only America, but the entire world where we exert our influence. You are incorrect about the conscription and US wars. We have fought all of our wars since Viet Nam with a “volunteer” army.
Now, as to the Pearl Harbor conspiracies, in my job as a physician, I have the unique opportunity to get to know people on an intimate level. Many of these folks have had quite interesting lives. One of my most notable patients served 2 tours of duty in the Korean war and since then he became one of the world’s most accomplished sword fighters (Not fencing, but sword in one hand and dagger in the other) rising to the level of world champion in this sport on more than one occassion. However, after knowing him for several years, in a passing conversation, he also revealed that he was one of the world’s foremost experts on the Japanese WWII military with 10 books to his credit. I specifically picked his brain on the issue of Pearl Harbor. In fact, this man was the technical consultant on the movie Tora, Tora, Tora. He subsequently showed me the actually reconstructed Japanese orders given to Yamamoto to attack Pearly Harbor which are now declassified as well as a copy of the declassified government policies towards Pre WWII Japan to incite them into a war in the Pacific so that we could control the region in their defeat. That declassified government article is a specific report of all the American policies that gave Japan no other option than war with America. Thirdly, I have several patients that were survivors of WWII and one that was on the US West Virginia when it was sunk. He was in the boiler room when it was hit and he still to this day does not know how he made it topside with only minor injuries. So, I had his firsthand testimony on many different issues related to Pearl Harbor as well that confirmed what I have learned from other sources. So, it is not just a limited internet search on this one my friend.
Lastly, we have the US senate hearings which overturned the demotions of General Short and Admiral Kimmel due to the abundant evidence that vital intelligence was deliberately withheld from them by Washington. So, my own conclusions are based on more than simple internet searches. We can argue about this for quite a while but the final answer I will await on the Lord when he shall reveal all things to us.
In any case, my main point is the function of dictatorial powers throughout all history has lead to disastrous consequences. So why are we overthrowing these principles of freedom and oversight with control limited by the interactions of all three branches of government effective which has been effective in many ways but not all. We didn’t overthrow constitutional protections when you Limey’s burned Washington D.C. in 1812 so we could do a little urban renewal which was a little before we really needed it thank you. We have had dozens and dozens of terrible hurricanes before Katrina where the Posse Comitatus posed absolutely no hindrance. So why all of a sudden do we throw the baby out with the bath water due to the “blunders” of Katrina. You fire the incompetents that oversaw that wicked travesty against our own people instead of trashing one of the only effective documents this world has ever seen in the fight for freedom and liberty in this world. Why have they not yet even cleaned up the debris 2 years later? Perhaps America really is a third world country now, or perhaps we need to figure out that something quite peculiar is going on in that city from any other disaster that has ever occurred in America as if it is still a show piece for whatever purpose. No my friend, Katrina is still an ongoing oddity in the history of this country. Did we forget how to do so many things that in other disasters we were quite good at doing? Don’t ask me, but it was not the same military that I was a part of that showed up at Katrina and it is still not the same American response to any other disaster that I am aware of. Now we have legislation based on the poor response of the government because of a reported constitutional protection that hindered their movements. Hogwash!!!
In kindness,
EndTimes
Samphire
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 4:24pm:Hi Endtimes,
Thanks for response.
Firstly, my apologies for the “conscription” error. Complete nonsense on my part.
The Zimmerman telegram was the trigger for the US entry into WW1. I am sure the www will give you a good understanding.
As for Pearl Harbour, I doubt that any of your informants were sufficiently close to the top that they could give you useful inside gen on whether or not there was a conspiracy to allow the Japs to destroy the US Pacific Fleet, the point of our previous discussion. Whether or not general intelligence was withheld from the Naval Base, I am not aware that the US knew anything at all of the whereabouts of Nagumo’s fleet although it was well aware of much naval activity well to the west but which could not immediately have threatened Pearl Harbour. The Japs had even removed the keys from the fleet’s transmitters so that no radio-operator could break radio silence by mistake.
I do not doubt either that FDR effectively forced Japan to declare war because of the oil issue or that he was unaware that such declaration was more than one or two days away but I have seen no direct evidence that he thought an attack on PH was imminent. Although it must be fascinating to have met those you mention who were close to the event you have not given any evidence to suggest that he knew of the imminence of the attack or that intelligence of the proximity of Naguro’s fleet was withheld.
By the way, did you know that “Tora Tora Tora” is on a par with “You dirty rat” and “Play it again, Sam”. The Japs did not have radios in their planes – just morse transmitters – so the spoken code word could not have been given as in the film.
Anyway, despite my gentle rubbing of rosehips down the back of your shirt, I do actually agree with you that centralisation and the concentration of power is not a good thing. In previous posts you have mentioned our own loss of sovereignty to Europe and unelected bureaucraps. The trouble is that the further power is removed from the electorate the less involved it feels in the process of government and the more apathetic it becomes. Even so, I cannot imagine that I would ever recommend that the populace should be free to arm itself against an overbearing but generally benign government.
One last point. In today’s paper it was announced that the government of the unelected sullen Scot may shortly introduce a law to ban the drinking of alcohol by amateur sailors. Well, there’s none more amateur than me and I shall be bobbing about on the Solent this weekend marking my boat’s passage as usual by the deposition on the seabed of the usual selection of empty wine bottles, a tradition as old as the Etruscans and my sole method of navigation. Catch me if you can, Gordon, you miserable control-freaky killjoy. Thank God he spends his summer holidays in the US with you sober Yanks than floating along the South Coast with me.
To your continuing good health,
Samphire
ibelieve2
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 5:43pm:Thanks so much for the drdino web-site information!!!!! It is up & running now! I was having some trouble with my computer last night & wasn’t sure if it was me or the site….Thanks again!!!!
Blessings,
ibelieve2
YoCuzwaasup
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 5:45pm:Dr. Hovind,
Lets say, all you adversaries are right, Baliset, god (Small g) and to may more to #. For this post you are a horrible man, a liar, thief, and all they say you are and what the courts convicted you of.
You do the ten years. You paid for your crime that’s justice. Our American Court system by designed the God worked. You were guilty and now set free. I suspect, you sorry, you repented The same God who created the system, has now disciplined one of his sons for doing wrong. It’s the American way, Gods judgment for doing wrong.
God also has another form of judgment. It’s called, “Hell”. A place created not for man, but for the devil and his angles. Jesus said, “In this world you will have trouble, but I have overcome the world”.
Lets say you knowingly did these crimes. Again you got caught and God in his mercy showed you the err, of your ways. Praise God!
My question is then … whom do these adversaries have on their side? There quick to blame, but if the shoe were on the other foot I know you would be praying for these men. Like you say, there not the devil. They may work for him but there not him.
Gentlemen: regardless what you think you know, I was at 9-11, and as sure as that event happened, and the Bible like other events hinted to it. Things are only going to get worse. Not my words the Bible’s. Hell is a real and the Bible speaks of people like you. “Mockers”, Ken’s favorite word for you, “scoffers” (Dumb on purpose), I’m not knocking you, I’m calling you what God says you are, “Fools”. You did not strike a nerve, I just feel so sorry for you, and would try any means, to get you to see the err of your way. You to can repent, and say sorry for your sins and accept Jesus as your substitute, or you can join satin in Hell. It’s your decision.
artemis
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 6:38pm:Realize Brothers and Sisters in Christ that arguing with posters here is a preoccupation for them. Instead of them hearing their own words ringing in their ears (because of silence) they are feed with the feed they only know of. Don’t wish to sway your hand over the sea to calm it. What of the wind? The boat/ship is being tossed about, but you are not in it. You have already been tossed over as Jonah. They have a mast; and blow into it, and find no shore. Let them blow alone- they will faint- their lungs are shallow. They cannot build a larger boat. But don’t wish them ship wreck, remember your call in the storm and how it was calmed. Some think their mast is great, and without wind they have no vessel. And though this isn’t about being stranded; they work as it is. Let them work to their own. They do not come here to join the journey; but to through another over; and to that end, they know nothing of. The end they speak of speaks back- it is as loud as the heavens. But our words are as His- even louder then a storm. In His quite sleep we hear ‘Oh ye of little faith’. Can you hear it? So, let them rid the weight, let them hear, and the others will throw them over; as you were thrown over. They will be tossed out, find solid ground, and walk into the city to share in the Good News. Just as those before you.
What defense do you have at hand? If it is prayer, then you do not pray to man. Be it so, then what scrimmage do you have with man that you might defend another. Honor is greater from a brother to a brother. Do not think some are here asking you for his a defense- as if they were able to free him. Nor do they seek an innocent person to be compelled with. Their armor is made of sticks and stone because they have only fought with those that will. But God would not have us throw them back because there is an end to such cause. His will never ends- this is to our hope and our refuge. Do not draw your sword as you will- cause when you thrust it will be the blunt end. Take thought of your Love, and speak of it only- the Sword will part (rationed)- and then the tree can be approached. This warfare are not ‘dark saying’ to those who have not seen the Light. So, do not speak out of turn with His Word, return your sword to your side, and replace the ear so they can hear. They would not have cared if it was Judas’s face on the coins that day. But Christ placed a mans ear back to him that day. It is he who asks to be heard. In this forum, there is no calm, not among the many voices- it looks like a Picasso painting in hear. They should not be censored- I do not wish for that- even though I wish brother Hovind could hear from the Church and Body only as letters from Paul to His Brothers. Just know that even the slightest contempt and idle word will sound vulgar- as swearing- if your time is used for good and not quarrels. Only you can draw the line- the line they need and seek to cross- but you are busy trying to reclaim borders. The border is fixed my friends, and they will try to step over it; but the will never take over the city. So don’t pay tribute to anything Christ is not- make you time to his will, and encourage a brother instead of learning of quarrel. He sees your peace and receives it, and send it back again- he does not take stock in your reasoning and fighting with those who wish him less then faith.
Be of good cheer, cause we can see he is doing well. I do not wish to discourage anyone who tries to defend Dr. Kent Hovind, or those who have argued in the past with people who do not encourage. My hope is to see him encouraged at all times, as well as yourself. He has not shown that he would quarrel outside his walls by showing us that he quarrels within them. That is certainly instruction.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 8:09pm:mrthrun [jun12, 9.04am]
the “summary” you are “constructing” from the true bible is 100 percent wrong.
http://members.verizon.net/vze3xycv/Jerusalem/confPontPilate.htm
In short there were two types of money. Temple Money/ Real Hebraic Money/ real gold and silver/ the shekel was the weight and it was certain and fixed.
There was also the denarius, Roman Sovereign /fiat-money.
Jesus did not put a denarius into Peter’s hands via a miracle of Jesus’ own making to pay the “holy and righteous” temple tax.
Judas, the betrayer, whereas, was paid with Roman Money; from the sanhedrin treasury (it would seem)
If anything the story possibly tells us that God Himself can “also” create money ex nihilo, which is what the ministry of CSE and Brother Kent is all about, so thanks for bringing the point up even though you are dead wrong with the conclusion you have drawn.
djhouk [jun14, 10.05 am]
1. I note you ingnored an earlier point I made about “mens rea”
2. “kinds of things” – this reads like subjective commentary
3. One could read those “kinds of things” to be the actions of a contract supervisor who worked closely with the contractors, who were happy with “piece rates” of barter.
One could also read them as the Minister / Teacher who rewarded his flock with money for their performances at the alter.
4. “In U.S. employment law” -which I take it you agree is an act of Congress and that all their acts are laws subordinate in nature to the Constitutional Law
5. “The jury established that his workers were employees.” – this remains a critical point. Did the foreman make this statement either written or verbal?
DID ANY JURY MEMBER TESTIFY THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY ESTABLISHED, during or after the trial?
6. “I believe that this was a specific finding of fact from the jury instructions.”
You have challenged me as being incomprehensible. I find this sentence ENTIRELY non-credible. First you make a statement of fact – point five, then you say it is your “belief” – so may not be fact.
Then you say that the Jury are “giving instructions”
ARE THE JURY GIVING INSTRUCTIONS OR RECEIVING THEM !!!???
7. ” In any case, it would be a requirement that the fact be established by the jury in order to proceed with finding him guilty”
THEN YOU TURN AROUND AND AGREE WITH ME THAT THE POINT IS A CRITICAL ONE -
IF/ BIG IF, THE JURY WERE FALSELY/ ERRONEOUSLY OR GIVEN ENTIRELY INADEQUATE OR NEGLIGENT INSTRUCTIONS OR SUMMATIONS BY THE PRESIDING JUDGE OR JUDGES THEY SHOULD HAVE IGNORED THOSE JUDGE’S POSSIBLY CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT OR FALSE AND PREJUDICIAL SUMMATIONS OR INSTRUCTIONS ON OR OF EVENTS;
OR IF THE JURY DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ALONE HAD TO DETERMINE AS A “FACT” THE VERDICT IS A FALSE ONE
OR, IF THEY FOUND THE RESPONDENT GUITLY WITHOUT DETERMINING THIS “FACT” THE VERDICT IS A FALSE ONE.
DO YOU HAVE A TRANSCRIPT OF THE TRIAL.?? HOW DID YOU GET ONE?? WHAT IS YOUR SPECIFIC SOURCE OF INFORMATION??
8. he chose to offer no defense to the charges, so we don’t know what they thought.
ie. PERSON NOT FIT TO STAND TRIAL.
ONE OF THE THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT POINTS THEN WAS NOT EXAMINED RIGOROUSLY BY THE APPLICANT OR THE RESPONDENT – IT WOULD SEEM FROM WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THIS WAS GROUNDS FOR AN APPEAL BY THE “CONTRACTORS” OR “TRADES-MEN” OR “DISCIPLES” THEMSELVES.
- NAMELY, THAT THEY HAVE BEEN “LIABLED” AND OR “SLANDERED” IN A PROCESS IN WHICH THEIR INTERESTS WERE NOT ADEQUATELY PROTECTED.
SEEING THIS IS ALL ABOUT JUSTICE I BELIEVE THAT IS WHAT SHOULD BE PURSUED TO ITS LOGICAL CONSLUSION.
I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT THE JURY WERE NOT SUI JURIS IF THEY DID NOT ASK OR INVESTIGATE ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS FOR DETERMINING A TRUE AND RELIABLE VERDICT.
BY ALL MEANS CALL ME AN IDIOT [I AM METAPHORICALLY TEFLON COATED] BUT PLEASE DO NOT WRITE TO ME AS IF I AM ONE.
written without prejudice, all rights reserved, and subject to peer reviews exclusively on this forum.
All glory to the Judge of all the earth.
Recipient of Grace
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 9:30pm:Hello,
I haven’t had the time to read all the posts, but I am both encouaraged and appalled.
Brothers and sisters, I don’t care what your take on this tax issue is, if Christ could die for you when you were His enemy then you can love and support another brother for whom He shed His blood. Dr. Hovind has been a vessel used by God to strengthen us and challenge us. I praise God for his faithfulness to the work set before him.
“Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith.” – Galations 6:10
Dr.Hovind, I don’t know if you’ll be able to read this, but this verse is for you:
“and let us not be weary in well doing, for in due season we shall reap if we faint not.” -Galations 6:9
Our prayers are with you!
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 9:30pm:To: djhouk [jun14, 10.05]
It occurred to me I didn’t make the point plainly enough to enable all to see it plainly.
Quoting you: “… it would be a requirement that the fact be established by the jury …”
“…..it would be…..”
So you went from saying what “did happen” to what “would have been required to happen”
I find such a standard of rhetoric entirely inadequate for asserting statements as “fact”; before an audience capable of being mislead intentionally or unintentionally.
Is this is your standard of Juris Prudence in United States of America? It seems you operate at the same level as “darling”.
scottaogden
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 10:00pm:Brother Kent,
you have inspired me to follow in the steps of Jesus and take up my cross, taking his gospel to the ends of the earth, starting in my own backyard. Thank You.
mtlionsroar
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 10:47pm:Dear Kent:
As always, you’re words are such an encouragement to me. Thank you for being faithful to God.
Praying for you!
Dee
Ekkman
Said this on June 14th, 2007 at 11:18pm:http://www.scottcsmith.net/remindus.swf
America became the most powerful nation in the world in less than 200 years. Now she is crumbling fast, falling to the wayside. I asked you to watch the video on the link above that I posted at an earlier time. I asked you to watch all of it.
NOW I ask you to watch the one below and as you are watching it, keep in mind the words of our “leaders” in the video above.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Senator_Lieberman_advocates_military_strike_on_0610.html
Do you see the parallels in his comments about how he “knows” that Iran has certain things and are doing certain things that are a danger to our people and to the people in Iraq. Just as we saw that “they” knew what Iraq had but come to find out they didn’t have what our “government knew” they had. But we are making them a democracy??? In reality, who is a danger to who?
Brothers and sisters, the waves are getting higher and the storms are getting worse. We need to walk on the water right through the storms of life with our eyes on the Lord Jesus Christ, he is the only one who can keep us afloat. But we will sink like Peter did if we take our eyes off of the Lord and focus on the “storm”, the problems, the trials, the confusion, whatever.
In closing, Kent Hovind is innocent, the government is guilty.
Ekkman
BryanRick
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 3:04am:I hope every person on this blog who supports Hovind is signing the petition at http://www.freehovind.com, and/or writing to the President. Actions speak louder than words. Cliche, but silly really just to complain about it here; when something can be done to possibly help.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 7:14am:Dear Endtimes,
the parry with Samphire contains some both interesting and some enjoyable reading but, and I am sure defeatist attitudes won’t sway you, – but consider this: Carl Sagan was a deeply religious man – the paradigm he clung to of “materialism only” was his religion. Samphire has his religion and cannot see the fundamental non testable axioms of construction upon which it is based. That is his glass ceiling.
As for peculiarities about Louisiana – maybe the High Altitude Auroral Research Project had something to do with it all. Also I believe Louisiana has not ratified or adopted article [or chapter] 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Perhaps it was singled out for unusual treatment. You have already pointed out the unusual quite well. But how far can you stretch your own imagination.
Bizaare is an uncomfortable way to think.
The great mass of people … will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.
Adolf Hitler
mrthrun
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 9:20am:Dear Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974. Thank you for your comments. It seems that my earlier comments may seem a little confusing so I will make them simple.
Kent Hovind is in Jail!
- He is not in jail for preaching the gospel, and he is not in jail to evangelize.
- He is not in jail for being a christian and he is not being persecuted for righteousness.
Kent Hovind is in Jail!
He is in jail for not paying his taxes. Kent Hovind needs to repent.
Hopefully this is simple enough for everyone to understand.
If Kent was truly hearing from God he would be hearing the word REPENT! And like it or not, twist it however you seem justified to do so, the Bible, especially Jesus, does not support fraud, stealing and tax evation. And those of you supporting Kent in his fraud instead of encouraging him to REPENT do not really love him. So Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974, I hope this clears up what I meant. Sincerely in Christ. Peter Thrun
artemis
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 9:23am:BryanRick, thanks buddy, I hadn’t realized there was a petition, and it was so easy to sign. Thanks for mentioning it here. I wonder how many people know about it. ACLJ, other Radio, and all Churches will certainly be sending the message out. To bad Dr. Kent can’t read all the comments of those supporting him. He would certainly like the comments made there.
mrthrun
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 9:58am:Why Kent and Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974 need to repent:
Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s. When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause PAY YE TRIBUTE also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.
These are the scriptures that support paying taxes and submitting to governmental authority. If Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974 and or Kent would be so kind to show us the scriptures that support not paying taxes and insurrection to governmental authority I would be highly interested. Sincerely In Christ. Peter Thrun
absolute
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 3:26pm:CALL 1-202-514-2000 THIS IS THE US JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. ASK FOR THE DIVISION OF PARDONS AND STATE YOUR CASE.
ALSO YOU CAN FAX (MAKE IT BREIF AND TO THE POINT) DIRECTLY TO BUSH….ADDRESS TO GWBUSH THAT FAX IS 1-202-456-2461
ENOUGH OF US CALLING MAY MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 5:00pm:mrthrun, [jun15 9.58am],
thankyou for your post.
there are dozens of scriptures one can use to support the ordinary paying of taxes. eg. Luke 6.20 Give to every one who begs you for something.
Does this include junkies [sorry substance abuse challenged "individuals"] wanting money from you to enable them to “shoot-up”?
…….a long line of cases shows that it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.
Lord Chief Justice Hewart
I suggest some extent of casuistry is imperative to any open and unbiased process of review. I do want to know what actually happened!
When the king had gone rotten David had no real option but to “go bush” – he wasn’t going to extend his hand against the king – God’s own anointed one. Citizens might have a choice; “subjects” do not have an easy choice.
Jesus did not try to reform Rome. If anything, He simply used it to scourge. Rome was a voluntary association – no-one was forced into being a citizen. Does “Club of Rome” sound familiar?
Sure, the midwives could have obeyed Pharoah – the law said, kill them!
When there is criminality in government? – what then? The “republic” is predicated on a revolution – rightly or wrongly, that is where the nation came from.
Kofi Annan said the invasion of Iraq was an illegal act
Question: Is CSE all about Church Ministry in Jesus’ name?
Question: Does Jesus own CSE?
Question: Does the Constitution guarantee “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”
I respect your opinions; in this instance I disagree with that which you have conclusioned – God bless you.
It is fundamental “a priori” axiomatic presuppositions that define us. I know some of my biases – maybe not all of them! But I am happy to nail colours to a mast. I am yet to see certain others do the same. [the question is not really "Who is religious; but what exactly is their religion?]
Maturekid [jun15 12.00pm] – well said, thankyou. – it is easy to get over wrought.
Ekkman
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 7:53pm:15Three Crosses
Said this at 10:30am:
——————————————————————————–
Wow! Did you know the only thing you have to do to get tax exempt status is fill out and agree to a form? Of course there are a few verses you’re not supposed to teach! You’re also not supposed to teach anything HATEFUL.
I beleive it’s only a matter of time until you all discover there are more than enough tyrranical laws in the US, to put every one of us to death or prison for anything at all! You won’t even get a trial (read patriot act II).
Three Crosses said a mouthful here. But remember only the one who hung on the middle cross can save you. The cops are proving to me over and over that they can do just about anything they want to do. We are already in a police state but it will get worse as time goes on. I was pulled over the other day. I asked the cop why did she pull me over. She said that I was driving too slow. I was doing 25 in a 35. I told her, “I have been pulled over for all kinds of reasons but this is the first time that I have been pulled over for driving too slow.” She just smiled and said, “Papers please.”
I have been pulled over for having my license plates in the area that the truck was made to carry them. It was a cut out area in my bumper. The cop told me that he can’t see them well enough. I tell him that they are supposed to go there. I have been driving with my plates there for about 7 years. He didn’t care. He asked me was I going to take them out and put them on my bumper somehow. I tell him no. He writes me a ticket. I had to go to court three times before they finally threw it out.
I have been pulled over for barely going over a double yellow line before I got to the area where there was a solid yellow line and a dotted yellow line. He wrote me a ticket.
I have been pulled over for going about 5 miles over the speed limit.
I have been pulled over for tracting at a high school activity. I was threatened but they didn’t take me in.
I have had the cops come in and politely ask me to leave when I was sharing the love of the Lord Jesus Christ in a bar.
Besides the time that I have already discussed, they told me that I couldn’t preach Jesus on the streets. I told them that I could, they took me. Of course, the reason given was obstructing traffic. Even though I was only obstructing traffic by those driving their cars on the sidewalk.
There were other times too but this should make my point.
The Lord has told us what the last days would be like. We are called to look up, our redemption draweth nigh.
Maybe if Kent changes his name to Sun M Moon, they would let him out too.
In reality, the Lord Jesus Christ is in control even when it doesn’t look like it. Those who seek his face and follow his word will get the victories that he promises when our trial is past just as Job did.
Ekkman
CMarychurch
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 10:09pm:Hovind v God
It’s puzzling. Why does “God” talk and think exactly like Kent Hovind? Why does “God” only know what Kent Hovind knows?
Is this transcript supposed to be factual, a parable, or has Kent Hovind truly lost the plot under the stress of prison life?
Isn’t there Commandment about using the Lord’s name in vain?
EndTimes
Said this on June 15th, 2007 at 10:41pm:Dear PZ Meyers,
I feel quite sorry for the day of judgement that shall come you by your own words. I would advise you and your crowd to carryfully consider the evil comments you have placed against God including accusing him of sexual acts. You trample lightly on that which is Holy. Sorry, but the witness of God is greater than the witness of man. The crucifixion was prophesied in Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, Daniel 9, and Zechariah chapter 12-14. No my friend, you shall have your day of judgement as shall all men when men like yourself shall be filled with trembling and the gnashing of teeth at the sight of the Holy God you so easily mock. In that day, the terrible words spoken on your blog will be the number one evidence testifying against you. I am so glad that you and your crowd are so educated that adolescent insults and slander is the best that you can muster. But in all seriousness, all I can see is the terror of you standing before the Holy God that you have mocked all of these years with the sudden realization that He is not only real, but you are guilty before Him and you have refused the ransom paid by His Son for you. PZ, that day shall not be pretty. I wish to tell you now, that I feel sorry for you and anyone else that will attempt to pay for their own sins. What a sad day that could have been avoided but by your own free choice, you have instead castigated that which is Holy.
May God be praised for His mercy and grace.
EndTimes
Ekkman
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 1:10am:Acts 16- SOME THINGS WE MIGHT GO THROUGH TO SEE GOD GLORIFIED
16 And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying:
PRAYER MOTIVATES THE DEVIL TO DO WHAT HE CAN TO STOP YOU FROM PRAYING… HAVE YOU EVER NOTICED THAT ABOUT THE TIME YOU ARE GOING TO PRAYER, A LOT OF THINGS COME UP THAT SEEKS TO KEEP YOU FROM IT… THINGS COME TO MIND THAT YOU HAVE TO DO AND YOU REALIZE THAT YOU HAVE TO DO IT NOW… OR YOU ARE TOO SLEEPY, OR WHATEVER ELSE I CAN NAME…
Acts 16 (cont.)
17 The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation.
SHE, HE, THEY OR OTHER THINGS WILL KEEP FOLLOWING US AROUND AND IT COULD BE FOR MANY DAYS WHICH COULD GO INTO WEEKS AND MONTHS AND YEARS AND THE THINGS “CAN” BE GOOD THINGS TOO OR “APPEAR GOOD” TO THE EYE, NEEDED THINGS, ETC.
Acts 16 (cont.)
18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.
THESE THINGS NEED TO BE DEALT WITH OR WE WILL BE GRIEVED BY THEM SOONER OR LATER… AND IF IT IS DEALT WITH PROPERLY, WE WILL GET THE VICTORY…
Acts 16 (cont.)
19 And when her masters saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew them into the marketplace unto the rulers,
20 And brought them to the magistrates, saying, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city,
21 And teach customs, which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans.
22 And the multitude rose up together against them: and the magistrates rent off their clothes, and commanded to beat them.
23 And when they had laid many stripes upon them, they cast them into prison, charging the jailor to keep them safely:
BUT KEEP IN MIND THOUGH THAT IT WILL PROBABLY GET THE DEVIL TWICE AS MAD AND HE WILL SEEK TO BRING MORE OF HIS PEOPLE INTO THE ACT TO REALLY SHUT YOU DOWN.
YOU MIGHT BE FALSELY ACCUSED BY OTHERS, SLANDERED, BEAT, ETC. , PUT AWAY FOR A TIME, WHATEVER BUT THEN HIDE AND WATCH, IF YOU KEEP YOU FAITH IN THE LORD WHAT HAPPENS THEN…
Acts 16 (cont.)
25 And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God: and the prisoners heard them.
THINK ABOUT THIS, “AT MIDNIGHT”… WOULDN’T THAT SHOW YOU THAT WHEN THINGS LOOK THE DARKEST, BLEAKEST, in other words, HOPELESS. This is a good TIME THAT PRAYER AND PRAISE SHOULD GO FORTH…
REMEMBER WE TALKED ABOUT PRAYING WITHOUT CEASING AND YOU DO THAT WHEN YOU ARE WALKING IN THE SPIRIT AND THE PRISONERS WILL HEAR…
AS TRUTH GOES FORTH, PRISONERS SEE THEIR NEED AND HENCE…
Acts 16 (cont.)
26 And suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken: and immediately all the doors were opened, and every one’s bands were loosed.
AS TRUTH GOES FORTH, THERE WILL BE THINGS HAPPENING WHETHER IN THE SPIRITUAL OR THE NATURAL… EXPLOSIONS ARE TAKING PLACE AS THE WORD OF GOD GOES FORTH… His word is explosive power, it causes people to react in different ways.
Acts 16 (cont.)
27 And the keeper of the prison awaking out of his sleep, and seeing the prison doors open, he drew out his sword, and would have killed himself, supposing that the prisoners had been fled.
JESUS DIDN’T SEPARATE SLEEP AND DEATH, THEY WERE ONE AND THE SAME TO HIM. HE COULD WAKE A MAN OUT OF HIS SLEEP AS EASILY AS HE COULD WAKE A MAN OUT OF HIS DEATH…
Acts 16 (cont.)
28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here.
PHYSICAL DEATH TO SELF ISN’T THE ANSWER BUT DEATH TO THE SIN NATURE IS… WE ARE NOT TO BEAT OURSELVES AND DO PHYSICAL HARM TO OUR BODIES TO ACCOMPLISH HIS WILL IN OUR LIVES…
Acts 16 (cont.)
29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,
A LIGHT IS NEEDED TO EXPOSE THE UNFRUITFUL WORKS OF DARKNESS AND WHEN WE SEE BY THAT LIGHT, WE WILL COME TREMBLING. THE FEAR OF THE LORD IS THE BEGINNING OF KNOWLEDGE.
Acts 16 (cont.)
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
WHEN KNOWLEDGE GOES FORTH AND THE FEAR OF THE LORD IS THERE THEN THE TRUTH WILL BE MANIFESTED SO THEY CAN ACT ON IT. THEIR SPIRIT HAS BEEN AWAKEN BY THE WORD OF GOD AND/OR THE POWER OF GOD… REMEMBER THE WORD WENT FORTH FIRST IN PRAYER AND PRAISE THEN THE POWER CAME… WE SHOULD EXPECT THE SAME…
Acts 16 (cont.)
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
SALVATION WILL COME FOR US AS WE TRULY BELIEVE WHAT HE SAYS, AS WE ACT UPON HIS CALL AND HIS DRAWING US TO HIS SIDE, INTO HIS VERY LIFE…
Acts 16 (cont.)
32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
THE MAN WAS SAVED AND HIS WHOLE HOUSE, THEY HEARD THE WORD OF GOD AND ACTED ON IT… THE FRUIT OF THE NEW LIFE WAS IMMEDIATE… HE TOOK THE PRISONERS AND WASHED THEIR STRIPES AND THEN HE AND HIS FAMILY WERE BAPTIZED…
Acts 16 (cont.)
34 And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.
MORE FRUIT GOING FORTH FROM THE NEW LIFE IN JESUS…
Acts 16 (cont.)
35 And when it was day, the magistrates sent the serjeants, saying, Let those men go.
(MAGISTRATE — ONE WITH POWER IN THE GOVENMENT TO APPLY A LAW AND PUT IT IN FORCE).. THINK ABOUT THIS ONE, IT WAS A CORRUPT GOVERNMENT TOO!)
Acts 16 (cont.)
36 And the keeper of the prison told this saying to Paul, The magistrates have sent to let you go: now therefore depart, and go in peace.
37 But Paul said unto them, They have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison; and now do they thrust us out privily? nay verily; but let them come themselves and fetch us out.
38 And the serjeants told these words unto the magistrates: and they feared, when they heard that they were Romans.
39 And they came and besought them, and brought them out, and desired them to depart out of the city.
NOW PAUL USES THE LAW TO HIS ADVANTAGE… Kent was using the law to his advantage but the IRS started using their “non” laws to their advantage. Keep in mind that God is bigger.
Acts 16 (cont.)
40 And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed.
HE GOES TO COMFORT THE BELIEVERS IN THAT CITY AND THEN HE DEPARTS… WE ARE CALLED TO DO WHAT GOD HAS CALLED US TO DO AND THEN IF WE ARE CALLED ON TO DEPART FROM WHERE WE ARE AT THEN THE LORD WILL SHOW US AND WE ARE TO LEAVE… BUT NOT UNTIL HIS TIME…
Brothers and sisters, keep prayer and praise before the throne of grace on behalf of Kent. At the moment, we are not in there with him in the physical but we can be with him in the spirit by prayer and praise. The way that it is going, it looks like many Christians will be in jail or the pen too and a lot of others from patriots to Constitutionalists or whoever won’t submit to a pagan government.
I put together a few thoughts when I was preaching on Acts 16 a little while back.
Ekkman
no_where_man
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 3:14am:As I read many of the posts under the woodsman and thought of how I could contribute to such a complex and serious thread the song “nowhere man” came to mind. I especially appreciate EndTimes contribution and explanation of these events.
I was drawn to Kent Hovind’s situation after typing “creation” in YouTube’s search box and viewing a video of one of his lectures. He made compelling points while our whole family was drawn into his presentation. Then to my dismay I discovered Hovind had been imprisoned for preventable crimes, and even worse, for ten years in federal prison.
Upon reading Wikipedia’s explanation of events, I realized by the Wiki article that a great deal of consorted effort had gone into the article, too much effort and too much detail, to be innocently presenting the facts. Satan goes about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. Hovind has drawn many who hate him, I conclude. Though tens of thousands have drawn themselves against me, I will fear not, for You are with me.
The penalty is excessive compared to penalties we have seen for violent crimes throughout our culture. We live in an unjust society. The days are evil.
Yet I am compelled to present alternate possibilities for Christian ministries than those tagged and targeted for persecution by atheist or government, that is, church were ungodly mammon (money) is a lesser or irrelevant issue as far as government tax status is concerned.
Satan is very crafty. The oldest standing and intact concrete structure of Rome is the Pantheon. It was erected by the Roman Emperor to venerate the seven gods of the Roman republic. The Pantheon eventually was converted into a Catholic “Church.” The Roman Byzantines followed in the earlier traditions. Since Constantine sponsored Christendom, “church” has been redefined as a place rather than an assembly of people. We have the Hagai Sofia in Istanbul as a testament to the craft of the devil. The Hagai Sofia is the greatest relic from Byzantine times. The massive building of amazing architectural design was became known as a church. When the Turks invaded the city, rather than destroying the building, they converted it into a Mosque. Subsequently, massive and majestic mosques built afterward by the Turks build upon the same style. Even now, the government sponsored Islamic religion builds mosques by the same style throughout Turkey. Whether Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Christendom, adherents of religions throughout the world have been craftily lead by Satan to iconize their buildings, mosques or temples. Masses of funds are poured into the buildings as one sect or religion envies another to outdo another. Whether it is the Vatican or the Crystal Cathedral, these defiled edifices are called churches, and twisted justifications are made to divert wealth into temporal and useless objects of devotion. But the body is God’s temple.
Yet, it escapes the notice of nearly all of our society that our government also follows in the steps of the Roman and Constantinian traditions, building its own temples and religious icons of devotion. Few know, yet the information is readily available, that the Capitol building is a cultic temple inspired by the Pantheon of the Roman Republic religion. Originally the Capitol was called the Temple of Liberty, to venerate the Roman Goddess Libertus, goddess of prostitution, immigration and personal freedom. Atop the Capitol stands Libertus, named the Statue of Freedom. Lest anyone doubt the connection with the Pantheon in Rome, consider that the fresco inside the Rotunda depicts the founding fathers with seven gods and goddesses of the Roman republic. Libertus, the most prominent, is poised with George Washington as he ascends to godhood. And of course, the greatest icon which stands guarding the waters of the greatest trade center of gold and silver in the world, is the Statue of Liberty, originally called “Liberty Illuminating the World.” Her crown has seven spikes which represent the seven hills or landmasses of the world that she illuminates and sits upon in power. She is especially venerated and worshiped on TV on the Fourth of July. In the first century this goddess was known as the Mother of Harlots, after her original form from Babylon, the goddess Ishtar, also known as Isis, Astarte, Asheroth, etc. Ishtar was not known as the mother of harlots because she gave birth to any children. She was childless (though she seduced many men), but because she was the goddess of prostitutes who would pray to her, and would especially be heard from their lowly positions in society.
Hence, America is Babylon the Great, who sits on many waters and rules the world with her economic and political might, that Mega-City, where “Mega” is venerated, and Christians have fallen in her trap. It is a trap of the ages. Many Christians envy the power of the occultic state and her ability to use our tax money for substantiating herself. Yes, when we register as 501(c)3s we compromise, but we have already compromised by investing in the buildings as churches, by competing with Libertus and playing by her game. Libertus is chained to her pedestal on the Hudson River. We have chained ourselves to mortgages and payments and amusement parks and equipment, when the early church was much more effective meeting in homes, where families became extended families in houses, where Christians shared meals with each other as the sacrament of the blood and body of Christ, not factory produced wafers and juice. Families became extended families in homes, where Christians learned the meaning of brother and sister in Christ as real family members, where “the worker is worthy of his food” was as an ox eating while on the threshing floor not greedy for monetary gain in the way of Balaam who went the way of profit to his own condemnation.
Yes, the world is out to get the competition and they are usurping their authority over the notes with their god’s picture on it, the picture of George Washington. But the Biblical Christian is not truly in competition with Washington, for there is no law against the fruit of the Spirit, which is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, self control and such things. We should abandon the call of Libertus to chain ourselves to institutions of filthy mammon. We must repent of our greed, our envy, our covetousness of religious buildings, pews, pipe organs and stained glass, and get a life, that we not be condemned with the world. The federal reserve note is a franchise. If we entangle ourselves in it, it will entangle us. Why is it that we can not meet in our homes for ekklesia, where the bills are already being paid by individual families just doing the things normal family’s do? For our lack of authentic and intimate spirituality, we entangle ourselves in extraneous bills, and instead of bearing one another’s burdens, we create greater burdens our Lord did not require us to acquire. We must repent of these sins, and not be condemned with the world.
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
http://www.americathebabylon.com
http://www.ntrf.org
http://www.redmoonrising.com
andries
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 8:34am:Elethiomel said:
“What happens when these people find they have been deceived by this nonsense? They will often link their belief in God with this stuff and fall away totally. It’s sad and I have seen it many times.” There is really an easy answer to this. We are all going to stand before God, based on what we believed and not on what other people has told or learned us. The only reason for people to “fall away totally” because “they will often link their belief in God with this stuff”, is when their faith was not rooted in the accomplish work of Christ at Calvary.
andries
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 8:41am:I have withhold any comment on that what I have said. I can do so, but there an other thing that troubles me more while reading this blog and I want to continue where Recipient of Grace stop. Have you noticed while reading the comments, that the Christian army is the only army that kick his solders when they are down, or even kill them? After Jimmy Swaggert fell, there was a discussion on TV. All the participants was in ministry and they attacked Jimmy Swaggart. We all knows that what he has done, was wrong. At the end of the program, an elderly man who has not take part in the discussions and just listen, was asked what was his view. He answered by saying: “The only thing I know that when I am in trouble, I will not talk to any of you.”
The words that flowed out of some people’s hearts into their comment, is so bad that it needed editing. To announced that Kent is part of the devil’s army, is beyond me. I have personally experience and see how people’s relationship has deepen with Father God after listening to his DVD’s. There is no way that satan will allow one of his “disciples” to do that. Never!
Recipient of Grace stated: “Brothers and sisters, I don’t care what your take on this tax issue is, if Christ could die for you when you were His enemy then you can love and support another brother for whom He shed His blood. Dr. Hovind has been a vessel used by God to strengthen us and challenge us. I praise God for his faithfulness to the work set before him.”
I agree, and wants to asked a question, irrespective if you believe Kent is guilty or not: Do you pray for him and if you do, what do you pray? “Please God, release him from prison”, or “Please God, convince him of his sin”? God can use us regardless where we are. He is bigger as our sin (that is no excuse for sinning or to acknowledge our wrong doing). Or do you pray that God will achieve in and through Kent what He wants to accomplish?
andries
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 8:47am:ibelieve2
Just keep going. Just keep focusing on Father God, His greatness and your unspeakably value to Him. Do you know that He values you more than creation itself?
When I read your comments, I picked up a sweet spirit, a gentleness and a kindness. This is of more value than a thousand words.
Enjoy God. Enjoy His embrace of love. Enjoy His guidance. When you humble yourself in personal fellowship unto Him and meditate on His word, He will learn you His ways…on His time.
warocuya
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 11:13am:mrthrun,
If I were you, I would just side with Jesus Christ and not the USA. Jesus doesn’t equal America.
Judgement will fall on this country shortly.
Choose your side wisely,
Warocuya an American Indian
Ekkman
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 1:12pm:Jun
16 warocuya
Said this at 11:13am:
——————————————————————————–
mrthrun,
If I were you, I would just side with Jesus Christ and not the USA. Jesus doesn’t equal America.
Judgement will fall on this country shortly.
Choose your side wisely,
Warocuya an American Indian
See how a person can speak a lot of truth with just a few words.
Ekkman
mrthrun
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 1:27pm:Mr. warocuya, Mr. Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974, Mr. Maturekid, and others. I am not exactly sure how that I am supporting The US government and not Christ. I am not sure how that calling for repentance is anti-Christ. That is why I asked specifically for scriptures that would demonstrate a new testament support for Kent not paying taxes. I have provided several scriptures that demonstrate the need to submit to governmental authority. They do not violate God’s commands of righteousness. Opinions are great, but scripture is better.
Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.
Either you believe that the Bible is God’s word, and final authority or you don’t. The scriputes I have quoted are not my opinions but right from the same bible (KJV 1611) Kent claims is God’s unarguable Word. As Kent puts it, “From cover to cover”.
So then, I ask again show me the New Testament scripture that would vindicate and justify Kent in not paying taxes. If you cannot, then you should see why I believe he needs to repent. Nothing to do with supporting the government. Everything to do with seeing repent and get right with God. Sincerely in Christ. Peter Thrun.
FuManchu
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 2:31pm:Ekkman, I had a brief check on Wikipedia:
“The term police state is a term for a state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population, especially by means of a secret police force which operates above the normal constraints found in a liberal democracy. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive…police states are authoritarian, and are often dictatorships.”
Oddly, there’s nothing in there about it being a police state when you happen to get pulled over for infringing the traffic laws. A minor oversight; perhaps you should amend the entry.
When you’re giving a ticket for doing nothing, then it’s a police state. Instead of ‘barely’ going over a line, you don’t go over it at all; instead of going ‘about’ five miles over the speed limit, you’re well within the speed limit. If you start getting called up for that kind of thing, let us know. Until then, try driving sensibly and you’ll be amazed how the police state fades away.
Rochnowski
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 2:49pm:Dear Kent,
Thank you for your example and testimony. Your life has been a modern day Daniel in my eyes, and continues to be a testimony to me while I am still free to witness the gospel in the united States and abroad… and you are incarcerated. I know that God will only give the mission field you are in to those He can trust. I try to thank the Lord Jesus Christ for you and your family and your ministry daily, and ask Him to continue to strengthen you all while you serve Him as you must.
God Bless! In Christ Jesus, Brian
Teno
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 4:04pm:http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=896
I see tax protestor Irwin Schiff is getting the same kind of “diesel treatment” (constant moving and harassing) that Bro. Hovind received.
If Kent (or Irwin) were just guilty of a crime they would just put him in jail and let him serve his term. But the unconstitutional IRS wants more than that. They want to inflict cruel and unusual punishment.
Of course cultists like Sun Myung Moon are exempt from such gov’t persecution.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 7:06pm:Dear MrThrun
quote: “the New Testament scripture that would vindicate and justify Kent in not paying taxes.”
thankyou for your post.
Act 5.29 “We ought to obey God rather than men” Apostle Peter, upon whose ‘revelation’ about the God head, the entire new testament church is built.
If the money does not belong to Kent; then there is no argument. All charges are null and void. There is nothing else to discuss about it.
Other stuff is being discussed on the blog expanding on separate issues about where the Church and America is at.
What right does any man have to question the testimony of another living sentient soul?
Unless there is direct evidence of wrongdoing simply believe the bible and the plain words contained in the Constitution.
a few words on the ironies of history:-
The Liberty Bell – a Chequered History (addenda)
The liberty bell was recast at least once following its first fracture, a breach that occurred at its very first sounding on American soil; during the March of 1753. The bell had originated by way of commission, in the East End of London, England, at the “Whitechapel” Foundry; it travelled abroad on the “Hibernia” [means "wintery"], captained by William Child ; In 1821 the bell made an appearance in “time keeping” as a clock-bell. Subsequently, the steeple to the clock rotted and was torn down – the bell was placed in storage for seven years, and was hauled away, and maybe misplaced. When a new 4,000-pound bell had been cast [or was it a recasting] – that also cracked. Now it seems the Liberty Bell’s new $9-million pavilion was built right where George Washington once kept slaves. Gus Grissom, while piloting the NASA spacecraft, Liberty Bell 7, lost the vessel on July 21st, 1961 when its hatch prematurely blew after splashdown; sending it to the bottom of the Atlantic – Grissom a 33rd degree freemason, just couldn’t keep “liberty bell” afloat it would seem. The recovery vehicle/ helicopter tried to hold on to it, but just couldn’t manage it the seas they were in.
Even the name of Captain “William Child” is interesting. The name William means “looking for/ desiring – protection/ helmet” [protector] – child is obvious enough.
So Christians fleeing religious persecution in Europe founded the “New World” – which was overtaken by another generation to create the “New World Order” – a secular state which began persecuting Christians – and on the STATES’ one dollar Federal Reserve Bank notes aka legal tender: Novus ordo Seclorum, New Order of Secularism, since 1935.
Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is Liberty. ie. There is no Way, but for the Spirit of the Living God.
[this was written in a hurry- please forgive the typos]
Three Crosses
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 7:14pm:CMarychurch Said something about commandments: I was just wondering if this is a Catholic poster and if you’ve read the catechism?
2ndamenduser
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 7:43pm:In blogs like this there seems to always be those who use their freedom to post to countervail the truth. Often when the truth is told, so many lies follow or are mixed in that the truth is forgotten.
I don’t have the time to do this, but would appreciate it if someone who has time did. Would someone please post in simple, yet accurate terms the actual charges against the Hovind’s, ie. what laws are they charged with actually breaking?
A link to a site that would be the quickest way to confirm would be great. After all, with all the “wanna be judges” out there, I’m sure some will post what they want us to believe are actual charges, but are not (such as media reports).
Another missing thread of truth in all the discussion about rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and submitting ourselves to government is the fact that our government is OF THE PEOPLE. When a government agent/agency is contrary to the constitution, the people have a right to refuse to obey. The Supreme Court ruled once, I believe, that a law that is unconstitutional is no law, and should be treated as if it did not exist. Could someone confirm this for me and those who might want to use the uncertainty of the rule of law to persuade good people of the “guilt” of another? A link to confirm this would also be appreciated.
Also, could someone please provide options of actions that Christians in Florida can pursue to bring to justice those involved in the reporting, charging, judging, incarceration, foul treatment, etc. of the Hovind’s if laws were indeed broken to arrive at a guilty verdict?
Some of these things may have been covered in the past, but are worthy of reentry because the average busy person does not have the time to read all the comments of blogs of the past.
Lastly, is there anything that Christians not in Florida can do to help bring to justice those who may have violated the Hovinds’ right to life, liberty and the pursuit of the will of God (which is the only way to happiness) and their 1st amendment rights and/or any other rights which may have been violated?
Asking for a pardon is the worst thing one can do if they are not guilty.
Blessings on those who love righteousness, cursings on those who love pride, selfishness, frowardness and deceit.
A Pastor from the West
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 9:21pm:Dear Teno [jun16] – I can’t fathom the “diesel treatment” – it is so obvious, it is “as if” someone somewhere wants people to go to the international court of Justice on this issue. Otherwise, doesn’t Alaska have prisons? Why not send all “tax deniers” to hard labour camps in Alaska. Is this all about provoking a tidal wave of civil dissent? Is someone wanting to crash the system via crude means? This is back in the pure speculation – sorry if I digress.
To All Saints of the Most High God,
pursuant to looking at a solution to the evil taking place there are many yet unspoken topics. Some words you might want to do a quick read on are
Ens Legis.
L. Lat. A creature of the law; an artificial being, as contrasted with a natural person. Applied to corporations, considered as deriving their existence entirely from the law.” “Blacks Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition, 1951, “Blacks 4th.”
I suggest that the STRAMINEUS HOMO is become an “Ens Legis” to all intensive purposes.
also:
Pro Se;
Also Latin – adjective meaning “for self”, that is applied to someone who represents himself (or herself) without a lawyer in a court proceeding
Pro Se, I believe, is very important if you “want to” avoid the adverse implications of
“Parens patriae”.
Latin, A common law doctrine by which the STATE has an obligation for the welfare of children and “lunatics”. The parens patriae power may be exercised by the superior courts of the STATES.
I suggest that as the STATE is now operating like a CORPORATION that is effectively exercising a type of PARENS PATRIAE over its children, the ENS LEGIS, which cannot speak for themselves as SUI JURIS natural born men [those with enough pubic hair to make it as real citizens], because they need an ATTORNEY to do their talking for them – ie. they are acting like the mentally incompetent.
ie. being “pro se” gives you access to rights in a court of competent jurisdiction that are otherwise being subtly lost in what looks like deliberate obfuscation
OR, if you look as if you are “playing dead” they will treat you like you are “dead”.
[getting a lawyer to REPRESENT you and then having them enter a plea in connection with quasi criminal charges might not be just shooting yourself in the foot; it might be more tantamount to cutting off both of your own legs to feed yourself]
which brings up the point:
Praesentia corporis tollit errorem nominis: et veritas nominis tollit errorem demonstrationis.
latin – the presence of the body cures errors in the name: the truth of the name cures error in description.
ie. If you turn up anywhere to defend the ENS LEGIS and do not specifically rebut the proposition that it is “your NAME” and free of defect, it is immediately assumed that “you” are the “NAME”; OR AT LEAST THE UNLIMITED LIABILITY SURETY FOR THE NAME. remember what the bible says about being a surety for a “stranger” – this is serious!!
By turning up and answering to the NAME when it is spoken you are assumed to be that ENS LEGIS, or have unlimited liability in connection with it or to be the full legal liability commercial accommodation party.
Scenario.
The policeman pulls you over for driving too slowly [ a quasi criminal / non crime]. He asks for your name or papers. By talking to him you have “recognised his right to exist”. By giving him your name verbally you have provided him with “a person” to charge. By giving him papers with a signature on them that looks as if “you” are an “accommodation party” because of the way you signed it, you have also provided him with a person to charge. But here is where the catch-22 comes in and how you should begin to sign documents from now on.
I say my name is “Phillip-George (c) 1974″ but he writes down in his note pad “P H I L L I P G E O R G E”
ie. I gave him the truth; under duress of false and unlawful imprisonment [read non lawful contract]; but he created a fictional man, the ENS LEGIS / STRAMINEUS HOMO – which pre exists from your “berth” [non typo] records but he has re-created with his notepad.
When/ If the ticket reminder or the official second notice, but usually unsigned “notice” turns up at your address you see the NAME ON THE PAPER WORK IS AN ENS LEGIS and you return to the letter unopened to sender as “unsolicited mail/ or person not known this address/ or persona non grata/ or REFUSED FOR CAUSE” – there are differences between these that need to be investigated also.
there is much to say about this but it gives you something to think about.
David went into a wilderness that Endtimes seems reluctant to talk about. The woman in Revelation fled into a wilderness. The Bride is raptured away. If you treat the bible literally and believe that injustice is occurring it might be time to “discover” something new for yourselves. I might be able to point but I cannot force a horse to drink.
Also no-one can force you to accept a “fiction” as “truth”. Under torture they might get you to speak something but via the testimony of people who have been there they can never get you to believe it.
Both Satan and God Almighty treat “sovereignty” as serious issues.
His name is Kings of Kings. All Glory to Jesus.
written without prejudice, all rights reserved, and subject to peer review exclusively on this forum. (c)2007
djhouk
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 10:46pm:Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974:
I’m not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), but I take it from the thrust of your posts that you believe that Kent’s trial and conviction was a great judicial injustice. You’ve made a lot of statements that, frankly, don’t make a lot of sense to me about Kent being a person unfit for trial, the jury being erronously informed or failing in it’s constitutional duty, and much more.
In the U.S. justice system, juries determine the facts based on testimony offered during the trial. During Kent’s trial (I don’t have a transcript; my sources are the published media accounts and others who attended the trial) testimony was offered that Kent’s workers were employees, not contractors. This is an important distinction for counts 1-12 of the indictment, because payroll taxes only have to be witheld for employees. Thus if Kent’s workers were truely contractors, he would be innocent of those counts.
The instructions the judge gives the jurors are approved by the counsel on both sides. Often, the judge asks the jury to rule separately on specific facts that lead them to a verdict. To find Kent guilty of the first 12 counts, the jury would have to have found that his workers were employees. Whether that was a separate finding, distinct from the verdict, I don’t know; I haven’t seen the jury instructions. But, it doesn’t matter; for the jury could not have found him guilty of those charges if they had determined that his workers were contractors.
I don’t find anything particularly unusual about the trial. The most salient difference in this trial from the thousands that occur daily in the U.S. was that no defense was offered. That’s fairly uncommon. As I’ve stated before, the trial really wasn’t about creationism, religion, or the endtimes. It was about someone who didn’t pay taxes and tried to hide that fact from the government. To those that believe he was making some kind of religious statement, I ask, “then why was he trying to conceal his actions?”
Many of the posters on this blog appear to know little of the facts in the case. This is evidenced in the many comments about the evils of 501c3’s, the “fact” that Christians don’t owe taxes, the income tax is [voluntary, unconstitutional, or unfair (take your pick)]. None of these are relevant to the charges of which Kent was convicted.
I harbor no ill-will toward the Hovinds; I just don’t see them as martyrs.
I would not expect any success with Kent’s appeals, with the exception of the structuring counts. Kent is arguing that structuring, by the very nature of the offense, requires multiple instances. This makes a lot of sense to me (again, I’m not a lawyer), so I wouldn’t be surprised to see those counts eventually reduced to a single count, which would substantially reduce his sentence.
Maturekid
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 11:06pm:mrthrun,
A quick summary so we don’t rehash this too much. (Darling, this is just a summary not reopening the topic.) Scripture actually isn’t the primary issue in the arguments. The US Constitution is and the binding aspects of the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights and the duty of the federal government to abide by them. Prior to then Sen. Lyndon B Johnson inserting into the tax code 501.3c to effectively gag the preachers in the pulpit, government had no power or taxation ability over a church. Later on in the 1970’s, they added in provisions requiring churches to collect taxes on those under their employ.
The big bone of contention is how does the “gag order” Lyndon Johnson put in the IRS code and the later provision match up with “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,” etc.
If the tax code is the law, then it must be in line with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights the supreme documented law of the USA. Hence the argument is that what Hovind is being charged with is unConstitutional and thereby not legal in and of itself. The Structuring charges are a different story. Those charges just seem lame. So with that in mind, please rethink the topic. What do the Scriptures say about honoring what can be considered an illegal law? The topic goes far deeper than just the standard “Render unto Caesar’s what is Caesar’s” especially when the tax issue in question puts doubt on if Caesar even has a say in the first place.
Again…that is just a summary and not an open invite to rehash the topic. Others, particularly darling, have other opinions. But again, I’d recommend skimming over the last 10 or so threads to get caught up on that.
Hope that helps on the stances Peter. Sincerely, Maturekid aka Gary
PS I think I’ll save a copy of this post. It can join Endtimes final post on the topic as a copy-paste answer.
EndTimes
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 11:27pm:Jun 15 mrthrun
“Said this at 9:58am: These are the scriptures that support paying taxes and submitting to governmental authority. If Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974 and or Kent would be so kind to show us the scriptures that support not paying taxes and insurrection to governmental authority I would be highly interested. Sincerely In Christ. Peter Thrun”
Thank you for an honest question to a difficult problem. Yes, we are to submit to the governmental authority and we are to pay all taxes that are due. Yet, there is also the fact that Caesar is not to take that which belongs to God. Simply put, the tithes and offerings given to God belong to God alone. (Malachi 3:8-10) So by God’s law, Caesar has no authority at all over those funds set aside to do His work. Ezra 7:24 makes this quite principle quite explicit which is one such set of verses that you have asked for in noting not the tax exempt status of a church but instead the constitutional principle of being “nontaxable” and outside of the authority of Caesar entirely. This is the principle of God’s Word and God’s law that America at one time did honour, but now they no longer do. Dr. Hovind sought to reverse this back to the status of pre 1950s and especially pre 1984 and he has unfortunately failed at the price of his freedom.
Thus, America honoured the “nontaxable” status of the church until Lyndon Johnson in the 1950s placed churches into the “nonprofit” category with the start of the 501(c)(3) legislation. (Nontaxable and nonprofit are two totally different terms despite the similar appearance. Please remember that the Devil is sly and subtle.) Then in 1983, the Dole senate finance committee enacted legislation where they turned the churches into tax collectors for the first time here in America. So, if we were 40 years back in time, the entire persecution against Dr. Hovind would not have taken place because the manner in which he conducted his ministry was the manner in which many if not all churches operated under American law.
Dr. Hovind’s basic tax position is to restore that relationship that has been lost since 1/1/1984. Unfortunately, despite absolutely sound constitutional issues and biblical directives which our government now no longer honours, Dr. Hovind hooked up with a man named Glen Stoll who uses methods which have shown time after time to bring destruction to his clients while he sucks them dry of all that they are worth before they usually end up in prison from the advice that he has given them. So, to sum up my evaluation of the situation, there are several legitimate constitutional and biblical principles in support of Dr. Hovind’s attempt to restore that which we have lost. However, the tactics that he was advised to use by Glen Stoll are not defensible by either the constitution or sound biblical directives. So, Dr. Hovind did have good principles but I believe working with Glen Stoll was a bad execution of tactics. The answer that you are seeking I believe does not take into account the actual root of good principles that drove Dr. Hovind to even attempt his fight against the Goliath IRS. That is why I so ardently support him, despite the terror of knowing that the trust that he placed in Glen Stoll has placed in him in prison and his wife at jeopardy of prison.
Therefore, we have a sad mixture of quite highly principled beliefs that are laudible, and we have tactics by Glen Stoll that sadly are the reason why Dr. Hovind is now in jeopardy. The saddest thing is the number of people hurt by Glen Stoll and he is still free to spread his destructive schemes to those that seek the same separation from an intrusive government outside of the basic constitutional principles that once separated America from the rogue nations of this world. I hope that this is helpful and gives you a different perspective of why so many of us on the CSE blog do have strong support for this principled man.
I do not in any sense support any aspect of the tax protestor movement which you have correctly pointed out is not supported by the Scriptures. Yet we are also commanded to reprove that which is done in darkness. Daniel in chapter 6 did exactly this when he went and opened his window and prayed as his manner was after he knew that the law was signed outlawing his worship of the one true God. So, that is probably the most notable act of “social disobedience” anywhere in the Bible. Are there laws in existence today that we should likewise ignore as did Daniel? Absolutely, most especially when it comes to the gay marriage rights, abortion rights, pornography rights etc. These are absolutely against the Word of God. Practically, we must look at each law and how we can obey that law and obey the Word of God. If it is impossible to not obey both at the same time, then at the leading of the Holy Spirit, we should not obey that law period.
What is a possible solution to the dilemma of taxing the church of America today? Well, two possible answers have come to mind for me when considering what I would do myself. First, lest we offend, pay that tax that is not lawful for them to levy to be able to continue in the ministry and second, as Samual gave the children of Israel a king when he understood that the only King Israel has is God Himself, then since America and many of its churches have turned against God, turning the church into a tax collector may be allowed by God as a judgement and a curse against Laodician type churches. Just an idea, but it was a similar dilemma that Samual faced and God told him to just give them what they have requested again as a punishment against those that had fallen away. Is that a perfect answer in my mind? No not at all, but it is something that I have noted by an example of a similar situation with Samuel. Thus, even though there are many that understand turning a church or church ministry into a tax collector is completely against the principles of a New Testament church, the lack of obedience and worldliness of many churches today could cause God to remove the most important constitutional protection of the church as “nontaxable” and now place them in the category of “nonprofit” with tax exempt status instead of the absolute constitutional protection of “nontaxable.”
Thus, we may be seeing an example of God’s judgement against the lukewarm Christian worship of today. Therefore, Dr. Hovind nor any one else will likely ever find a satisfactory method for keeping the church of today from becoming a tax collector for the IRS if this is part of His judgement against us for failing to obey His commandments. I believe that is where we are actually at today and that is why we won’t find a satisfactory solution. Then the answer becomes II Chronicles 7:14 and asking the Lord to forgive us of our lack of zeal and also lack of self evaluation.
In kindness,
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 11:53pm:Jun 16 no_where_man
“Said this at 3:14am: Hence, America is Babylon the Great, who sits on many waters and rules the world with her economic and political might, that Mega-City, where “Mega” is venerated, and Christians have fallen in her trap. It is a trap of the ages.”
Dear no where man,
Thank you for the excellent listing of many of the pagan spiritual attributes of America but I do wish to note my disagreement on the conclusion that America is Babylon the Great, which I do not believe to be true. First of all, “America” is not a “city” that rules over the people of the earth with that city sitting atop seven hills. There is a much better candidate that fulfills that and all of the other MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT criteria. Just ask Samphire and he will tell you who that entity is. Secondly, simply because we find evidence of the MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT in America, that is not evidence that nation is the Mystery sun god woman, it is instead direct evidence of the fulfillment of Revelation 18:3 that states that all nations shall drink of the wine of her fornication.
However, I firmly believe America does and will fulfill another important prophetic role during the tribulation, that of the false prophet of Revelation 13:11-12. Please take a look at a prior post on this issue and look at the literal fulfillment of each element of these two verses. Mystery Babylon, no, false prophet, yes.
In kindness,
EndTimes
Ekkman
Said this on June 16th, 2007 at 11:55pm:16FuManchu
Said this at 2:31pm:
——————————————————————————–
Ekkman, I had a brief check on Wikipedia:
“The term police state is a term for a state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population, especially by means of a secret police force which operates above the normal constraints found in a liberal democracy. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive…police states are authoritarian, and are often dictatorships.”
Oddly, there’s nothing in there about it being a police state when you happen to get pulled over for infringing the traffic laws. A minor oversight; perhaps you should amend the entry.
When you’re giving a ticket for doing nothing, then it’s a police state. Instead of ‘barely’ going over a line, you don’t go over it at all; instead of going ‘about’ five miles over the speed limit, you’re well within the speed limit. If you start getting called up for that kind of thing, let us know. Until then, try driving sensibly and you’ll be amazed how the police state fades away.
Hey Fu,
Did you accidently leave out this part of my blog?
Besides the time that I have already discussed, they told me that I couldn’t preach Jesus on the streets. I told them that I could, they took me. Of course, the reason given was obstructing traffic. Even though I was only obstructing traffic by those driving their cars on the sidewalk.
That would make it a “police state” to you then, wouldn’t it? Remember the only traffic I was blocking were the ones driving on the sidewalk. Even though the cop charged me for obstructing traffic when I got to the jail, he told me out on the streets that I can’t preach Jesus out there.
It surely sounds like a police state to me. I await your apology. I threw in a few other happenings to me, just a few. They mess with me a lot.
I have already shared the info below before but I will again for you.
A woman cop pulled me over for driving too slow. I end up talking to her for over an hour and a half. She told me that she believed in evolution, abortion was fine, etc. So from our discussion I would think that driving too slow wasn’t her pet peave with me. About every thing that she told me that she was for, my bumper stickers showed that I was against. I would say they didn’t make her too happy. Just an educated guess.
I would guess that you wouldn’t have problems with that either. You might tell me that I should have been driving the speed limit. I will add because I wasn’t driving the speed limit, they kept me in the parking lot for around two hours total to search my van. I mean I had to be bad news for them, the bumper stickers, driving too slow. I mean, “Come on!” Surely I was the bad guy again. Even though most of the times I go to court, it gets thrown out but I am not so sure that at the rate we are going to being a full pledge “police state’ that I will get off with much of anything they charge me with like the “obstructing traffic”.
I will await your apology.
Ekkman
Teno
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 12:04am:Fu Manchu doesn’t think oppressive control of traffic helps constitute a police state.
Did anyone ever stop to think how odd it is that most police forces spend the majority of their time and effort babysitting traffic? Shouldn’t law enforcement be spending most of their time preventing and solving CRIMES (like murder, rape, assault, theft, etc.)?
Why is that? Revenue is probably one reason. Getting us used to control of our movement is surely another. Now there are even check lines, where cars are pulled over at random, without any evidence of criminal activity. Gasoline is over $3 a gallon. Our roads are being sold to foreign interests who will soon greatly increase tolls. We are being conditioned to have our ability to travel greatly curtailed. Why else would an oppressive gov’t spend so much of their resources on harassing traffic violators?
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 12:50am:To: no_where_man [Jun16],
an interesting post – like all of Endtimes’ – highly evocotive stuff – but where does it leave the reader?
I suspect “Babylon the Great” pre dates United States of America by at least a thousand years – and was that which took over from the Roman Empire. ie., the Roman Empire became the Holy Roman Empire and is the end of Daniel’s Vision of man-over-man-empires/ Beast of a Man – Babylon.
And again where is the “prescription” of a physician? What does “come out of her” mean?; apart from your “home group” churches!
And as for sitting on seven hills.
A. Vatican City is a Sovereign Nation State 100 percent married to the Religious-State-Run-Church; of 7 hills.
And the power she wields leaves United States Looking like a second rate bit player as far as world affairs go. So it seems to me! As for sitting on seven continents?, she has far more numerical representation on seven continents? how did we get 7? – than does USA.
Which three living current or ex presidents recently knelt before a dead pope? How many popes have ever knelt before a president [living or dead] – think about it.
Like the “Raptureready” website your ommissions speak as loudly and clearly as your inclusions.
I so much wonder about Chuck Missler – as good a reference source as he is. A man who has handled nuclear weapon and personally knew Edward Teller; yet has nothing to say about 911 – strange.
thanks for your post. I am not an SDA but I believe Martin Luther and a plethora of early protestants were unambiguous and correct about Babylon the Great – the Holy Roman Empire.
Elethiomel
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 1:13am:andries points out that “The only reason for people to “fall away totally” because “they will often link their belief in God with this stuff”, is when their faith was not rooted in the accomplish work of Christ at Calvary.”
is interesting given the insistence from many conservative christians that their particular interpretation of the Bible has to be right, or the Bible is totally wrong – such as Kent Hovind’s adherance to the KJ Bible, and the insistance of the literal nature of Genesis by groups such as AiG. It looks more like they are rooting their faith in their own arrogance that their interpretation is totally correct, and they are teaching this word to others.
FuManchu
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 9:51am:Teno,
It’s very common for people to get annoyed about the amount of time the police spend on traffic duties. It annoys me too. But I’d say that the reasons are: revenue (as you mentioned), the fact that traffic duty is necessary to stop people getting into bad habits, and the prosaic if unglamorous truth that pulling people over for speeding is relatively safe and therefore relatively popular among the police, none of whom want to get shot if they can help it. I’m not sure there’s much more to it than that.
Ekkman,
It wasn’t an accident that I left out that part; it was done for reasons of space and also for unity of subject. However, since you mention it, I’m happy to look it over.
“Besides the time that I have already discussed, they told me that I couldn’t preach Jesus on the streets. I told them that I could, they took me. Of course, the reason given was obstructing traffic. Even though I was only obstructing traffic by those driving their cars on the sidewalk.”
‘Traffic’ doesn’t just have to refer to cars. I’m not sure how it’s handled in the US, but in Britain ‘obstructing a public highway’ can involve any public street, whether on the road or the pavement. In order to ‘preach Jesus’, I imagine you had to partially block the pavement, hence ‘obstructing traffic’.
“A woman cop pulled me over for driving too slow. I end up talking to her for over an hour and a half. She told me that she believed in evolution, abortion was fine, etc. So from our discussion I would think that driving too slow wasn’t her pet peave with me. About every thing that she told me that she was for, my bumper stickers showed that I was against. I would say they didn’t make her too happy. Just an educated guess.”
It’s unlikely that she even noticed your bumper stickers while you were driving.
“I would guess that you wouldn’t have problems with that either. You might tell me that I should have been driving the speed limit. I will add because I wasn’t driving the speed limit, they kept me in the parking lot for around two hours total to search my van. I mean I had to be bad news for them, the bumper stickers, driving too slow. I mean, “Come on!” Surely I was the bad guy again. Even though most of the times I go to court, it gets thrown out but I am not so sure that at the rate we are going to being a full pledge “police state’ that I will get off with much of anything they charge me with like the “obstructing traffic”.”
From what you’ve said above, it sounds as if you argued with them. If they really did keep you for two hours while they searched your van, that’s because the police, like every other profession, have a tendency to use what powers they have to inconvenience people who annoy them. It’s not dictatorship, it’s human nature. Next time you fly, tell a security officer that he’s being too slow. You won’t have breached any rules, but he’ll mysteriously keep you back for a lengthy search because you annoyed him. There’s no need for a conspiracy theory when the answer’s simple.
Ekkman
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 12:55pm:Jun
17Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this at 12:50am:
——————————————————————————–
To: no_where_man [Jun16],
an interesting post – like all of Endtimes’ – highly evocotive stuff – but where does it leave the reader?
I suspect “Babylon the Great” pre dates United States of America by at least a thousand years – and was that which took over from the Roman Empire. ie., the Roman Empire became the Holy Roman Empire and is the end of Daniel’s Vision of man-over-man-empires/ Beast of a Man – Babylon.
And again where is the “prescription” of a physician? What does “come out of her” mean?; apart from your “home group” churches!
And as for sitting on seven hills.
A. Vatican City is a Sovereign Nation State 100 percent married to the Religious-State-Run-Church; of 7 hills.
And the power she wields leaves United States Looking like a second rate bit player as far as world affairs go. So it seems to me! As for sitting on seven continents?, she has far more numerical representation on seven continents? how did we get 7? – than does USA.
Which three living current or ex presidents recently knelt before a dead pope? How many popes have ever knelt before a president [living or dead] – think about it.
Like the “Raptureready” website your ommissions speak as loudly and clearly as your inclusions.
I so much wonder about Chuck Missler – as good a reference source as he is. A man who has handled nuclear weapon and personally knew Edward Teller; yet has nothing to say about 911 – strange.
thanks for your post. I am not an SDA but I believe Martin Luther and a plethora of early protestants were unambiguous and correct about Babylon the Great – the Holy Roman Empire.
I am not SDA either and I agree with Phillip-George. The Roman Catholic Church has killed millions of true born again believers in the Dark Ages and are still killing them today when and where they can get by with it.
From WORLD, quoted in CALVARY CONTENDER, 3/15/90, “A Feb. 2 Mexico City
prayer meeting of some 160 evangelicals was attacked by a frenzied mob of
about 10,000 Catholics using stones and machetes and shouting, `Kill them!’
and `This is a Catholic town.’ The 2/90 CHARISMA reported more persecution
and the stoning deaths of two evangelists by over 100 Catholics. Someone
said, `The trouble with North Americans and your relationship with the
Roman Catholic Church is, you don’t know what the church is like when it is
in control.’” CEC/MOTC, BOX 99141, LOUISVILLE, KY 40269
Here are a few good sites to check out regarding the whore of Babylon.
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/babylons/default.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/2594/
http://www.angelfire.com/ky/dodone/
http://www.mtc.org/
http://www.reformation.org/
You could go to my Pages, I share with Roman Catholics quite a bit too.
http://www.ekkcom.net/tchdir.htm
To be “mystery” Babylon, the whore of Babylon, then it would be associated with Babylon back then. The Roman Catholic fish hats come from Babylon, Mary, the “mother of God” comes from Babylon, thinking that they are literally drinking the blood and eating the flesh of their gods comes from Babylon, and many more that I won’t get into at the moment.
In biblical types, a “whore” would be someone in this case a “church” claiming to be the “bride” of Christ and isn’t. The “church” is shown as a woman, believers are called the bride of Christ so a false Church would be a “religious organization” claiming to be his bride or the only true church but it isn’t a part of him. I love the Roman Catholic people and I witness to them a lot but they are not Christians. They are under deep “religous” bondage to a false religious system.
Ekkman
Three Crosses
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 12:55pm:Hi, I have got a few answers for you. I hear these terms alot: 1″conservative Christian”, 2″interpretation of the Bible”, 3″soveriegn nation”, 4″police state”, 5″wikipedia”, and 6″501c3.”
1.) “conservative Christian” I would say this is like the statement, “fundamentalist muslim” One word is completely meaningless and is only meant to drive a wedge between people who should be united! The title conservative applies in some way or another to virtualy everyone, even if it’s only to say “I,m conservative about how much antifreeze I drink.” If you don’t want to believe part of the Bible because it puts to much preassure on you. Don’t blame it on those who do beleive!
2.)”interpretation of the Bible” You can always interpret anything to fit your means. I suspect, too literal a translation might leave you in the shower until you run out of shampoo, “lather, rinse, and repeat.” I see the Bible two ways, mostly straight forward, but there are also many places (as in the parables), where you can take many, many meanings from the same verse.(It was designed to be that way!)
“Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”Luke 22:36 King James Version
As I see it, most people just choose to agree or disagree with whatever parts they please. If you approach safety instructions on your lawnmower in the same way, we won’t have to worry about you for long!!!!
3.)”soveriegn nation” There are many soveriegn nations that don’t have to succumb to are nation’s laws here within our borders! It seems to require one of three things: 1.You have to reach a high enough political stature(Clinton’s impeachment & Bush’s shooting of an endangered bird while he was governor of Tx). 2.You get yourself so ingrained in America’s cities and “Free market” that they can’t get rid of you (Walmart illegally restrains people, blatantly invades their privacy when they search through their property, and to my experience, our law overlooks their truck’s traffic violations). 3. Reach a high enough celebrity or financial status.(to many examples to list OJ, Lohan, Moon etc) I almost forgot oil companies, they don’t have to pay taxes or succumb to price gouging inquiries, a blend of all three examples!
4.”police state” A police state is a society that is policed in just about everything depending upon how far it’s carried. Basically, being robbed of your freedoms to make sure of what you’re doing or not doing. This is why we’re monitored everwhere we go, they put cameras on all the light poles and stop lights, “onstar or it’s equivalent” is in all new cars and at least in my state they’re holding old people down and chipping their right forarms under the pretense they know what’s good for them.
5. “Wikipedia” It’s very interesting that a publicly written, (not thoroughly researched), encyclopedia can be as accurate as Encyclopedia Brittanica, (both claim a 4% error rate). I can change only 4 words out of a hundred and change just about anything, (a subject better suited for a Bible version discussion).
6.”501c3″ I hear a whole lot about how satan’s little tool, (the 501c3) doesn’t have anything to do with Kent’s case. I think most ministers in this country have slipped this, “voluntary leash” right over their own heads. Most unintentionally, they just agree because everyone else does. While some of the “law worshippers” are right. Kent was not charged with not signing the 501c3, (it’s voluntary!!!) He fell under the IRS’ microscope because, without the “said document” his ministry was not tax exempt meaning that in the laws eyes, it was not a ministry. Like the rest of the world, if the government doesn’t control it then it’s not a ministry.
In closing, I hope you understand that these law worshippers post here for practice. Their future depends on their ability to play semantics,(word games)and their ability to twist interpretation of law,(or the Bible) to suit their arguements! This is why they generally only quote part of EKKMAN, ENDTIMES AND MANY OTHER’S COMMENTS!
Thank you so much for reading, God bless america God save us all!
warocuya
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 3:11pm:mrthrun,
I am going to try to avoid being overly direct.
What happened to the 60 million or so Native Americans that used to be here? Here’s a hint – Governement (your governement) + greed + guns … Be careful with whom you side with because Jesus would not have murdered us. Remember the midwives that disobeyed the King of Egypt. They were blessed by God. Why?
Simple math – Good tree = good fruit – Bad tree = bad fruit.
Now think about what I said above about my people, their land and your government.
Warocuya
An American Indian
The real argument is – Is the Constitution really the law or not. If it is – Kent is innocent – if not then he’s guilty. See “Freedom to Facism” by Aaron Russo – video.google.com
[EDITOR'S NOTE: ...Were there even 1 million Native Americans on the continent during the 19th Century? ...? There were no permanent cities, but some "towns." When Lewis & Clark walked West, they sometimes went for weeks without seeing another human being. No one was there. There were lots of buffalo. The continent was almost empty then, except for a few scattered tribes, right? The battles between settlers & soldiers vs Indians were usually a few hundred or less in a battle, correct? ... I understand that what I am writing is "politically incorrect" but I believe that it is instead historically accurate, which is more important. Compared to battles in the US Civil War or WWI, the battles in the "American West" were actually all small skirmishes. (Even the Battle of "Little Big Horn" with General Custer, involved less than 400 US soldiers. Were the number of braves over 1,000? Contrast this with D-Day, where 160,000 Allied troops with 30,000 vehicles landed at Normandy.) Am I wrong? Please explain - where does the "60 million" number come from? Aren't there actually more Native Americans alive today, statistically speaking, than ever before in known history? By the 18th & 19th Century almost no one was in most of North America, to the best of my understanding. And if "mass murder" was what America did, then why are there more American Indians today than ever before, sir? If I am wrong, please do correct me. P.A. ]
GORGE
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 4:53pm:Dear djork,
You said
” e.g., he set their working hours, docked their pay if they arrived late, directed their assignments, etc. In U.S. employment law, these are the kinds of things that classify folks as employees ”
But “those kinds of things” can equally and obviously be applied to contractors.
GodBless
selenamj
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 4:53pm:Dear Kent,
We met you in Fresno California at the homeschoolers conference. We have continued to pray for you and your family everyday. A scripture that my sons and I want to share with you is ” Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding, in all your ways aknowledge Him and He will make your paths straight.” Prov.3:5-6. Count all our suffering as joy knowing that when we suffer, we suffer for Him.
In Christ,
Selena Mejia
Turlock,Ca.
baliset
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 5:16pm:EndTimes no longer seems as keen to discuss the issues surrounding the reason this website exists. This website exists to support the man and the ministry of Kent Hovind. EndTime’s diversions are presumably because by now, this is an unsustainable exercise.
The editor of this site has, to my general surprise, actually permitted some debate and some criticism of Kent Hovind in the comments. This is commendable, especially since Creationism is normally distinguished by a wilful deafness to criticism, denial of clear evidence contrary to their views, and a universal demonisation of the very notion that one can be a Christian, and yet, not a Young Earth Creationist.
Unfortunately, the Editor’s normal even-handedness seems to be slipping. My comments, squarely relevant to the reason the site exists, get censored. EndTime’s ad-hominem comments, calling me “evil”, “accursed”, “deceiver” and questioning my salvation, make it through whole.
EndTimes also links and quotes from my website, which I can scarcely object to, since I am perfectly willing to put my name, publicly to what I write. EndTimes does not seem able to return the courtesy, criticising from the cowardly refuge of anonymity. My shoulders are plenty broad enough to bear EndTime’s ignorant rage. EndTimes is mistaken on every count.
EndTime’s umbrage springs entirely from the mistaken belief that Young Earth Creationism (and the simplistic literalistic Bibliolatry that causes it) represents “true” Christianity. Few people here on this site who support Kent Hovind seem to realise that there is a world of Christianity outside the USA that rejects, outright, the notion that the world is 6000 years old. There are Christians, a majority by a clear margin outside the ecosystem of the US Bible belt, who EndTimes will deny are saved because of their “apostate” belief that the first two chapters of Genesis are not literally true.
Thus you see why this should be opposed, and vigourously. Kent Hovind was an engine of apostasy. Kent pushed a message that was fringe and disreputable even by Creationist standards. Answers in Genesis disowned him. His fake Doctorate was exposed. Finally, tragically, his conduct brought him to prison. EndTimes is entirely wrong if he thinks this brings me any joy at a personal level. One might experience relief that he is no longer able to go from Church to Church to spread a message that enforces the prejudices of some but was far, far more likely to cause “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you” (Romans 2:24) because of the way in which specious arguments about dinosaurs or Noah’s ark were falsely linked to the Gospel message.
So yes, as much as EndTimes takes exception to me, I think he (or she) is on shaky ground. I feel no need to defend myself or the legitimacy of my own salvation. I can shrug off his claim that I “deny Jesus as my Creator” when my life, employment and ministry over the years show otherwise, but that is not the point of this website, so I shall not labour that point.
EndTimes equates those who reject Kent Hovind’s discredited message with Bible-haters, Jesus-deniers and mockers (all terms EndTimes has used). Ironically, I regard my trenchant criticism of Kent in exactly the same terms as he does; as “Earnestly contending for the faith”. I reject utterly that, in opposing liars or thieves who hide behind the veneer of piety, I am doing anything less than the God who *is* the Author of all Creation, would expect me to do.
As far as “not kicking a man when he’s down”; If Kent pleaded guilty and served his sentence without recourse to a blog to continually inform us of his thought life (which remains unrepentant), then no commentary from anyone would be necessary. However, this website invites us to take sides. That’s all we’ve done.
I’m afraid that EndTimes that he does not realise the Enlightenment (that little thing that happened half a millennium ago) is on my side, but not his. His is a medieval, narrow, ignorant worldview. Frankly, the way he slights sincere Christians who choose to believe that the findings of Science since the Renaissance do *not* represent a monstrous humanist conspiracy designed to “do away with God”, is really insulting.
I am a Christian. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour. I do not believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, nor do I believe that it is wise to season the Gospel with obvious lies about the natural world and its age. To do so is morally repugnant. EndTimes cannot admit that such a person as I can exist and remain “uncompromised” in my faith.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: I APOLOGIZE! ...I thought the message you sent in yesterday was a "double-post". As far as the "even-handedness slipping" I would reply: Luke 6:26 "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets." And I would add, "You can please some of the people, some of the time, or so it seems ... until you find out their true opinions."
The guys who want to mock prayers and our Maker's responses ... I don't really want to give them, as "spiritual luddites" a forum to mock people of faith. They are limited in their dimensional understanding of the universe, which does NOT make them "more advanced" than believers. If they want to believe that all that is revolves around human understanding, let them. It is their right in this life, i.e. temporarily. They, like the consensus of scientists for over 1000 years who mocked Galileo, can presume that "everything revolves around us." (The parallel is one of backwards "experts" holding back deeper understanding and truth, due to their pride and their errant belief that it is all about them being at the center of things.) A few of the anti-God "hit messages" with disdain for the spiritual and with sarcastic blasphemy against God do not help anyone, IMHO. -Let's have discussion. But please limit open disdain for those who are "not as advanced" as those persons (unlike myself...) who think they have it all figured out. P.A. ]
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 6:42pm:Dear djhouk [jun16 10.46pm.]
Quote you: “the jury could not have found him guilty of those charges if they had determined that his workers were contractors.”
Unquote: I repeat myself – you earlier asserted as positive “fact” that they did determine those people were “employees”
You later qualify your statement with what could have or should have happened.
I might as well just “cut to the chase” with more of my signature “hyperbole” – I will call what you have done “necromancy”
I cannot call it “forensic” [I know it technically to be an adjective - and I know I am using it well here]. I cannot call it “love of the truth”. I cannot call it “science”. I cannot call it “do justice and love mercy and walk humbly before YHWH”
Your a priori unspoken assumption is that if something happened it must have happened “de jure”.
I shudder at what you have done.
Again I will de base my own status posture with condescending hyperbolic ranting – making word associations that you find incomprehensible.
This whole thing would be funny but for the “fact” that a man has been put in Jail, a Church Ministry defamed, ridiculous prisoner movements have taken place, a transcript has purportedly not been released, I could rant on and on and on ……….
All for Samphire’s “entertainment” – how droll – how very droll.
mrthrun
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 7:51pm:Dear EndTimes, thank you for your post. You have answered well. And I agree whole heartedly that those laws which transgress the law of God we are not to obey. Peter asked the question of whom we should obey, man or God. We obey God first and government second. But if we believe, which I think you do, that if God’s word tells us to pay taxes, which it does, then we pay taxes. And that is all I was trying to say. I am not against Kent Hovind, I have a set of his creation tapes at home and watch them now and again. However, all though he was led astray, I still believe, that if he would confess his error, God would forgive and restore him. He made an error, we all make errors, but we are all commanded to confess our faults one to another and pray that our sins would be forgiven.
Concerning your views on the coming judgement I whole heartedly agree. In fact, the judgments pronounced in the first 3 chapters of the book of revelation will be meeted out against the churches of North America and the churches of the western world unless the church gets right with God.
Concerning the churches as tax collection agents for the IRS. Well if churches stopped incorporating, payed their taxes as individuals, met in homes, used their money to feed the poor, pooled their money together to help their members in need, honoured the laws that don’t transgress the law of God, then I believe that the IRS, Revenue Canada, and other tax agencies couldn’t do what their doing. But by instituting tithing,(non-Newtestament) and tax reciepts(Jesus said they have their reward already) we have given control to the government.
Bartering systems are totally leagal non-taxable means of an economy, at least for now. So if I see you in need, and I buy you food, you don’t have to report that food as income, thus no tax. Or if I build a house and let you live in it, pay your utilities, and let you borrow my car, that is all tax free. But as soon as I pay you cash, that is income and taxable. That is why the new testament had all things in common.
So thank you for your comments, they are well recieved, Sincerely in Christ. Peter Thrun.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 8:08pm:this is just a personal lament.
for a long time now I have lamented at the number of people who are not talking “inside” of the church;
people such as: David-Wynn:Miller, Victoria Joy, Len Clampett, Harry James Townsend, Mary Elizabeth Croft -
it is not that I agree with everything, or even most of, what these people have to say. It is that they are telling pieces of a story that needs to be heard.
I lament that Alex Jones “should be” the number one Guest Speaker in Every Church across America. It is not that I agree with everything he is saying. It is that he is telling part of a story that needs to be heard as a high priority to the pursuit of Justice, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I lament that in the Church of the Laodiceans, Jesus was on the outside of “a” Church – knocking to be allowed in.
I got to go do stuff now – today is a busy day for me.
Jason
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 8:27pm:Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this at 12:50am:
I so much wonder about Chuck Missler – as good a reference source as he is. A man who has handled nuclear weapon and personally knew Edward Teller; yet has nothing to say about 911 – strange.
_________________
I found out about the controversy surrounding 911 about 18 months ago, up until that time I was comfortable within a mainstream Christian mind set. After discovering that there was a controversy, I spent my time looking at the evidence, exploring the plausibility factor etc.
I found the phrase “Conspiracy Theorist/Theory” used again and again, spoken in such a way as to say… Have You been tricked into believing a “Conspiracy Theory”?…. Don’t be so gullible.
I searched the internet for Christian websites which addressed the issues, I found none (at the time) from the mainstream that even mentioned it. I wrote to one or two sites and got a little response, but was brushed off because they were too busy to debate such a ridiculous idea.
One of the more responsive sites was actually Chuck Missler site, Phillip George is right, Chuck has nothing to say about 911. However I was able to discuss “Conspiracy Theory” as a concept within itself.
The question was raised, “What conspiracy theories are true?” It’s a trick question (in a way).
That which is known to be true is not theoretical, where as that which is theoretical awaits a verdict true or false…
The only answer one can give is “I don’t know of any”. Yet I feel very opinionated.
The interesting thing I find is that everyone who believes in the resurrection of Christ is considered to be a conspiracy theorist.
Those who believe ‘the disciples stole Jesus’ body’ conclude it is a whacky idea to believe that Jesus was resurrected upon the third day, so therefore it is a ridiculous “Conspiracy Theory” to think it was the religious leaders, WHO LIED about the empty tomb.
Mat 28:12-15 And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers, (13) Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept. (14) And if this come to the governor’s ears, we will persuade him, and secure you. (15) So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.
__________________
I like Kent Hovind, He is willing to talk where others say nothing.
I want to thank everybody who fights on Kent Hovind’s behalf, I enjoy reading the posts, although I don’t contribute much I do thank God on Kent’s behalf that you are here.
Lots of Love
Jason x
PS I just want to say that that I agree with Phillip George Chuck Missler is an excellent reference source.
EndTimes
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 10:54pm:Jun 17 Elethiomel
Said this at 1:13am:
“is interesting given the insistence from many conservative christians that their particular interpretation of the Bible has to be right, or the Bible is totally wrong – such as Kent Hovind’s adherance to the KJ Bible, and the insistance of the literal nature of Genesis by groups such as AiG. It looks more like they are rooting their faith in their own arrogance that their interpretation is totally correct, and they are teaching this word to others.”
Dear Elethiomel,
It appears that you were up past your bedtime with this post. Sorry, it is not arrogance to know and defend the truth. Actually, it is God throughout the Bible that over and over again makes claim that He is infallible. That is not a notion that any man came up with. It is simply a characteristic of our Holy God and our loving Creator. I for one would love to go back to the evolution and creation debate on this site but that is not likely to occur, but I never did get an answer to the Perry Marshal question.
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 10:57pm:Jun
17Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this at 12:50am:
——————————————————————————–
“To: no_where_man [Jun16],
an interesting post – like all of Endtimes’ – highly evocotive stuff – but where does it leave the reader?”
It leaves the reader with a point of reference to begin their own study. If people are not interested, then they will not learn what is in the Bible to learn. I will not force it upon them either, that truly is casting pearls before swine with the deep and profound truths of the Bible. So, I leave it up to the reader whether they wish to bite or not. If they wish to study it out themselves, there is plenty to find if they will only look.
In kindness,
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 11:06pm:Jun 16 djhouk
Said this at 10:46pm:
“Many of the posters on this blog appear to know little of the facts in the case. This is evidenced in the many comments about the evils of 501c3’s, the “fact” that Christians don’t owe taxes, the income tax is [voluntary, unconstitutional, or unfair (take your pick)]. None of these are relevant to the charges of which Kent was convicted.”
It also appears that you have not grasped the often repeated constitutional and biblical positions that Dr. Hovind was rightly fighting for even though I do not agree with his tactics through Glen Stoll. You also do not see the implications of a goverment that no longer honours the “nontaxable” position that the church once held based on different spheres of authority which was spelled out in the original intentions of the constitution. If you do not see these as important questions to defend then I can’t really help you. So, you keep sliding away from very legitimate points of contention in this case that are honourable to defend. It appears that you have a complete lack of understanding of the historical protections under the constitution in the name of separation of church and state that are now gone. This is lamentable and I for one will continue to defend the historical account even though I recognize that it will never be restored no matter how many protest its demise. It is a sign of the times that we live in. So, all of the topics that you have listed above are absolutely related to the charges against Dr. Hovind despite your pleas to the contrary.
In kindness,
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 11:26pm:Jun 16 2ndamenduser
“Said this at 7:43pm: Lastly, is there anything that Christians not in Florida can do to help bring to justice those who may have violated the Hovinds’ right to life, liberty and the pursuit of the will of God (which is the only way to happiness) and their 1st amendment rights and/or any other rights which may have been violated?
Asking for a pardon is the worst thing one can do if they are not guilty.
Blessings on those who love righteousness, cursings on those who love pride, selfishness, frowardness and deceit.
A Pastor from the West “
Dear Pastor from the West,
First, please show me anywhere in the NT that we are to wish for cursings upon our enemies. You are not teaching the truth of the love that Jesus had for his enemies of which you and I were once His enemies as well before we came to salvation. I am really getting tired of “Christians” on this blog not representing the love of Jesus. One verse will suffice my point:
John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Please Christian, represent the Christ of the Bible that gave His life for us while we were yet sinners. Please Christian, stop proving the claims of our enemies of our “self righteousness” and arrogance and start instead to have the love of Christ to preach the gospel to ALL creatures even those here on this blog. You are not helping the cause of Christ with ignorant remarks calling for cursing.
Sorry, but we all need to represent the love that Christ has for ALL sinners including you and me. If anyone disagrees with me then I would love to have the opportunity to list a dozen or more verses to show you that any Christian that posts on this blog articles of vengeance, that you are not representing my Lord and Saviour correctly. In addition, all of these hate filled comments could be used as an excuse for further “special treatment” for Dr. Hovind so you are potentially endangering him more.
People please grow up and stop using your knowledge of the Lord as a curse to any man when God meant it for a blessing, that is a blatant travesty of His love.
Secondly, the answer to your first question is II Chronicles 7:14. There is no other method to accomplish what you wish to accomplish. People get on board with the Scriptural methods of fighting spiritual warfare, on your knees before the throne of God.
In kindness,
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 17th, 2007 at 11:37pm:Jun 15 Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this at 7:14am:
“As for peculiarities about Louisiana – maybe the High Altitude Auroral Research Project had something to do with it all. Also I believe Louisiana has not ratified or adopted article [or chapter] 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Perhaps it was singled out for unusual treatment. You have already pointed out the unusual quite well. But how far can you stretch your own imagination.
Bizaare is an uncomfortable way to think.”
Dear AG,
It is not bizarre to understand unusual governmental actions that are then followed by specific legislation to abrogate further restraint against dictatorial powers in our so called democracy. It is instead bizarre for people to ignore the obvious before our face in a such a manner as to prove the Orwellian mind control techniques used today against the general American populace. Have the people of America really become that complacent already??
In kindness,
EndTimes.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 12:43am:RE: Endtimes [jun16 11.27pm], but also to all Witnesses, sons of God, Faithful and True Who Shall Judge in Righteousness
Quote: “I believe …………….. we won’t find a satisfactory solution.”
This is your contribution to the blog. That summates your posturing.
I lament that in/ at the times of the Church of the Laodiceans, Jesus was on the outside of “a” church – knocking to be allowed back in.
This is where things are at. A lot of Christians who might know about “stuff” are being totally overlooked. Some whistle blowers have completely given up on churches as offering any forum to consider opportunities for redress.
As a group of people one of the nicest things one could say about that very visible church is that it is of “the sleepwalking” or “disinterested” / “lazy”/ “fat”/ “gluttonous” – and, in need of nothing.
Why did there need to be a “911 truth movement” independent of a very visible church – because the visible prolific church wasn’t interested in their testimony.
People have escaped the beast, you just haven’t sought them out or talked to them ….
Jesus said, “to those who overcame ………..
Jesus, said “come out of her…………….
YHWH said, “come in” to Noah, at the time of the ark’s readiness – indicating He was on the “inside”:- perhaps getting his own hands dirty helping to shovel shit while the world was drowning.
I am happy to take those immediately above words before Jesus’ Glorious Throne.
[remember it was a Religious Fraternity sitting in council with a Legal Fraternity that Crucified the Very Word of God, Ultimate Truth, Jesus Himself.
All Glory to the King of Kings my God.
What colours are flying from your mast? Whom do you serve?
Harriet
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 9:46am:Bloggers,
Pardon this post if it is irrelevant to your arguments. My focus, instead is on one of Brother Kent’s remarks, concerning scriptural justice.
Our nation is in dire need of prison reform and Justice reform. Ya know, with the divorce rate out of control, [shoot]ing your spouse is not as bad as it used to be. In West TN, in the last 2 years a minister’s wife shot her husband in the back, and ed him. After her being justified in the courtroom, and downgraded to manslaughter, she recently got a 7-day sentence http://orig.jacksonsun.com/winkler/ Getting seven days ain’t bad. BUT if you disagree with the IRS over $$$, you might get 10 years!
This is UPSIDE DOWN justice! God’s perfect law converts the soul (Psalm 19:7). We need to flip America right side UP! Scriptural justice allows for beatings (Deut.25), fines (Ex.22), and (Ex.21:12) but never prison! A jail should only hold over those waiting judgment, and be not a place of ongoing punishment. Correctional Institutes are not correcting anything! Being caged like animals, inmates search for thoughts or things to take their mind off of the “nothing”. Their energies are squashed instead of being funneled into repentance. If the Justice system followed God’s law, the souls of inmates could be converted.
We need to flip America right side up! Who will lead this revival?
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Well … 1. Get REAL (honest) news. 2. Privatize the Schools (so your kids get a real education). 3. End (unconstitutional) Judicial Review. … that is my idea for turning things around. P.A.
http://www.creationism.org/mp3/RescuingAmericaAbramson.mp3
Three Crosses
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 10:14am:Dear Editor you asked about native Americans.
We only have evidences of how many there were. The native americans were masters of conservation for an indeterminate amount of time before the American settlers came. We do have however so many buriel mounds across just North America that they don’t even attempt to catalog them! Unfortunately we will never be able to answer your question, disease spread much faster than we did. Most estimates I’ve heard have been about 20 million in north America because each large mound is considered a city (some fortified). If a Native American city was wiped out by disease or something else the survivors would bury or burn it in an attempt to stop it from spreading.
Warocuya may be aware of some evidences that I am not or he may mean north and south America(eskimos?)
When diferent “scientists” have attempted to determine how many of these large hill and plateaus were buriel mounds they were generally overwhelmed!
The subject of their current population is the same as that of hispanic Americans their current populations are figured including mixed blood not strictly native Americans.
It’s quite interesting however that this works as proof of how long humans have been on the earth. Humans unlike any other animal are not seperated by any species. Any human who is fertile can go anywhere else in the world, mate with any other human (of opposite sex) and have viable offspring.
Therefore if humans had been here more than a few thousand years there would be no races just one.(mongols, saxons, romans and moors…. changed the colors of entire nations in a few short years each)
Thanks for hearing my opinions God bless america God save us all!
david84ss
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 12:12pm:Very inspirational. I pray God will give me that sort of courage if I am put in a similar situation.
Samphire
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 12:32pm:“All for Samphire’s “entertainment” – how droll – how very droll.”
For my entertainment, P-G, perhaps as a linguistic exercise you would describe in as few words as possible but so that an English-speaking Martian could immediately master the technique exactly how you tie your shoelaces without falling over – presumably, sideways.
warocuya
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 2:10pm:Hi Paul,
As per recent studies on Native Americans, there were more natives than previously thought (Discovery Channel, Smithsonian etc) I used a large number to make a point. The country must adhere to the Constitution or we will have innocent people in jail like Dr. Hovind. mrthurn’s point was Hovind didn’t pay his taxes. My point is – are these taxes Constitutional? What is the real law? And if this land was stolen, what really is the law? I want him to understand that siding with Jesus is better than Rome, USA or any man made thing.
I know that there were around 500 nations for all of the Americas. My tribe had at least 6 million people. These estimates are based on the settlements found and the amount of them. We had so many people that we left united states area and migrated to Peru then left Peru traveling along the Xingu river to the carribean and then to Florida. In our tribe we push out the younger people to find new areas to populate do to the overpopulation of certain areas. (see 500 Nations the book or the program).
500 nations at around 100,000 is about 50 million. I mean the whole of the Americas, including Peru, Canada etc. I consider all natives people in this hemisphere to be Americans. Lewis and Clark didn’t see many Natives but we saw them. We would be moving to look for other food supplies so as to not tax the land. Also, Lewis and Clark traveling in a line could easily miss natives 20 miles away. Also, History is often told but the conquerers. Research just on my tribe has us at about 6 million. But I understand deseases and other factors but in all this is still our land. Only Joshua was given the mandate to clear out the Canaanites not Columbus or anyone else.
I do appreciate your hard work brother Paul,
Thank you for all you are doing for the cause of Christ,
Warocuya
Thank you brother Paul,
Warocuya
EndTimes
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 4:34pm:Jun 17 baliset
Said this at 5:16pm:
1) “EndTimes no longer seems as keen to discuss the issues surrounding the reason this website exists. This website exists to support the man and the ministry of Kent Hovind. EndTime’s diversions are presumably because by now, this is an unsustainable exercise.”
Not at all Nathan, I have made note of my strong support of Dr. Hovind many times over especially since he is a brother in Christ. If you were his brother in Christ, would you publicly call him a “bonehead creationist?” Sorry, but guilty or innocent, I shall always have a love in my heart for the man that saved my dear son by his seminar. WRONG #1
2) “Unfortunately, the Editor’s normal even-handedness seems to be slipping. My comments, squarely relevant to the reason the site exists, get censored. EndTime’s ad-hominem comments, calling me “evil”, “accursed”, “deceiver” and questioning my salvation, make it through whole.”
Sorry Nathan, but you need to reread the Scriptures that I quoted that bring into question your convictions. It was not my own contentions that you are now disagreeing with but the Holy Scriptures themselves. I simply pointed out for all to read what the Word of God clearly states. You can either believe and obey His Holy Word, or you can disbelieve and disobey by your own free choice my friend. So, how can the editor edit God’s Word for which you seem to have very little love? By the way, I am simply a “bone headed creationist” simply responding to you in kind. You started the ad-hominem comments first. What’s the matter, can’t take the heat my friend? Well, get out of the kitchen then. WRONG #2
3) EndTimes also links and quotes from my website, which I can scarcely object to, since I am perfectly willing to put my name, publicly to what I write. EndTimes does not seem able to return the courtesy, criticising from the cowardly refuge of anonymity. My shoulders are plenty broad enough to bear EndTime’s ignorant rage. EndTimes is mistaken on every count.
Dear Nathan, I have my own website on another topic of which I not only have my name, I also have a point of contact through my own personal email for those that agree or disagree with anything that I have likewise publicly written. Yet, here on CSE, I have chosen to use the anonymity of a pen name to first of all not advertise my own self interests/website per CSE’s request and to instead focus this blog on Dr. Hovind and secondly, my own website is completely off of this topic and at present, I will not advertise that which would indeed be a great distraction to the cause of Dr. Hovind. Otherwise, I would be most happy to show you my true colours here as well. But for the purposes of CSE, that is not necessary. Many likewise have chosen to do the same on this site and I honour their own reasons for this choice as they have mine up until you came around here. It is after all still a “free country” my friend. In addition, I have responded in kind to several on this blog in my own name at their request by email and I still do. However, since you are not likely to wish to be my brother in Christ anytime soon, I will forgo that direct a relationship with you at this time. Lastly, if you had a need to know, then I would readily supply it and who knows, perhaps in the future that could occur. At present, there is no need that I can see at this time. Hmmm, Paul didn’t put his name on the book of Hebrews either. Did that make him a coward?? I don’t think so. WRONG #3.
EndTimes
Samphire
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 4:45pm:Hi Endtimes,
“You also do not see the implications of a goverment that no longer honours the “nontaxable” position that the church once held based on different spheres of authority which was spelled out in the original intentions of the constitution.”
But what constitutes “the church”? Do you discriminate between “the church” and religion generally? Should Roman Catholics, Coptics, Mormons, Scientologists and Raelians all receive the same tax-free regime as that which you would grant to Episcopalians and Baptists? How do you guard against corruption? How do you stop abuse by those tithing churches with their rich pastors and personal jets? Should the “religion” of evolution receive the same benefits?
Kind regards
Samphire
EndTimes
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 5:17pm:Jun 17 baliset
Said this at 5:16pm:
4) EndTime’s umbrage springs entirely from the mistaken belief that Young Earth Creationism (and the simplistic literalistic Bibliolatry that causes it) represents “true” Christianity. Few people here on this site who support Kent Hovind seem to realise that there is a world of Christianity outside the USA that rejects, outright, the notion that the world is 6000 years old. There are Christians, a majority by a clear margin outside the ecosystem of the US Bible belt, who EndTimes will deny are saved because of their “apostate” belief that the first two chapters of Genesis are not literally true.
Dear Nathan, my umbrage springs forth from any man that will call Jesus Christ a liar as you have done on many occasions. Jesus quotes literally from the book of Genesis many times over. Sorry, but I will defend all that He has stated as true and accurate in all details. I do not deny any man to be saved you falsely claim, yet the Scriptures clearly teach that if any man gives you a different gospel than the gospel which was once delivered to the saints by the apostles, then that man is accursed. The gospel includes the simple fact that Jesus is the Creator of this creation. Since you choose to publicly deny this simple truth, then I will show all the Scriptures that prove you are not speaking for the Lord, nor the true church when you continue in such comments. Either the Words of Jesus are the truth or your words are the truth. I vote against your words. I leave it for all here to read and judge the truth from the Scriptures alone.
Galatians 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Secondly, the literal truth of the Scriptures is confirmed in the NT every time that the gospel writers wrote something to the effect of “thus was fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet . . .” ALL of those prophecies were literally fulfilled by our Saviour and Creator Jesus Christ of Nazareth. It is a shame that you haven’t learned such a simple truth. It’s all a matter of faith and belief in the true Word of God. So, either get in the boat or get out, you can’t have it both ways. WRONG # 4
5) Thus you see why this should be opposed, and vigourously. Kent Hovind was an engine of apostasy. Kent pushed a message that was fringe and disreputable even by Creationist standards. Answers in Genesis disowned him. His fake Doctorate was exposed. Finally, tragically, his conduct brought him to prison. EndTimes is entirely wrong if he thinks this brings me any joy at a personal level. One might experience relief that he is no longer able to go from Church to Church to spread a message that enforces the prejudices of some but was far, far more likely to cause “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you” (Romans 2:24) because of the way in which specious arguments about dinosaurs or Noah’s ark were falsely linked to the Gospel message.
Dear Nathan, I love the epistle of Romans and I have quoted it many times as well. However, I never quoted it out of context as you have. Let me show you a couple of other verses that you might some day wish to learn that are as well to be used in the context of the verse that you quoted for me.
Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
So which part of the Creator in these verses is your so called apostasy to be found my fine four footed creature lover? It does not appear to me that it is Dr. Hovind that is the messanger of apostasy, but perhaps someone else closer to home.
Take a look at a couple more verses from Romans that you might some day be interested in as well. Perhaps a little more time knowing and understanding your Creator would have been the first place to start before you begin a crusade against the man that you call your Saviour. That is a strange way to show your love and affection for Jesus if I ever did say so myself.
“Romans 2:19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,
20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.
21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? . .”
WRONG # 5
EndTimes
Samphire
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 5:39pm:Three Crosses said: “Humans unlike any other animal are not seperated by any species. Any human who is fertile can go anywhere else in the world, mate with any other human (of opposite sex) and have viable offspring.”
All animals are separated into species including humans. You might just as well have written with equal inaccuracy “Dogs unlike any other animal are not separated by any species. Any dog which is fertile can go anywhere else in the world, mate with any other dogs (of opposite sex) and have viable offspring.”
Therefore if humans had been here more than a few thousand years there would be no races just one.(mongols, saxons, romans and moors…. changed the colors of entire nations in a few short years each)
Yes, those stone-age motorsickles got everybody round the place really quickly. In England, until the arrival of the railway in the mid-1800s, the vast majority of people had never travelled more than a couple of miles from the village in which they were born. Even today, it is reputed that there are a few people on the Isle of Purbeck (7 miles by 1 mile) who have never even ventured the couple of miles into Weymouth. The reason different languages are spoken around the world is not some nonsense about a Tower of Babel but because, until the advent of the steam engine, populations generally could not travel widely in large numbers and therefore did not mix with other populations. In America today the lingua franca remains English and not some confection developed from the 100 nations and more who make up the present population and yet the individual racial groupings still reflect their origins.
EndTimes
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 5:48pm:Jun 17 baliset
Said this at 5:16pm:
6) So yes, as much as EndTimes takes exception to me, I think he (or she) is on shaky ground. I feel no need to defend myself or the legitimacy of my own salvation. I can shrug off his claim that I “deny Jesus as my Creator” when my life, employment and ministry over the years show otherwise, but that is not the point of this website, so I shall not labour that point.
,b>Dear Nathan, sorry again but I stand on the firm foundation that no other man can place, Jesus Christ of Nazareth and of the apostles that have built upon this sure rock of salvation, the Lord God, Saviour and Creator:
I Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.
Pray, tell, what foundation are you standing on to get your perverse ideas of the Bible and of the Lord Jesus Christ our Creator? So far, all that I see in writings are wood, hay and stubble. I have yet to see any gold, silver or precious stones.
And for one more time, you, Nathan were first in calling my salvation into question by your comments placed on your blog from the very first comment at the very bottom of your page that you typed out with your hate filled diatribe against creationists. Here is the quote again that started your wonderful “intellectual” entanglement in hate speech against people that you likewise call hypocritically your “brethren.” Sorry, but I don’t believe you for one minute. You know them by their fruits.
Just who is it in your blog that you imply God does not know huh Nathan?? Who do you think you are fooling anyway?? WRONG # 6
“WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 2004
In the beginning
In the beginning, the world was formless and void. And the spirit of the Creationists hovered over the waters, proscribing just how God was permitted to create the Universe, lest the creationists’ faith be bruised by the knowledge that the world was in fact older than 6000 years. And lo, God spake and said “has it occurred to you that I’m quite capable of doing this without your input?” Verily, the creationists were astonished by this hubris and said “well, when your Son comes down in some future age and he gives his life for the sins of the world, we’ll make sure that when we spread that message, we’ll encumber our audience with unlikely claims of lions eating vegetarian and Koala bears walking across two continents and swimming an ocean to get to their habitats. And we’ll also insist that if they don’t believe our claims, then they can’t really be saved, can they?”
And God said “Do I know you?”
http://baliset.blogspot.com/
So far, you have proven over and over again that you “worship” Jesus from ignorance and not from knowledge of who He truly is. It appears in my mind that He is still an unknown God to you my friend for you and I truly do not worship the same God of the Bible. What was that foundation that you stand on?? I missed that. No Nathan, it is you that started your “ministry” questioning the salvation of some very devout believers in Christ such as myself. I have only returned that question in kind to you for your consideration which you apparantly have not considered.
Acts 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 6:10pm:Jun 17 baliset
Said this at 5:16pm:
7) “EndTimes equates those who reject Kent Hovind’s discredited message with Bible-haters, Jesus-deniers and mockers (all terms EndTimes has used). Ironically, I regard my trenchant criticism of Kent in exactly the same terms as he does; as “Earnestly contending for the faith”. I reject utterly that, in opposing liars or thieves who hide behind the veneer of piety, I am doing anything less than the God who *is* the Author of all Creation, would expect me to do.”
Sorry, but I was a creationist a long time before I ever heard of Kent Hovind. It is God’s message that you attack, not Kent Hovind’s. How can you at the same time call God the “Author of all Creation” yet deny that He is the Creator. That my friend is not only hypocritical, but it is also schizophrenic type thinking to hold two contradictory thoughts in your mind at the same time. You need to study logic and truth a little closer my friend. So who is it that is truly the liar and the thieves hiding behind a veneer of piety.?? Not me my friend, I am a sinner saved by grace and glad of it. How are you expecting to get to heaven? Gee, is that going to be a literal place or is it just another inaccurate confabulation of man as you claim all of Genesis is??
WRONG # 7
As far as “not kicking a man when he’s down”; If Kent pleaded guilty and served his sentence without recourse to a blog to continually inform us of his thought life (which remains unrepentant), then no commentary from anyone would be necessary. However, this website invites us to take sides. That’s all we’ve done.
All I did was quote a number of Scriptures to show that you are not correct in your theology. You did not get these interpretations from the same foundation that I did.
WRONG # 8
9) I’m afraid that EndTimes that he does not realise the Enlightenment (that little thing that happened half a millennium ago) is on my side, but not his. His is a medieval, narrow, ignorant worldview. Frankly, the way he slights sincere Christians who choose to believe that the findings of Science since the Renaissance do *not* represent a monstrous humanist conspiracy designed to “do away with God”, is really insulting.
Sorry, but you called me a “bone headed creationist” first so yours was the first insult not mine. Secondly, while I was pursuing my undergraduate studies, the history, music, art and philosophy that started the sciences during the “age of enlightenment” lead me to such a voracious appetite for all the details of them that I could possibly digest that I was rewarded with my degree in Biology with a minor in math and another minor in chemistry ( I would have also had a minor in History if I would have realized in time that two of my required courses counted for that minor, but I fell one class short of this) with SUMMA CUM LAUDE placed on my diploma. ( I actually took 25 credits with 4.0 gpa in one short semester) This was also of great value to me while I completed my medical degree shortly thereafter. So, I think that you tried to imply as most “evolutionists” do that I must be ignorant, however, I will stand my academic record against yours any day my friend.
But the greatest value I have ever received from any form of study is when the Lord Jesus Christ showed me that His Word is the true literal Word of God. Perhaps you might someday learn of the truth of His Word as well if you would take a little time to study it more closely.
WRONG #9
Endtimes
Jason
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 6:48pm:Australian Philip George
I’ve said before that I appreciate your presence upon this Blog. I always try to read your posts, but I have to confess I do sometimes struggle with respect to the discussions you have on Law especially Tax. I mostly put this down to the fact that by design the documents in question describing a legislative intent are confusing in the way they are written. This confusion coupled with people who posture themselves as being intelligent enough to understand them clearly (the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes” comes to mind) leaves me personally dead in the water.
You seem to be able to stand your ground in this respect and so again I say I appreciate you being here, & I’m glad you decided to stay a little longer.
Some time ago I spoke about your wondering concerning EndTimes’ presence here. If I may again be so bold as to comment;
Your Comment June 18th 12:43am:
RE: Endtimes [jun16 11.27pm]
Quote: “I believe …………….. we won’t find a satisfactory solution.”
This is your contribution to the blog. That summates your posturing.
First of all I would like to state my position; I have never known anybody (besides Jesus) with whom I totally agree down the line. This means that I expect when meeting anybody, I will find that a point comes where there is a disagreement. Nobody agrees with me about everything, and I am sure that you to will find me disagreeable also. Hopefully not so much as would cause you to dislike me.
I don’t agree with all that EndTimes says, I’m not so sure that where EndTimes and mrthrun agree I can stand with them in that agreement.
Maybe I am wrong but I studied Romans 13, looking at the context and meanings of each word, and I believe there is room to say that Paul is instructing people to subject themselves to their Christian Pastors & Teachers etc who are ordained By God, and that they should tithe a proportion of their income.
However my differences of opinion are not fundamental, I am not lead to question EndTimes heart concerning who he serves.
Please don’t think that I am now criticising you, while thinking what to write, it occurred to me that you remind me of Peter, impetuous, eager to stand up and be counted, forthright in your manner. Leaping up to Jesus’ defence when the guards came to arrest him, wielding your sword, ready to fight, and zealous for the cause.
Sometimes Jesus called Peter… Simon
I lament also for the church, it bothers me also that the mainstream church isn’t separated from the state enough to shout at our worldly leaders and hold them to account for their actions. The idea that Jesus might vote into power a member of “Skull and Bones 322” to me is insane, yet that is what the body of Christ has been encouraged to do… virtually unchallenged.
My passion is for the unity of the body of Christ in Love, that when He comes back He finds the perfect bride.
If things need to be said, let’s say them in Love.
With Love
Jason x
EndTimes
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 7:03pm:Jun 17 baliset
Said this at 5:16pm:
“10) I am a Christian. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour. I do not believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, nor do I believe that it is wise to season the Gospel with obvious lies about the natural world and its age. To do so is morally repugnant. EndTimes cannot admit that such a person as I can exist and remain “uncompromised” in my faith.”
If you truly believe that Jesus is your Lord and Saviour, then so be it. However, if that is true then you are still in trouble due to Romans chapter 14 when you publicly question the salvation of “bone headed creationists” “like me” on your website. Let me share this with you for your own study. If you don’t believe that Jesus created this world, then by your faith keep it between you and your own master, whoever that is. Yet, at the same time, why do you ridicule my beliefs that have come directly from God’s Holy Word and yet you would still call me a “brother” by your claim to be a Christian. If you are, that is good. However, your public crusade against Bible believing creationists does not lead me to any conclusion that you are my friend or fellow supporter of the truth of God’s Holy Word. Moreover, you have once again called God a liar here again in your last comment. You are not opposed to me, but instead you continue to deny the truth of His Holy Word. I think that is not a good position to be in heading into these last days. Once again, the gospel is about the Creator who became our Saviour. Your gospel is not from the Bible. Sorry, but the Bible is the one that states any that come with another gospel shall be accursed. Perhaps you should study out what the gospel really is my friend. The Creator and the Saviour are one in the same. That is the gospel in a nutshell.
You are also wrong that I believe someone like you could be saved and not believe in an young earth. At one point in time shortly after I came to the knowledge of Jesus Christ as my Saviour, I followed some of the teachings by Hugh Ross who is an “Old Earth” creationist. Yet, I didn’t go around demonizing YECs who didn’t believe just as I did at that time. I took it as a matter of faith for either view to be judged by their own master, not me. Yet, your writings are not filled with the love of Christ for those that disagree with you on the age of the earth and that is my contention with you and not anything else. I do not call anyone that uses the type of terms that you use to describe YECs a brother for your fruit is not filled with love. Sorry, but the Bible specifically calls us to be weary of such people that do not have a love of the all brethren whether weak or strong in the faith.
So, my friend, if you are a Christian, I stand before you today and plead with you that your writings are offensive to me not because they are true, but simply because they are offensive and written in an insulting manner. If you are truly a brother in the Lord, then remove your offensive comments from your blog and stick to objective facts and I will agree to disagree with you with the love of Christ between us. Somehow, I believe that my simple request will be offensive to you even though it is a genuine request from a Christian “brother.”
WRONG # 10
Romans 14:1 HIM that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
4 Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s.
9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men.
19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
EndTimes
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 7:44pm:Dear Samphire and warocuya [jun18], God bless you both,
I am glad I find your postings are back to back today – and their contents perfect for discussion development.
Quoting Samphire: “English-speaking Martian”
Unquote:
this gave me a really good laugh. Last night I went to a lecture that included time on the Natural Born Original Title Bearing People of North American legends relating to the Skin Walker Appearances.
In brief it seems “to me” to be some type of demonic shape shifting geographically constrained entity:- like the moth man phenomenon it appears to me that the stories/ testimonials are cogent and reliable.
Now Jack Cuozzo [Phd] has done excellent work on the Neanderthals that you, Samphire, will also have to totally dismiss – because your well defined religion cannot accommodate his findings.
But a skull has turned up that provides prima facie evidence for what I personally call extra dimensionals/ fallen and degenerate angel -beings having hybridized with “the woman” – see book of Genesis – Nephilim, Rephaim, Anakim …….
The book is “The Starchild Skull” and the author is Lloyd Pye
The Skull has been fluoroscope and C.T. scanned – it a serious piece of anatomical anomaly.
Now I might disagree with many or most of his conclusions but the evidence I have to deal with.
Now this whole thing helps to demonstrate the difference between you and I, quite perfectly.
For you extra terrestrials [I vastly prefer the description extra dimensionals] can be nothing more than a “joke” with which opportunity affords for attempts at ridicule. But for warocuya the alternative readings on history are not only obvious, they are vastly superior. brother warocuya, I suspect, is not troubled by the evidence for spirit beings – “skin walker” appearances. I, likewise, am not troubled by extra dimensional incursions into this time space continuum.
Most of the U.F.O. searcher community I think of as wrong because they dismiss the biblical account a priori.
And most of the church, have their heads so far up their own rectums they see about as much light of day as you do Samphire. My boots are well laced and these boots are made for walking.
You are the quintessential skeptic Samphire, made almost a “demonstation piece” for closed mindedness.
So thank you very much for your post – I laughed profusely.
Also to: Jason – spot on the money trail – thanks.
I hope to get back tomorrow with alternative methods for signing documents – God willing – all glory to Jesus.
Harriet
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 8:35pm:Paul,
Please, I need more instruction about unconstitutional Judicial Review. This is completely a new concept for me. And HOW do we end it?
[did my cybersitter clip some of my words out of my last post?]
[EDITOR'S NOTE: In the USA the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. After the Preamble, it starts: "Article I Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Section 2. ..."
All law-making powers are vested in Congress. That is all for Section 1. The House and Senate are to make the laws. Each representative is elected for specific term(s) of office. We have "Citizen Review" every 2, 4 & 6 years - called elections. No other law supersedes the Constitution, except where it has been amended. There are now 27 Amendments to the Constitution. Not a single one of those amendments secedes legislative (law-MAKING) power from the legislature to the courts. That is not in the Constitution, nor in the Amendments. (There is only a court case, Marbury v. Madison (1803), whose decision was actually never acted upon by President Jefferson. A court case, one ignored by the then sitting president, is NOT in any way an Amendment!)
America is in a fog. We live in an age of deception. 2 Timothy 3:13 "But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived." You and I have been deceived. Jesus said, (Matt. 24:4, Mark 13:5, Luke 21:8) "Take heed that [no man] deceive you, ….”
Abracadabra!, Shazam!, Unconstitutional!, Simon Says!, Alakazam! These are all magic words. “Citizen Review” of our law makers is what is CONSTITUTIONAL. “Judicial Review” is not in the Constitution, nor in the Amendments. Therefore every time a judge exclaims “Unconstitutional!” – that very act is unconstitutional. If they want to MAKE laws, let them run for the legislature, just like everyone else. The job of judges is to adjudicate and to uphold the legally constituted laws – but NOT to override and “make” their own laws up. Abortion, “homosexual marriage”, and many other “laws” instituted in the US today – were invented by rogue judges. They are MAKING laws. Some of them should be impeached for stepping outside of their oaths of office to uphold the Constitution. They are using a “magic word” to go around our representative government. The first step – is that on a daily basis we need honest news. Hosea 4:6a “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge…” Get out of deception! We must learn what the truth is – daily; instead of being subtly deceived – daily. No one can do that for another person. Gen. 3:1a “Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field….” It is a subtle daily deception. Please listen to my MP3 or Google Video “Rescuing America.” Ending this unconstitutional “judicial review” (#3) is also absolutely essential, or our republic will soon fall.
Judicial Review – is Unconstitutional! It is Unconstitutional for a judge to even say: Unconstitutional! Citizen Review of our law-makers is what is Constitutional. // Right now it seems that no one understands this. It is an uphill battle. America remains in a fog, it seems …. Here is a full copy of the US Constitution and its Amendments: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html
Today on my Internet radio program (unless … technical difficulties intervene) I will spend the hour explaining this issue. http://www.truthradio.com – 5PM EDT (or 2PM PDT) P.A. ]
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 9:32pm:The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler [We know Him as Jesus], so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.
Which of the “two sovereigns” is imbued with the Moral Law? [this is the key to everything and about every contest]
“The art of using troops is this:
……When ten to the enemy’s one, surround him;
……When five times his strength, attack him;
……If double his strength, divide him;
……If equally matched you may engage him;
……If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing;
……And if in all respects unequal, be capable of eluding him,
- Sun Tzu, the Art Of War, written somewhere in the 6th Century B.C.
“if in all respects unequal” – maybe this day all you are ready to do is elude; but then is that what the woman going into the wilderness is:- please take this as something to consider in a bible study.
How Pyrrhic a Victory it would be if all one accomplished was to avoid petty bureaucratic charges; such as an IRS sort of applicatin.
I hope people shall grasp a greater vision for the real church than that.
All Glory to the King, our King [please cut and paste this post on the inside of your brain]
robtzfamily
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 11:24pm:Dear Brother Kent,
We are STILL praying daily for you, your family & the CSE Team (also for End Times). We love and appreciate all of you!
We’re grateful for being able to get a small insight into what you (Bro. Kent) are having to endure. And of course, feel extra saddened, when we compare your current circumstances, with ours – a warm, comfortable and loving environment. But as you are well aware, our loving Father in Heaven is just as much present with you as He is with us and, (to our shame) probably more proud of you than with us. As, no matter how difficult your present trial may be, you still continue to produce good fruit.
May our Lord continue to be your closest companion.
With lots of Christian love, always,
Wayne, Anne, Daniel & Rachel Roberts
1 Peter 5:7
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 18th, 2007 at 11:57pm:mrthrun [jun17,7:51pm]:
“……as soon as I pay you cash, that is income and taxable.”
Peter Thrun.
Dear Mrthrun, this is exactly what people are trying to discover. What money movements exactly are taxable? Should you be concerned with agents acting on behalf of the IRS being in a possible criminal breach of the Constitution of the united States of America?
Further, since money is no longer “lawful money” as was once written on U.S. Treasury Notes, but is now “legal tender”, does this mean all money really belongs to the owners of the Federal Reserve Bank? After all, it has all been “lent out”. It is all created as a lone secured by “your” valuable consideration. But then if it was created out of nothing, what valuable consideration really is there?
If all money then was created from a loan arrangement is it really yours to begin with. When you pay “cash” are you really paying off a debt or perpetuating a fraud. If you are behaving in a fraudulent manner perhaps you would like to use a shelf company called an ENS LEGIS – STRAMINEUS HOMO – JURIDICAL CORPORATE COLOURED PERSON to actually handle the fake money for you in order that you not be charged with unlawful deception/ fraud?
These are by no means trivial questions and I suggest to all of my learned friends that courts, be they Admiralty and/or Courts of Competent Jurisdiction, would rather stamp a file as NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE; NOR TO BE CITED IN ANY OTHER COURT [or words to those effect] than to really deal with them as issues in the public domain.
thus a Pyrrhic Victory; and we all walk away with clean hands and consciences, and get on with the real business of the Gospel, with all of its eternal consequences.
Sincerely
Phillip-George [brother rather than Mister] (c)1974 All Rights Reserved, forgive me if I take a long time to make a point.
dtoitw
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 3:07am:A comment like the following always makes me wonder.
“I am a Christian. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour. I do not believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, nor do I believe that it is wise to season the Gospel with obvious lies about the natural world and its age. To do so is morally repugnant. EndTimes cannot admit that such a person as I can exist and remain “uncompromised” in my faith.”
Are you only trusting Jesus to save you, but not to tell the truth all the time? That appears to be the message with such a comment.
Do you not believe the Lord when He says:
1)”I am the way and the truth and the life”
2)”In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”
3) “But at the beginning of creation God `made them male and female.”
4)”He (the devil) was a murderer from the beginning”
5) “And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.”
Do you think that the Lord did not mean what He said, or maybe did not clearly and correctly expressed Himself. Can He be the truth but not speaking truth clear and correct all the time?
For me it is clear, Jesus does not lie, He says what He means and means what He says. Humans were created at the beginning, immediately the devil started murdering righteous people of which Abel was the first. It really seems to me that Jesus is also a young earth ( about 6000 years) creationist!
Three Crosses
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 10:11am:SAMPHIRE SAID
“All animals are separated into species including humans. You might just as well have written with equal inaccuracy “Dogs unlike any other animal are not separated by any species. Any dog which is fertile can go anywhere else in the world, mate with any other dogs (of opposite sex) and have viable offspring.”
Two small questions 1.) Please name two species of human?
2.)Please show instance of a great dane mating naturally with a teacup poodle and having a viable offspring?
(or a mastiff mating naturally with a pomeranian?)
While you’re at it since wolves, coyotes and dogs interbreed naturally, in the wild and have viable offspring maybe you can point out where a human has mated with some form of ape and had viable offspring.
Your second statement
“Yes, those stone-age motorsickles got everybody round the place really quickly. In England, until the arrival of the railway in the mid-1800s, the vast majority of people had never travelled more than a couple of miles from the village in which they were born. Even today, it is reputed that there are a few people on the Isle of Purbeck (7 miles by 1 mile) who have never even ventured the couple of miles into Weymouth. The reason different languages are spoken around the world is not some nonsense about a Tower of Babel but because, until the advent of the steam engine, populations generally could not travel widely in large numbers and therefore did not mix with other populations. In America today the lingua franca remains English and not some confection developed from the 100 nations and more who make up the present population and yet the individual racial groupings still reflect their origins.”
Now that’s pretty funny! Do you contend that nomadic people, conquerors, explorers, Ghingis Kahn, curiosity, galleys and sailing ships did not exist pryor to the steam engine?
I appreciate that people come up with all sorts of arguements for their point of view. I would have to say, to make it scientific you have to include all evidence not just theories. I don’t think any of my examples came after the steam engine (which was limited by where tracks were laid). I am also pretty sure that England took part in the crusades and colonized a large part of the globe. I could however be wrong. The people on the Isle of Purbeck may have been there since, they evolved from clams! Sorry about that, maybe we’re leaving out where they came from, to try and support your arguement.
Thank you ever so much for your theory that all languages arrived through isolation and not communication.
God bless america God save us all!
Harriet
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 10:48am:Paul,
Wow, I feel so deceived. Does this have anything to do with “case law”? Doesn’t case law have its roots in European history? Christians everywhere are always celebrating this or that judicial decision…seems like we’ve all been applauding the wrong things.
I feel like I’ve been asleep for 20 years.
Will you record today’s lecture? I won’t be at my computer when it airs…
H
EndTimes
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 11:15am:Jun 18 Samphire
Said this at 4:45pm:
But what constitutes “the church”? Do you discriminate between “the church” and religion generally? Should Roman Catholics, Coptics, Mormons, Scientologists and Raelians all receive the same tax-free regime as that which you would grant to Episcopalians and Baptists? How do you guard against corruption? How do you stop abuse by those tithing churches with their rich pastors and personal jets? Should the “religion” of evolution receive the same benefits?
My dear Samphire,
I just first of all wish to express my appreciation for you as a man that knows how to disagree without resorting to ungentlemanly attacks. I have actually learned from you on this account. I again attribute that to your wonderful mother and father but perhaps that is an unfair assumption.
The answer to what constitutes a church is best answered by what constitutes a “church ministry.” Can anyone state that Dr. Hovind’s CSE ministry was not motivated purely on the principles of NT evangelism using the creation/evolution debate as his venue? The answer to that is of course CSE is a bona fide church ministry. That has never been in question. The issue of church and religion is again unfortunately in the eye of the beholder. I believe for any of us to have religious freedom, then we need to have religious freedom even if I don’t agree with that religion.
Now, the answer to the third question: “Should Roman Catholics, Coptics, Mormons, Scientologists and Raelians all receive the same tax-free regime as that which you would grant to Episcopalians and Baptists?” Actually they already do with the prime example of the state prison system here that even has an Indian lodge where they are allowed to practice their religion. But again, the constitutional guarantees for Christian churches were not tax-free/tax exempt, they were NONTAXABLE due to the two different spheres of authority recognized in one form or another by our government until January 1, 1984. Since then, no Christian has been able to freely exercise their religion without first checking with the IRS. That is the principle that led Dr. Hovind to seek refuge with Glen Stoll and that is why he is now in prison, because he listened to Glen Stoll. It was not his principles that placed him in prison, but the tactics he sought while paradoxically seeking first of all to honour the sovereignty of God and to return America to honouring the constitution but unfortunately the man that he placed his trust in is far from trustworthy.
Now, to answer the tough question on how to keep the crooks from taking advantage of the system, we must first note that the constitution was designed to govern a people that were self governed by the gospel of Christ. In other words, the founding fathers of America sought principles of freedom and organization from people that were motivated by biblical commandments against stealing, killing etc. The success of the constitution in its first 150 years is directly attributable to Christian principles held widely by the wide majority of people in America even if they did not profess Christ themselves. My mother is an example of that with her principles of decorum until marriage yet she was not and is not a Christian (much to my chagrin) and these prinicples are no longer honoured by the majority of 18 year olds here in America today. Thus the answer for the success of religious freedom is a populace that was able to tell by the fruits of corruption whether a ministry was worthy of support or that they were simply making merchandise of the household of God. Thus, prior to recent memory, there was a sufficient majority of God fearing Christians that self evaluated the fruits of those that professed to be serving the Lord. Unfortunately, the general populace of today has forsaken the pursuit of the truth of the Bible for self actualizing gurus that will make them feel good about themselves. So the Benny Hinn’s of the World should be completely broke if the people that went to his camp meetings would faithfully compare the fruits of his actions against the commandments of the Lord.
We thus again go back to the entire founding principle of a document to govern a self governing people. Since we truly do not have many self governing people in the Christian sense here in America anymore, then that in itself becomes the biggest threat to religious liberty since the IRS will now come in and govern that which we have not. Sad, but it points to a gloomy outlook for religious liberty in America. Yet, we should not be surprised since the Bible warns us from the proverbs of this very thing:
Proverbs 28:2 For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof: but by a man of understanding and knowledge the state thereof shall be prolonged.
So, the Laodicean church of America is actually to blame for its own loss of religious freedom. (Samphire, note that this church age starts with a statement against those that deny God is the creator, i.e. Uncle Charly is used as one of the markers for the start of the Laodicean church age.)
Revelation 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;
15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
In kindness,
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 11:27am:Jun 18 Jason
Said this at 6:48pm:
“I don’t agree with all that EndTimes says, I’m not so sure that where EndTimes and mrthrun agree I can stand with them in that agreement.
Maybe I am wrong but I studied Romans 13, looking at the context and meanings of each word, and I believe there is room to say that Paul is instructing people to subject themselves to their Christian Pastors & Teachers etc who are ordained By God, and that they should tithe a proportion of their income.”
Dear Jason,
I didn’t understand where your disagreement with my comments to mrthrun are separated since your comments on Romans 13 are what I agree with as well. Would you be kind enough to tell me in little more detail what it is that you don’t agree with regarding my comments to mrthrun. (Simply for my own edification) My suspicion is that we probably do not have much of a disagreement. In any case, if you would be kind enough to elaborate a little more, I would appreciate it. I likewise totally agree with your comments about the Skull and Bones 322 issue.
“I lament also for the church, it bothers me also that the mainstream church isn’t separated from the state enough to shout at our worldly leaders and hold them to account for their actions. The idea that Jesus might vote into power a member of “Skull and Bones 322” to me is insane, yet that is what the body of Christ has been encouraged to do… virtually unchallenged.”
Thank you as always for your faithful support of the Lord,
EndTimes
Three Crosses
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 11:27am:Samphire also said this
“But what constitutes “the church”? Do you discriminate between “the church” and religion generally? Should Roman Catholics, Coptics, Mormons, Scientologists and Raelians all receive the same tax-free regime as that which you would grant to Episcopalians and Baptists? How do you guard against corruption? How do you stop abuse by those tithing churches with their rich pastors and personal jets? Should the “religion” of evolution receive the same benefits?”
Here’s a point by point (Endtimes, I beg your pardon, I hope you don’t mind if I answer this also)
“But what constitutes “the church”?
According to the New Testament I belive it is any time two or more Christians are gathered together, more than one group would be “churches”. According to our government it’s anyone with a “501c3″ even if they worship “The process of evolution”
“Do you discriminate between “the church” and religion generally? Should Roman Catholics, Coptics, Mormons, Scientologists and Raelians all receive the same tax-free regime as that which you would grant to Episcopalians and Baptists?”
You seem to have left out a whole lot of religions. I try not to discriminate against any group of people, even those bent on my destruction. Many, many people blend religions there are quite a few that post here that mix evolution with Christianity. Our beloved president seems to mix a vast array of religions. There are also press photos of hitler coming and going from every kind of church and temple in Germany during his rise to power. Once again, only those organizations with a “501c3″ are exempt your point seems to be mute.
“How do you guard against corruption? How do you stop abuse by those tithing churches with their rich pastors and personal jets? Should the “religion” of evolution receive the same benefits?”
It seems to me that you are just sadisticly rubbing salt into a wound. Bible believing Christians are the only religion that isn’t tax exempt, the religion of evolution has been tax exempt since it’s been taught in public schools! No one can guard against corruption, it’s only our job to tell the truth. “Law worshippers” have passed several hundred thousand laws under the pretense of: it’s to protect us. Eleven would suffice. That is your corruption, the law worshippers, the politicians and their often unwitting supporters who want everyone to believe they’re just dumb animals. It justifies what they do with children or if we wipe out another race (or country). How do we guard against the millions of dollars the evolution preachers that run the churches that go under the guise of public schools? I’m not to worried about people tithing to the government controlled churches. Dear sir: I understand your arguement and how much sense you can make out of it when it enters your mind. I have always been a skeptic myself. The only difference is I woke up and excepted God’s wisdom! God has you here for a reason! Science does not back the religion of evolution. Five of my dearest friends are all physicians, they all know we were designed and one of my best friends was the chemistry proffessor at are local college until he was dismissed for teaching simple truths. Why dear sir do you strike blindly at the truth and science for a religion that offers only a lake of fire!
God bless america, God save us all!
Harriet
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 1:32pm:Is this, the Judicial Review concept, what Brother Hovind is standing upon? I’ve wondered from time to time “doesn’t Kent Hovind understand case law?”
I want to faint. How can Kent Hovind stand alone against our entire country’s misunderstanding? Is this a war with the judicial system of injustice? Did William Wilberforce face even such a huge obstacle?
Somebody needs to write a book. This is HUGE.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Well, if we think in terms of "catalysts" then the question is what catalyzes other things? For example, Pearl Harbor or 9/11 each catalyzed America to war. The invention of the printing press (1440s) helped to catalyze the Protestant Reformation, as the printing and reading of the Scriptures began to spread. If you and I stop getting news (#1) from left-wing papers that co-mingle truth with deception; then work to get our children (#2) out of daily educational deception; and (#3) recognize that "Judicial Review" circumvents the intents of law-making in our constitutional republic - then I think it would solve most other problems in the US. It would/will take years. But it starts with us. The left-wing is strong in the media, in the schools, and in the courts. Let us re-capture all three of these! Then they will lose their power over us. Again though, it will take years.
I do have a book written, about a year old. But it remains unpublished. I have thought of just posting it online, as it is not possible to get it printed at this time. I cannot seem to get others to "catch the vision" of how things are connected and why we keep losing the Culture War.
We get hit with injustices. Why are they becoming so common? What has gone so very wrong with our society? Dr. Hovind points back to the late 1950s; after Sputnik, evolution (posing as science) gained new emphasis in the schools. It catalyzed less respect for the Scriptures. In 1962-63 they began taking prayer and the Bible out of the schools (as the next step downward). We need daily news that empowers and enables us. That will positively catalyze other things. Please listen to my MP3 or Google Video, as time permits.
Today's program on http://www.truthradio.com should be recorded and be made available in the archives tomorrow, for those interested. P.A. ]
Jason
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 6:29pm:In reply to EndTimes request for detail about my comments
June 15th mrthrun
Said this at 9:58am:
Why Kent and Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974 need to repent:
…… Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause PAY YE TRIBUTE also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
(This is extracted from Romans 13)
….These are the scriptures that support paying taxes and submitting to governmental authority. If Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974 and or Kent would be so kind to show us the scriptures that support not paying taxes and insurrection to governmental authority I would be highly interested. Sincerely In Christ. Peter Thrun
June 16th EndTimes
Said this at 11:27pm:
Jun 15 mrthrun
“Said this at 9:58am: These are the scriptures that support paying taxes and submitting to governmental authority. If Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974 and or Kent would be so kind to show us the scriptures that support not paying taxes and insurrection to governmental authority I would be highly interested. Sincerely In Christ. Peter Thrun”
Thank you for an honest question to a difficult problem. Yes, we are to submit to the governmental authority and we are to pay all taxes that are due…
As I read mrthrun, he is stating that Romans 13 supports paying taxes and submitting to governmental authority, he believes Kent & Phillip-George need to repent of this oversight .
In your reply to mrthrun you do not question this assertion but instead you seem to comply with it.
It is not the paying or not paying of Taxes I am troubled by it is the Romans 13 assertion I have a problem with when I said…
I don’t agree with all that EndTimes says, I’m not so sure that where EndTimes and mrthrun agree I can stand with them in that agreement.
Maybe I am wrong but I studied Romans 13, looking at the context and meanings of each word, and I believe there is room to say that Paul is instructing people to subject themselves to their Christian Pastors & Teachers etc who are ordained By God, and that they should tithe a proportion of their income.
If I misunderstood you I am sorry, & I didn’t mention it to cause conflict between us, I had actually written a post to talk about my study but when I read your reply to mrthrun I thought it better to not post but only to mention what I found. Speaking here upon this blog I am cagey about saying things which might undermine other Christians as they honestly attempt to answer difficult questions from sceptical people.
With Love
Jason x
Samphire
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 7:01pm:Hi 3 Crosses
There are not two species of human – that is my point. All dogs are genetically capable of interbreeding even though man’s deliberate interference has made the physical logistics somewhat tricky – a female Great Bernard with a male chihuahua, for instance.
“Now that’s pretty funny! Do you contend that nomadic people, conquerors, explorers, Ghingis Kahn, curiosity, galleys and sailing ships did not exist pryor to the steam engine?”
If nomadic people interbred with other nomadics of different tribes they would still be nomadic and, assuming only sporadic interbreeding, the tribal traits would be retained. Of course galleys and sailing ships existed before steam engines were invented but it takes more than a large rowing boat to move populations into other populations. Although there were migrations of populations throughout history and pre-history many of which can still be traced in large measure such movements were relatively localised and not great enough or often enough to cause all of humanity to become coffee-coloured. Certainly, the fact that we are not all racially identical is no support for the idea that the Universe is only 6,000 years old.
“Thank you ever so much for your theory that all languages arrived through isolation and not communication.”
What is your theory explaining where the Basque people of southern France and northern Spain obtained their language? It was not by communication with their neighbours since it bears no relation to either.
Kind regards
Samphire
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 8:40pm:“Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11.. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner’s report that will lead to our demise.
Congressman James A.Traficant Jr.
Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol.33
Paul Abramson, you might still be missing the point in a big way ………..
It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has
been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1,
Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and
insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint
Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause
dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official
capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and
Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal
Government exists today in name only.
The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International
Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now
operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers.
With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the
receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the
United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an
established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This
act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office
of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International
Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part:
“The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing
the United States.”
These are not “opinions” from a Judge aka. Judicial Review.
If Brother Kent had have gone into that “court” room with nothing but an American Flag, the Holy Bible and the Constitution and insisting that the “law of the land” be upheld, he might have stood a chance. His only option was to charge the agents acting for the IRS with a criminal breach of the Constitution and Unlawful acts and to insist that a Jury determine his complaint. If the Judge would not listen he would have had to have had them charged with treason.
alternatively he might have simply tendered a affidavit declaring that he is not the PERSON named on the documents before the court but that he was there to represent that entity. He might have thus had to have communicated via written communications to avoid confusion.
He should not have entered a plea when there were more serious matters before the court, such as money laundering for a foreign criminal syndicate.
So, how to sign your name:
1. JOHN HENRY DOE
by John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Authorized Represetative
2. JOHN H. DOE
by John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Auth. Rep.
3. JOHN DOE,
by John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Agent
4. By order of: JOHN HENRY DOE
by John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Authorized Representative
5. By order of: JOHN H. DOE,
by John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Auth. Rep.
6. By order of: JOHN DOE,
by John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Agent
7. By John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Authorized Representative
8. By John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Auth. Rep.
9. By John-Henry: Doe (C) year of your majority,
Agent
Year of your majority is best taken from Hebraic Law [13 y.o.] or Old Roman Law [14 y.o.]
///////////////////////////////////////////////////
Three Crosses, thanks for your post; “law worshippers” isn’t one I’ve thought of before.
and between you and me I found another quote for Samphire,
“Minds are like parachutes – they only function when open” Sir Thomas Dewar
ps. you might like to hunt up the Lloyd Pye testimony; both mainstream churchies and the U.F.O. crowd want to sideline this man. Both of them are too stuck in their dogmas to want someone with a entirely new piece of the jigsaw
artemis
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 9:34pm:Harriet said: Is this, the Judicial Review concept, what Brother Hovind is standing upon? I’ve wondered from time to time “doesn’t Kent Hovind understand case law?”
I want to faint. How can Kent Hovind stand alone against our entire country’s misunderstanding? Is this a war with the judicial system of injustice? Did William Wilberforce face even such a huge obstacle?
Somebody needs to write a book. This is HUGE.]
Hi Harriet, could you tell me what you’re seeing or saying here. Maybe a brief explanation or even another site to learn more about what you said? It seems you might now more about it since you wondered if Dr. Hovind understood case law. I’d really appreciate knowing more- I have asked family and friends to keep him in prayer- if this is ‘huge’ then there is more news for me to give them. =) Thanks, in Christ, artemis
Thanks editor for your comments. Were your commment’s addressing Harriet’s post? If so, I still didn’t follow- maybe your book would help….
JR Turner
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 11:20pm:May you find some comfort for your souls in these short stories my brothers and sisters. I did!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMF_24cQqT0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byqRyMtxfCs&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQYrF2g_48o&mode=related&search=
“A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” (Jesus as quoted by John 13:34-35)
“I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3-4, NIV)
“And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not”. (Galatians 6:9, KJV)
Kent and Jo are INNOCENT!
metrump
Said this on June 19th, 2007 at 11:27pm:Wonderful update, I thoroughly enjoyed it, thank you for painting a picture of your suffering. I will continue to pray for you and your family.
Be encouraged God is right beside you, this is only the second time I have ever written in a blog the first was also your blog. You inspire me to continue the fight where I work and at home to count my daily blessings. You are not only touching people in jail you are touching others who love you and believe in you. Keep running your race and fighting the good fight. As a fellow Grandparent I have to say how proud I am of you.
That may sound a little corny but I wanted you to know how much you and your DVD’s have meant to me. My struggle is not like yours but sometimes I feel like I am in prison myself. My husband is not a believer and I feel like I am going through my own solitary confinement. You give me hope and encouragement to press on and not to complain as often as I do. With Love and Prayer for you and your family I thank you for keeping the faith …
Samphire
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 7:54am:Hi Three Crosses,
“According to the New Testament I belive it is any time two or more Christians are gathered together, more than one group would be “churches”.”
So, if 2 or more christians get together to buy a plot of land and build a house in order to sell it at a profit they should pay no tax? How about baliset? If baliset gets together with a Roman Catholic to buy the plot of land should the profit be tax-free? I believe that Endtimes seems to doubt that baliset is a christian because he does not believe what Endtimes believes Jesus believed about the literal truth of Genesis and therefore believes baliset should pay tax.
On the other hand and ignoring what Endtimes says to the contrary Kent is quite happy to pay tax. “Show me the law and I will pay the tax” he said on the prison pre-sentencing tapes.
“You seem to have left out a whole lot of religions.”
My apology to any religion, sect, cult, belief system or groups of two or more christians gathered together if I failed to mention them.
“It seems to me that you are just sadisticly rubbing salt into a wound. Bible believing Christians are the only religion that isn’t tax exempt, the religion of evolution has been tax exempt since it’s been taught in public schools!”
Clearly, I am masochistic but not sadistic. If evolution really was a religion (which of course is not the case) then by your definitions whenever two or more evolutionists are gathered together to make a profit then they should pay no tax. As I understand Endtimes, he says no: the tax-exemption should only apply to christians. Hence my enquiry of him as to his definition of a christian. Whereas I understood it was the simple idea of believing Christ to be your eternal saviour it appears from his responses to baliset that one must also believe exactly whatever it was Jesus believed about the Big Bang. It rather begs the question as to what Jesus would have understood about chromosomes and why humans have 23 pairs while apes have 24. (see if I can slip that one past PA without him noticing)
“God has you here for a reason!”
I don’t think so. In so far as free will exists then I am here of my own volition.
“Five of my dearest friends are all physicians, they all know we were designed..”
I hope that they understand sufficient of evolution not to be handing out anti-biotics for every little winter cold and infection. You should speak to Endtimes about design. We both agree that the ID movement is on a loser.
“and one of my best friends was the chemistry proffessor at are local college until he was dismissed for teaching simple truths.”
Presumably, he was actually dismissed for teaching his own version of religion when he was supposed to be teaching chemistry. I wouldn’t be happy to continue employing a plumber to fit my central heating if I found him redecorating the house instead. My experience is that such throw-away anecdotes are not all they seem.
“Why dear sir do you strike blindly at the truth and science for a religion that offers only a lake of fire!”
Because I don’t believe what you believe to be “truth” because it conflicts with the evidence of my God-given senses. Science is not religion but its antithesis – the meaning of words seem to be of little relevance to your arguments. As for the lake of fire I think I offered some “proof” a few weeks ago that the bible teaches that heaven is even hotter by a couple of hundred degrees. Perhaps, as a masochist, I should opt for the heavenly option.
Kind regards
Samphire
Samphire
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 8:12am:Hi Endtimes,
“I just first of all wish to express my appreciation for you as a man that knows how to disagree without resorting to ungentlemanly attacks. I have actually learned from you on this account.”
Well, you could have fooled baliset.
“I again attribute that to your wonderful mother and father but perhaps that is an unfair assumption.”
Hey, can’t I claim any of the credit for myself, you old £$@*$!??
I’ve tried to respond to some of the points made in your post in my reply above to 3 Xs. Not having much knowledge of American history I am at a loss to understand what is your belief of what constitutes “the church” at the time of the composing of the Constitution. I suspect that it is not as simple a picture as you paint. We have no such issues here in our more mature form of democracy although some of us are in constant battle with Europe to retain our nation’s right to decide its own laws and freedoms. There is also a small movement to dis-establish the Church of England, a decision which will be made easier if schism occurs but where it will lead, heaven only knows. Like the Laodicians, I am rather lukewarm over the prospect.
Kind regards
Samphire
Samphire
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 10:51am:P-G
Is the James Anthony Traficant, Jr. you quote the congressman who was expelled from Congress after being convicted of taking bribes, filing false tax returns, racketeering, and forcing his aides to perform chores at his farm in Ohio and on his houseboat and is currently serving an 8-year prison term scheduled to end in 2010?
“It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent.”
Please state who you are quoting. I understood that the Emergency Banking Act was passed in order to bring stability to the banking system and not to “dissolve the Federal Government”. Indeed, having read the act at Banking Act I can see no justification for your allegation. Please explain.
As for parachutes only functioning when they are open, they will not work at all without lines. In your simile those lines represent reason connecting the mind to reality. Your YEC beliefs are more like the wings of Icarus. They melt when challenged by the heat of science.
djhouk
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 12:11pm:Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this at 8:40pm:
——————————————————————————–
“Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11.. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner’s report that will lead to our demise.
Congressman James A.Traficant Jr.
Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol.33
I’d be a little wary about quoting Mr. Traficant. He is a convicted felon, expelled from Congress, and currently in prison until 2010.
Ekkman
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 12:16pm:Jun
17FuManchu
Said this at 9:51am:
——————————————————————————–
Teno,
It’s very common for people to get annoyed about the amount of time the police spend on traffic duties. It annoys me too. But I’d say that the reasons are: revenue (as you mentioned), the fact that traffic duty is necessary to stop people getting into bad habits, and the prosaic if unglamorous truth that pulling people over for speeding is relatively safe and therefore relatively popular among the police, none of whom want to get shot if they can help it. I’m not sure there’s much more to it than that.
Ekkman,
It wasn’t an accident that I left out that part; it was done for reasons of space and also for unity of subject. However, since you mention it, I’m happy to look it over.
“Besides the time that I have already discussed, they told me that I couldn’t preach Jesus on the streets. I told them that I could, they took me. Of course, the reason given was obstructing traffic. Even though I was only obstructing traffic by those driving their cars on the sidewalk.”
‘Traffic’ doesn’t just have to refer to cars. I’m not sure how it’s handled in the US, but in Britain ‘obstructing a public highway’ can involve any public street, whether on the road or the pavement. In order to ‘preach Jesus’, I imagine you had to partially block the pavement, hence ‘obstructing traffic’.
“A woman cop pulled me over for driving too slow. I end up talking to her for over an hour and a half. She told me that she believed in evolution, abortion was fine, etc. So from our discussion I would think that driving too slow wasn’t her pet peave with me. About every thing that she told me that she was for, my bumper stickers showed that I was against. I would say they didn’t make her too happy. Just an educated guess.”
It’s unlikely that she even noticed your bumper stickers while you were driving.
“I would guess that you wouldn’t have problems with that either. You might tell me that I should have been driving the speed limit. I will add because I wasn’t driving the speed limit, they kept me in the parking lot for around two hours total to search my van. I mean I had to be bad news for them, the bumper stickers, driving too slow. I mean, “Come on!” Surely I was the bad guy again. Even though most of the times I go to court, it gets thrown out but I am not so sure that at the rate we are going to being a full pledge “police state’ that I will get off with much of anything they charge me with like the “obstructing traffic”.”
From what you’ve said above, it sounds as if you argued with them. If they really did keep you for two hours while they searched your van, that’s because the police, like every other profession, have a tendency to use what powers they have to inconvenience people who annoy them. It’s not dictatorship, it’s human nature. Next time you fly, tell a security officer that he’s being too slow. You won’t have breached any rules, but he’ll mysteriously keep you back for a lengthy search because you annoyed him. There’s no need for a conspiracy theory when the answer’s simple.
Fu,
I appreciate your “honesty”. I was wondering if you were just going to lie or ‘two step’ around what I really said. I am supprised that you “admitted’ that you were wrong in a “round about” way but still no apology. That’s all right. As far as “partially blocking traffic” of those walking on the sidewalk. No way, I was standing in front of a movie theater, all kinds of people were “partially blocking walking traffic” there.
Then you said that it seems like I was arguing with them. What you were decribing in the paragraph is basically a police state. I didn’t argue with them, I presented facts. If that is illegal and gave them the right to ’search my van’ to you then you are once again showing me a police state.
Police are supposed to be “public servants” Not anymore, they are to keep us in line when we don’t argee with them whether we are right or wrong. They are saying without saying, “Don’t disagree with us, we are government, we are {g}od!?”
My question mark and parentheses shows that they want to be “the God” but that place has a already been taken.
Thanks Teno for you imput in the above post. Also thanks to Three Crosses below.
17Three Crosses
Said this at 12:55pm:
——————————————————————————–
Hi, I have got a few answers for you. I hear these terms alot: 1″conservative Christian”, 2″interpretation of the Bible”, 3″soveriegn nation”, 4″police state”, 5″wikipedia”, and 6″501c3.”
1.) “conservative Christian” I would say this is like the statement, “fundamentalist muslim” One word is completely meaningless and is only meant to drive a wedge between people who should be united! The title conservative applies in some way or another to virtualy everyone, even if it’s only to say “I,m conservative about how much antifreeze I drink.” If you don’t want to believe part of the Bible because it puts to much preassure on you. Don’t blame it on those who do beleive!
2.)”interpretation of the Bible” You can always interpret anything to fit your means. I suspect, too literal a translation might leave you in the shower until you run out of shampoo, “lather, rinse, and repeat.” I see the Bible two ways, mostly straight forward, but there are also many places (as in the parables), where you can take many, many meanings from the same verse.(It was designed to be that way!)
“Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”Luke 22:36 King James Version
As I see it, most people just choose to agree or disagree with whatever parts they please. If you approach safety instructions on your lawnmower in the same way, we won’t have to worry about you for long!!!!
3.)”soveriegn nation” There are many soveriegn nations that don’t have to succumb to are nation’s laws here within our borders! It seems to require one of three things: 1.You have to reach a high enough political stature(Clinton’s impeachment & Bush’s shooting of an endangered bird while he was governor of Tx). 2.You get yourself so ingrained in America’s cities and “Free market” that they can’t get rid of you (Walmart illegally restrains people, blatantly invades their privacy when they search through their property, and to my experience, our law overlooks their truck’s traffic violations). 3. Reach a high enough celebrity or financial status.(to many examples to list OJ, Lohan, Moon etc) I almost forgot oil companies, they don’t have to pay taxes or succumb to price gouging inquiries, a blend of all three examples!
4.”police state” A police state is a society that is policed in just about everything depending upon how far it’s carried. Basically, being robbed of your freedoms to make sure of what you’re doing or not doing. This is why we’re monitored everwhere we go, they put cameras on all the light poles and stop lights, “onstar or it’s equivalent” is in all new cars and at least in my state they’re holding old people down and chipping their right forarms under the pretense they know what’s good for them.
5. “Wikipedia” It’s very interesting that a publicly written, (not thoroughly researched), encyclopedia can be as accurate as Encyclopedia Brittanica, (both claim a 4% error rate). I can change only 4 words out of a hundred and change just about anything, (a subject better suited for a Bible version discussion).
6.”501c3″ I hear a whole lot about how satan’s little tool, (the 501c3) doesn’t have anything to do with Kent’s case. I think most ministers in this country have slipped this, “voluntary leash” right over their own heads. Most unintentionally, they just agree because everyone else does. While some of the “law worshippers” are right. Kent was not charged with not signing the 501c3, (it’s voluntary!!!) He fell under the IRS’ microscope because, without the “said document” his ministry was not tax exempt meaning that in the laws eyes, it was not a ministry. Like the rest of the world, if the government doesn’t control it then it’s not a ministry.
In closing, I hope you understand that these law worshippers post here for practice. Their future depends on their ability to play semantics,(word games)and their ability to twist interpretation of law,(or the Bible) to suit their arguements! This is why they generally only quote part of EKKMAN, ENDTIMES AND MANY OTHER’S COMMENTS!
Thank you so much for reading, God bless america God save us all!
Ekkman’s final comments, it seems like there are those who reject God and “Wikapedia” becomes their “infallible source”. I was on Wikapedia a little bit the other day and they were talking about something that happened 150,000,000 years ago or thereabouts. Oh well, there went their infallibility. My bumper sticker says, “God will bless America when America repents and turns back to God.”
Ekkman
Maturekid
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 12:57pm:Hello Samphire,
I’ll just toss in a little bit so th American history thing & “the church” makes a bit more sense.
To our founding fathers, many found the Church of England being a religion directed by the King at the time to be offensive. So to that extent, they placed into the Constitution and more importantly the Bill of Rights protections that would prevent the government from ever dictating religion to the population. The most important one is the First Amendment.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
It would be safe to assume the Founding Fathers meant what they said. So to define “church” that would be any peaceful religion. Peaceful religion would be any that does not try and infringe upon the unalienable rights listed in the Declaration of Independence. Murder, stealing, etc wouldn’t be peaceful. To prevent someone’s comment on the term stealing, the Founding Fathers also entrusted the people to be self governing i.e. Suck up the responsibility on your own if you allowed yourself to be taken by a con-artist operating under the guise of whatever religion.
To this end, they also covered the taxation requirements in the Constitution to be fair and equitable. Structured in a manner as to not have any ambiguity.
1913 our lovely Congress decided to mess that up. 1950’s Lyndon Johnson opted to complicate it further. 1984 made the lines worse.
Had we followed what the Founding Fathers wrote, it would be pretty easy to understand. Government is supposed to butt out of all aspects of religion. But government can rarely adhere to the basic tenet of the K.I.S.S. format. They gotta make things more complicated to justify their full-time status as our employees.
Harriet
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 1:40pm:artemis
Before I answer your question, I hope to listen to Paul Abramson’s recent radio broadcast concerning judicial review.
Meanwhile, I will be studying an old fave, Richard J. Maybury’s
WHATEVER HAPPENED TO JUSTICE?
meanwhile I am wondering why an Australian has such a detailed interest in our country? Unless P-G has hopes of becoming an American citizen?
A:P-G quote
It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has
been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1,
Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and
insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint
Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause
dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official
capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and
Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal
Government exists today in name only.
Who ever heard of such?
And did you know in the state of Massachusetts it is illegal to eat peanuts in church?
amigas
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 2:15pm:Dear Samphire;
I would like to offer my understanding of the Church. The Church is made up of all true believers in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus the Son of God, “Christians” although not all who claim to be Christian are as they verbally claim and not all religions claiming to be Christian are as they claim either.
If two true Christians have a business venture together it does not make that business venture a church and they would be liable for all local, state, and federal taxes including payroll taxes. A business and a ministry are different although many attributes are the same ie. they may sell books or dvd’s to raise money to help fund their ministry.
Kind regards;
Gene Schmeling
The Welders Wife
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 2:15pm:This one is for Warocuya.
Hi Bro!
If you don’t mind, I have a question for you. Among the people that the LORD has brought into your life, do you know anybody who has any knowledge of the origin of the teepee, and/or do you know any old stories about it that might pertain to the following research? Here’s why I am asking: I’m working my way through the first eleven chapters of Genesis translating them from Hebrew to English, because I want to know exactly what they are saying instead of taking somebody else’s word for it. I am still working my way through chapter four. In verse 20 it mentions the first tents. For a long time I have had the notion that the original tent probably wasn’t like what Abraham is portrayed as living in, but it was something more like a teepee. I came to this conclusion because of a combination of reasons. It started with Brother Hovind’s notion that the pre-flood earth was hyperbaric, & I agree with him, so with that notion, why would Jabel have to migrate around to feed his livestock? [The Hebrew word means livestock.] Why not fence up an area & stay in one spot if the ground was well watered & hyperbaric? There had to be something else that motivated him to come up with the idea of a tent. My thinking is that he came up with the idea as a means to protect his critters from predators. I have a guard llama. His fur is completely white, except for his brown tail. When he stands alert, he is tall. If a stray dog comes into view, the sheep all run to him, & line up behind him. He’s pretty bold too! The other day I had to stop him from taking on 2 German Shepherds!! A couple days prior to that, two full grown black bears [a blond & a brunette!] were walking along the side of the mountain above our house. My llama was spooked! He wouldn’t leave the area around the house for a couple of days.[The house is almost 2 stories tall & it’s the color of brown fur!] With this thought in mind, the first tent could have been something like a tee-pee. Tee-pees are tall. Jabel had access to hides. Maybe at the time he left the fur on & hung it so that it faced the outside making the tent look furry. Maybe he painted eyes at the top. [Old Blackfoot Tee-pees had circles (sun & moon & stars) painted around the top. If you were a wild beast & you saw a tee-pee heaving in the breeze, you might think that it was some kind of magnificent beast, especially with those ‘eyes’ at the top & the ‘horns’ (lodge poles) above those eyes!! & if you were a wild beast, you probably wouldn’t come near it!! Maybe the smoke coming out of the ‘top of it’s head’ would also scare you away. [Maybe it created the notion of a fire-breathing leviathan.] The Hebrew word for tent used here means something that can be seen from a distance.
One last thought: In an animal’s way of thinking, height means authority. For example, my llama is a free spirited character with a ‘touch-me-not!’ attitude. In other words he’ll come near me, but he won’t let me pet him. If he is out in the field next door & I want him to head towards the house, I get out there on the other side of him & hold up a stick or raise my shepherd’s cane up in the air. When I do that it makes me ‘taller’ than him. At that point he decides I’m the boss & he heads in the right direction!! {Sometimes I can stand in the yard & hold the cane up in the air & he’ll come…it all depends on his frame of mind… like whether he wants to go party with the deer or come home & shepherd his flock!} With the same thought in mind, Jabel may have used the height of his tent to keep control of his critters. I kind of doubt that it was like a middle eastern tent or an army tent, ‘cause something probably would have stepped on it & ended the benefits of the invention!! Anyway, I’m researching old legends in this department, so, if you know of any good places to look, please let me know.
Thanks!
In Yeshua God’s Lamb,
‘Stands-on-the-ends-of-the-earth-singing-‘Glory-to-The-Righteous-One!’
FuManchu
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 3:31pm:Paul,
This may not be the place for such a discussion, but I was very interested to see your comments on judicial review. Not being an American, I’m not particularly familiar with your Constitution, so I had a look for myself. This gave rise to a couple of points:
1. Amendments to the Constitution require a two-thirds majority of both Houses, and must then be ratified by three quarters of the States. This would seem to indicate that the Constitution has superior authority to ordinary laws passed by a simple majority – obviously enough, otherwise the Constitution would be irrelevant. That being the case, it cannot be legal for Congress to pass a law that would infringe the Constitution – if it were, then any such law would act as an amendment and there’d be no need for the amendment procedure. Given, therefore, the fact that Congress is restricted by the Constitution, the judiciary must have the power to judge whether or not any Act of Congress has contravened the Constitution. If it were otherwise, Congress could simply ignore the Constitution and do what they liked by a simple majority, which would render the Constitution pointless.
2. Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution states: “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution (and) the Laws of the United States”. Since the judiciary has the power to hear cases, it must obviously have the ability to interpret the laws under which it is hearing the cases – that’s the whole reason we have judges. More particularly, however, is that the power extends to all cases arising under the Constitution. This presumably means that the courts have the ability to declare that the Constitution has, or has not, been breached. Since it has been established that the Constitution is superior to an Act of Congress, this seems to indicate that the courts have the ability to judge whether or not an Act of Congress has contravened the Constitution.
In both of these points, you’ll notice, the judiciary is not making the law, just interpreting it. Where the law is unclear – and, let’s face it, laws often are, even those drafted today (to say nothing of those drafted centuries ago) – it falls to the judges to decide what they mean. They can’t overrule Congress; they can only interpret the will of Congress, and point out where Congress can’t overrule the Constitution. Your opinion of their decisions may differ from theirs, but that’s fairly irrelevant to the question of what powers they have.
Anyway, I’d be interested to read any response you might have.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Yes, they should interpret and apply the laws in their court cases. However it is (I would contend, based on the US Constitution and the 27 Amendments) unconstitutional for them to override the law or state that a duly passed law is "unconstitutional" in their opinion. Their job is not to make laws, but to apply them in court cases. What is Constitutional in the USA is "Citizen Review" of the legislators themselves, but not "Judicial Review" of the laws passed by the legislators. The 1803 Marbury v. Madison court case does not rise to the level of an Amendment to the Constitution, therefore it is inapplicable. P.A. ]
Ekkman
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 4:40pm:19Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this at 8:40pm:
——————————————————————————–
…
///////////////////////////////////////////////////
Three Crosses, thanks for your post; “law worshippers” isn’t one I’ve thought of before.
and between you and me I found another quote for Samphire,
“Minds are like parachutes – they only function when open” Sir Thomas Dewar
ps. you might like to hunt up the Lloyd Pye testimony; both mainstream churchies and the U.F.O. crowd want to sideline this man. Both of them are too stuck in their dogmas to want someone with a entirely new piece of the jigsaw
Since I was doing a lot of witnessing at colleges and high schools, I thought this was a good comment to make with them.
Many in these last days are so “open minded” that their brains leaked out. Truth is narrow by definition. 2+2=4 I could seek to be “open minded” and tell others that today 2+2=5. Well, I am open minded but I am wrong.
Many who don’t know God as their Lord and Saviour make the government their lord and savior. They need someone or something for their security. But it fails them every time since no government is infallible. Take for instance, our Supreme Court decided blacks were non-persons, you could do with them as you basically wished. NOW they have determined that babies in the womb are non-persons and you can kill them at will.
As I have said before, any government that will kill innocent little babies in the womb or their mothers will do anything they want to do no matter how bad.
Phillip-George,
Even though I see your point. I was taking it from the opposite side of the fence.
I am doing some very small preaching tib-bits on YouTube. You can only have 10 minutes. One deals with the way.
http://www.ekkcom.net/danny.htm
Samphire
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 4:52pm:Hi Maturekid,
Thanks for reply. You wrote: “So to define “church” that would be any peaceful religion. Peaceful religion would be any that does not try and infringe upon the unalienable rights listed in the Declaration of Independence.”
OK, I’ve no problem with that definition in so far as it goes. So anybody who claims to be a christian is part of the church ministry and any money they earn should, in your view, be free of tax?
EndTimes
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 5:03pm:Jun 20 Samphire
Said this at 7:54am:
“So, if 2 or more christians get together to buy a plot of land and build a house in order to sell it at a profit they should pay no tax? How about baliset? If baliset gets together with a Roman Catholic to buy the plot of land should the profit be tax-free? I believe that Endtimes seems to doubt that baliset is a christian because he does not believe what Endtimes believes Jesus believed about the literal truth of Genesis and therefore believes baliset should pay tax.
On the other hand and ignoring what Endtimes says to the contrary Kent is quite happy to pay tax. “Show me the law and I will pay the tax” he said on the prison pre-sentencing tapes.”
My dear Samphire, first of all, forgive me for not giving you your due credit for your gentlemanly manners, yet I am still suspicious that your wonderful momma did have a hand in that. If not, forgive me once again for intruding. I responded to baliset after reading his blog in its entirety. You have to read the entire thing to see that he starts out be questioning the salvation of creationists. I have only used his own literary methods and pointed out some Scriptural deficiencies that he should consider himself. So, for the record, Nathan first used the insulting ad hominem attacks and questioned the salvation of “bone head creationists.”
Sorry, but I don’t have much patience for so called Christians attacking the faith of those that they should instead call brethren. It is not Christian to do so. If Nathan is truly saved, then that is good for him. Yet, he should then obey the Scriptures and remove his insulting comments from his blog and I will agree to disagree with him in the name of Christ over the YEC issue. There are many doctrinal differences among any group of Christians, yet there are also certain doctrinal issues that bind us all together. I suspect that Nathan will not obey the Scriptures and that he will instead continue to uphold his heroes, PZ Meyers and Carl Sagan for which he apparently has more trust in their words than the words of Jesus Himself who spoke of Himself as the Creator. If he does obey the Scriptures and remove the offensive and insulting comments, then others such as myself might be willing to offer the hand of fellowship. I again highly doubt that we will see that day, not by actions, but instead by Nathan’s.
There are many Christian brothers that I know that do not believe in the literal interpretation of Genesis, yet at the same time they do not publicly ridicule creationists and call them boneheads. As I stated in my last post to Nathan: “Yet, your writings are not filled with the love of Christ for those that disagree with you on the age of the earth and that is my contention with you and not anything else.” So, again, any man that claims to be a disciple of Christ needs to show the fruits of repentance and common decency to his fellow believers. Nathan has not done this, so I have publicly called that into question by accounting his objectionable statements which he has publicly committed dealing with “bonehead creationists” on nationwide Australian TV. If Nathan is upset about me putting a fictional dialogue with God questioning his salvation, then let him remove the fictional dialogue with God questioning my salvation and my objections to this man will be complete. The only thing that I have done is to use his own literary device back on him again. It is obvious that he didn’t enjoy that anymore than I did when I read his writings. Let him remove the offense that he has placed FIRST and I will be done with the man.
“As I understand Endtimes, he says no: the tax-exemption should only apply to Christians. Hence my enquiry of him as to his definition of a Christian. Whereas I understood it was the simple idea of believing Christ to be your eternal Saviour it appears from his responses to baliset that one must also believe exactly whatever it was Jesus believed about the Big Bang.”
Sorry, I thought that I stated quite clearly that I believe completely in the freedom of all religions and that it was up to “religion” to keep their act clean not the government. Again, it is not my job to tell baliset that he must be a YEC to be saved. When I first got saved, I believed in the day/age theory, which I no longer do, so for myself, salvation had nothing to do with how old that I thought the earth is or isn’t. So, salvation is not a matter of the age of the earth, it is a matter of being born again and believing the Word of God. My further explanation as above.
In kindness,
EndTimes
Three Crosses
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 5:53pm:Dear Samphire you said this:
“So, if 2 or more christians get together to buy a plot of land and build a house in order to sell it at a profit they should pay no tax? How about baliset? If baliset gets together with a Roman Catholic to buy the plot of land should the profit be tax-free? I believe that Endtimes seems to doubt that baliset is a christian because he does not believe what Endtimes believes Jesus believed about the literal truth of Genesis and therefore believes baliset should pay tax.
On the other hand and ignoring what Endtimes says to the contrary Kent is quite happy to pay tax. “Show me the law and I will pay the tax” he said on the prison pre-sentencing tapes.”
Wow you sure require alot of rebuttals in a small space (my hat’s off)!
1.)So, if 2 or more christians get together to buy a plot of land and build a house in order to sell it at a profit they should pay no tax?
Answer: If you are mixing religion with proffit, that’s politics not religion (evil = love of money)
2.)How about baliset? If baliset gets together with a Roman Catholic to buy the plot of land should the profit be tax-free?
Answer: Tough one: I really don’t know anything about baliset. (is that supposed to be “bail is set”, “bali&set” or a name I’m unfamiliar with?) Is baliset a roman catholic, santa ria catholic, Christian catholic, eastern catholic….? (I guess that’s not important just curious.) Are they buying the land for a church or school? I guess now most schools are churches. Personally I believe free enterprise should be just that, free. I think you shouldn’t have to pay to do buisness.
3.) I believe that Endtimes seems to doubt that baliset is a christian because he does not believe what Endtimes believes Jesus believed about the literal truth of Genesis and therefore believes baliset should pay tax.
Answer: (Here are some complicated definitions before we continue)A.)Saved: Accepting Jesus’ sacrafice for your sins and God the father rose him on the third day.(please refer KJV John 3:16)B.)Christian: Christ like or a follower of Christ’s teachings. You can be saved and not be a Christian .Example you’re saved you go to heaven when you die. Being a Christian means that you at least try to spread the gospel, be charitable, love each other as Jesus loves you …. None of us are perfect we are all sinners.”That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved” Romans 10:9 Kjv. I could discuss the subject of catholicism for quite some time.
4.)”On the other hand and ignoring what Endtimes says to the contrary Kent is quite happy to pay tax. “Show me the law and I will pay the tax” he said on the prison pre-sentencing tapes.”
Answer: I’m sure that Kent doesn’t want to be a bad influence to anyone by presenting himself as an outlaw.
5.)”Clearly, I am masochistic but not sadistic. If evolution really was a religion (which of course is not the case) then by your definitions whenever two or more evolutionists are gathered together to make a profit then they should pay no tax. As I understand Endtimes, he says no: the tax-exemption should only apply to christians. Hence my enquiry of him as to his definition of a christian. Whereas I understood it was the simple idea of believing Christ to be your eternal saviour it appears from his responses to baliset that one must also believe exactly whatever it was Jesus believed about the Big Bang. It rather begs the question as to what Jesus would have understood about chromosomes and why humans have 23 pairs while apes have 24. (see if I can slip that one past PA without him noticing)”
Answer: A.) I have not read all of Endtimes’ posts but he seems to have most if not all of his beliefs founded in Biblical teachings. B.) Evolution is a religion by every definition of religion that I’ve read. C.)I don’t think Jesus said anything about the any sort of bang. Question: Why do you keep trying to mix religion with proffit? Is this some kind of guilt by your association? Please also show me how to take an apes chromosone out and make a human? I can’t understand what this has to do with anything! (The horse is dead, quit flogging it!)
6.)”I hope that they understand sufficient of evolution not to be handing out anti-biotics for every little winter cold and infection. You should speak to Endtimes about design. We both agree that the ID movement is on a loser.”
Answer: What? Colds are viral infections. I think bacterial infections still respond best to antibiotics. I understand the religion of evolution very well. I guess if Endtimes believes design is a movement or a loser we should discuss it???
7.)”Presumably, he was actually dismissed for teaching his own version of religion when he was supposed to be teaching chemistry. I wouldn’t be happy to continue employing a plumber to fit my central heating if I found him redecorating the house instead. My experience is that such throw-away anecdotes are not all they seem.”
Answer: My friend was fired and escorted off campus by the police for teaching his students the truth! To be exact that science or evolution could not explain “medical miracles” or the “origin of life” it had to have been created. He was not witnessing to them if that was your question.
8.)”Because I don’t believe what you believe to be “truth” because it conflicts with the evidence of my God-given senses. Science is not religion but its antithesis – the meaning of words seem to be of little relevance to your arguments. As for the lake of fire I think I offered some “proof” a few weeks ago that the bible teaches that heaven is even hotter by a couple of hundred degrees. Perhaps, as a masochist, I should opt for the heavenly option.”
Answer: Sir why do you try to mix the religion of evolution with science? They do not go together unless you use evolution to only mean change: as in to evolve a flat tire? If your “God-given senses” offer some evidence that everything comes from nothing then out with it man!
Thank you so much for your time!
God bless america, God save us all!
EndTimes
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 6:21pm:Dear Jason,
Thank you for your kind reply. In part, I did not respond to mrthrun’s last response as it was off the subject of my reply on the issue of tithes and Romans 13. (Believe it or not, but I don’t nit pick EVERY issue before me on this blog. How often have I responded to the Australian mans flagrant provocations of which I don’t understand the provocation in the first place which induced such things.) I note that apparently mrthrun does not believe that tithing is a NT commandment. In part that is only partially true. The early NT faithful gave not 10% but instead 100%. As in all of the OT commandments, the NT commandments are ALWAYS of a higher fulfillment and not a lower level. So, starting initially at the 100% level, let’s look at it in light of a couple of other views.
First, just as Jesus admonished the Pharisees over the issue of divorce that it was allowed by the LAW only due to their hard heartedness, but it was not so “FROM THE BEGINNING.” (Matthew 19:3-12) There are many such issues that were settled before the LAW ever was. I believe that the issue of tithing is one of these issues with a NT reference as well. Specifically in Hebrews, chapters 5-7, the priesthood of Jesus and the priesthood of Melchisedec are shown to be one in the same. Thus, when Abraham gave tithes unto Melchisedec he was actually tithing to Jesus BEFORE the law of Moses. In Malachi 3:8-10, God makes it quite clear that the tithe belongs to Him period. This is the case in the OT before and after the law of Moses, as well as in the NT (Hebrews 5-7) and also during the millennium. (Ezekiel 44:24)
So, anyone that would wish to make a point that the tithe is not part of the NT is then contended with the argument of giving 100% instead. I have never given the Lord 100% of what He has given me, and I do not know anyone that has done likewise. Yet, the early Christians did just this and their rewards shall be likewise bestowed in relative manner at the time of judgement. Certainly, some of the missionaries that I have come to know may have come close to this NT financial obligation, but even there, I don’t know of anyone that’s given 100% and lived in common with other believers. If anyone has, more power to you and your reward shall likewise be great in heaven. However, today, it’s pretty hard to give up all yours and keep things in common if you are the only one that does it. The cults seem to have stolen our own idea and implemented the NT manner of contributions better than the true church of today. In any case, I have given my tithes and offerings for several years and the Lord has always rewarded me in return with more than I have given to Him. It truly is impossible to out give God. Just try it. He has likewise chastised me when I have on at least one memorable occasion held back.
Tithing is OT and NT doctrine for believers and nonbelievers alike. The nonbelievers will settle up with the Lord at the time of judgement as well even if they don’t understand that now.
Secondly, the common interpretation of Romans 13, I Peter chapter 2, and Hebrews chapter 13 is in the context of justifying Christian Patriotism. I wrote a 14 page essay on that subject that will not make it past Paul Abramson so let me just make a quick point on this. We are not earthly patriots here on this earth according to the Bible. We are instead HEAVENLY AMBASSODORS representing our King of kings and His Kingdom on this earth. The above verses are the simple marching orders and rules of engagement for His HEAVENLY AMBASSADORS. First of all, in I Peter 2: 13, we are to obey the earthly rulers for Lord’s sake, not your nations sake.
I Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
So, what is the purpose that the Lord has for us to submit to the earthly rulers ordinances?? The answer is quite simple and is coupled together with EVERY commandment to obey those that have rule over us. Take a look at how this set of verses in I Peter chapter 2 ends:
I Peter 2:20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:
24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
My friends, as an HEAVENLY AMBASSODOR OF THE LORD, we are to be without sin before the lost so that we may instead bear Christ’s reproach and not our own. We are to adhere to the rules of engagement for ambassadors employed in the Lord’s service and we are to represent the power and dignity of our sovereign. If you are a drunken, adulterous, fornicating, lying, stealing, cheating, cowardly, untrustworthy, disobedient and rebellious child of God, you will not be an effective ambassador.
“Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.
But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.”
(Romans 13:13-14)
“Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.”
(Hebrews 13:13-14)
So, Romans 13 is to be obeyed as an ambassador of Christ, yet with the same allegiance in mind as did Daniel when he would not commit idolatry even though his supreme governor and king had signed the proclamation to do so.
Jason, I hope that this helps.
In kindness,
EndTimes
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 7:13pm:Harriet [jun20]
“Unless P-G has hopes of becoming an American citizen?”
I had a good laugh at this one; I note you say American citizen and neither Citizen of United States of America [without a definite article "the"] nor citizen of the united States of America [with a "the"]
No, I am happy to simply call myself a Christian – but moreover; among my very deepest of hopes resides in God the Creator of the Heavens and this Earth as calling Me the same.
I have some relies in Maryland and have made a couple of vacations to spend time with them, but that’s it. On the balance I actually recoil from the U.S. – as sick as it also has become there’s no place oz.
I get a bit bombastic, sarcastic, hyperbolic and parabolic – but I wouldn’t say I know much at all about America. If I know a half of one percent about Common Law and Biblical Law and I see a patent injustice I should speak out about it – the bible says so.
I am only on the blog because Brother Kent is in Jail. If it had have been a suspended sentence and moderate fine I wouldn’t have even bothered – but what has taken place is wicked.
to Samphire and djhouk [both Jun 20, back to back, as you shall be for all eternity so I suspect]
you guys so amuse. Both of you honed immediately in on the ad hominem – you literally cannot help yourselves – its in your very natures.
Given what this man appears to have said [and I didn't check it myself] from the floor of the house, it utterly surprises me that the man was not in a random and spontaneous aeroplane “accident” somewhere shortly afterwards.
Secondly, why wasn’t your number one priority to go to the Congressional Transcript/ Records and see what efforts were made on the floor of the house in real time to rebut the proposition?
I’ll go through your other points in due course Samphire – but I remember a certain “individual” on this blog asking you to state your own posture on “origins”; and I never heard you respond to his polite request, thus, I can string you out like a monkey with his hand on a banana in a jar. [ Ah, maybe I am wrong !!!!!~ - maybe my memory fails me - and I shall have to apologise profusely; so I better check the transcript before I put my foot in things any deeper about your sartorial ignorance of polite and sincere people]
Now to all Saints of the Most High God, who shall judge in Righteousness,
I have the privilege/ providential happenstance, of some source material from a Catholic Priest involved in highly effective Common Law Advocacy. I do not know if he is a Canon Law Lawyer also, but I do know him to be an erudite and accomplished speaker/ writer.
On an ancient “cassette technology” tape I listened to last night I heard him mention the Common Law “duty of care” /imperative to make available the transcript of the proceedings in time for appeals to be launched. He actually says that there should be 28 days from the release of the transcript, in which time, to launch an appeal.
If indeed the transcript has still not been released there is grounds for a special appeal on the basis of denial of natural justice, which should be heard by an appellate tribunal sitting of at least three judges.
The principle is this – the court provides the official certified record of proceedings. In some courts unofficial recording devices are specifically prohibited. An accurate record of events is essential to make factual statements to form the basis of an appeal where an injustice has occurred. If the transcript is not released in time to make that appeal there has been a denial of natural justice – the basis for a separate and or new appeal or overturning of the original ruling because of the failure of the court to observe “natural justice”.
I hope this gives someone sensible something to chew on [I realise what I have just said excludes Samphire from being able to entertain an opinion on the matter]
All Glory to Jesus – God is not mocked.
EndTimes
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 7:15pm:Jun 20 Samphire
Said this at 4:52pm:
“OK, I’ve no problem with that definition in so far as it goes. So anybody who claims to be a Christian is part of the church ministry and any money they earn should, in your view, be free of tax?”
No, No, NO, NO!!! Why so much vitriolic contention over a very simple definition. If I earn $100.00, Uncle Sam will take his 60% that is “due” him. If I also give to the church of my choice $10.00 out of that $100.00, then God’s law states very clearly that that $10.00 belongs to God for the betterment of His church which is now bestowed in trust to earthly believers. The tithe that I have given to the church is meant only for God’s work through a godly church body or ministry. The problem is that Uncle Sam now also wants 60% of the $10.00 I gave to the church and that has always belonged to God FROM THE BEGINNING. That is what we mean by “nontaxable” and that status is no longer honoured by Caesar here in America. The money taken by FICA employee taxation from churches since 1984 goes against the constitutional provisions and protections of a nontaxable status and is against the law of God that declares that workers of a ministry doing the work of God are indeed above ALL taxation from earthly rulers. That money and that work belong to God alone.
For instance, if a man is called to go the Philippines and he uses the tithes and offerings of faithful supporters to accomplish the work that he is called by God to accomplish, that money used to accomplish the work of God according to the Bible belongs completely to God and not to Caesar whatsoever. That missionary should be nontaxable since the money given by the faithful believers has already been subjected to the “lawful” taxation of Caesar. So, my $10.00 should go 100% to God’s work alone!!!!! Your concern is in the realm of corrupt church workers. Under the constitution it was up to the church to police their own workers. The church has in the last few decades failed that job miserably and now Caesar has walked into the vacuum that the church has failed to fill. That is a shame that we will have to answer for at the time of judgement.
(There was accountability in place in American churches at one time that no longer exists in many instances. Financial accountability is only one area of accountability. My remarks to baliset in a brisk and perhaps even harsh tone were no different than questioning how a man uses the money given to him for the purposes of God’s work. Likewise, if a man calls himself a Christian and castigates others who hold a different viewpoint on a specific doctrine, the church is supposed to rise to the occasion and censure and self govern those that proclaim that they belong to the church IN ACCORDANCE TO THE SCRIPTURES WHICH IS OUR SOLE MEASURE OF CONDUCT. Most people in the church today wish not to cause any divisiveness yet the “lukewarm” I will tolerate anything attitude is exactly what makes God vomit, “spue out” this present day church in Revelations chapter 3. My friends, if we don’t earnestly contend for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints, what will we have left at the end of the day??)
However, with the current “nonprofit” status of churches and no longer existing constitutional “nontaxable status,” the man of God has truly no choice but to give to Caesar that which Caesar truly has no rights to have or face the certainty of prosecution and imprisonment just as Dr. Hovind’s situation brings to light. So, for those that keep telling Dr. Hovind to repent, is it man’s law that he should repent of or is it God’s law?? Please clarify for me and the readers.
Oh, my dear Samphire, what pray tell shall we do with you??
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 7:33pm:Jun 20 Samphire
“Said this at 7:54am: I hope that they understand sufficient of evolution not to be handing out anti-biotics for every little winter cold and infection. You should speak to Endtimes about design. We both agree that the ID movement is on a loser.”
Dear Samphire, my exception with the ID movement is twofold. First, they disdain the Bible as much as many evolutionists so it is quite hard for me to count them on the side of God’s Word.
Second, the Bible states emphatically in the positive that there is absolute proof of God seen in His creation.
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
The ID folks with their irreducible complexity are arguing from a negative standpoint against evolution which Judge Jones correctly pointed out does not positively establish ID by negatively denouncing evolution. I myself see the ID argument in its totallity as a straw man argument against the Bible because you can take the same information that ID uses and from the standpoint of a positive proof of God and creation argue the same facts to a positive conclusion. Most people have concluded that creationism is dead because of the Dover PA findings. God has not yet had His final testimony presented but it is coming soon.
I agree that ID does have some excellent negative “proofs” against evolution, yet they have ignored the positive proofs stated in a different manner as God Himself plainly declares. I again refer back to the unanswered Perry Marshall question of old debates on this circuit.
http://www.usedtapes.com/iidb.htm
In kindness,
EndTimes
warocuya
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 9:56pm:Dear Welders Wife,
God bless you.
I went to the earliest mention of the word tent in the Hebrew Scriptures and found that it’s root word means to shine. Job 25:5 the word “shineth” has same three letters Aleph, Hey, Lamed. For more on this see Chuck Missler’s Blueletterbible.org site
http://cf.blb.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=0168
The Maya had “Tee-pee” looking temples and so did the Egyptians. Our tribe strangely enough had huts in the same shape. Revelation speaks of the New Jerusalem coming out of heaven. It’s description sounds like a Pyramid or “Tee-pee” shape. Dr. Hovind covers the mysteries of the pyramid in DVD 7 Questions and Answers. And deals with this subject in light of the New Jerusalem.
The origin of the tee-pee in all likelyhood is this triangle symbol. In out tribe the triangle represents God. My masters thesis dealt with Native American mythology and how the oldest legends are actually bible stories. Our tribe has the Fall, The cool evening Garden story, The fall of Satan mixed with the Son of God creator of everything story. We also have the Cain and Abel story and of course the Flood. Native Americans
are descendants of Shem and so the triangle as a representation of something prior to the flood would have comes from him. Tee-Pees may very well be our way of remembering the pre-flood times.
So Tee-Pees could be tied back to the days of Noah and before. The Great Pyramid is really ancient and it is probably a pre-flood artifact which remains today. (see Patrick Heron “The Pyramid of the Apocalypse.” Overall he’s a believer and has done great research though he goes off the subject here and there but overall he’s pretty good.) Also, the Sphinx has tremendous amounts of water erosion. Almost 10 feet or more in some places. This information comes from a lecture by Richard Hoagland at the United Nations. Richard is not a Christian. His findings about a flood in Egypt are correct but his conclusions are off. Water in a desert? If you believe in the flood of Noah you will have no problem with this.
So in brief, tee-pees did not originate with us but it comes from the time before the flood. If you put the ancient meaning of “tent” = Shine and the shape you find it greatest meaning in Egypt. The great Pyramid used to have a bright shining covering for the stones that would make it visible from miles away.
It is further evidence of the Flood and the Bible story as true.
I hope you will enjoy this information. Test all things and hold fast to that which is good. Search the scriptures if these things be so.
JESUS is the WAY the TRUTH and the LIFE :^)
God bless Dr. Hovind and CSE
Your brother in Christ
Warocuya
Harriet
Said this on June 20th, 2007 at 10:59pm:Liberty=Common Law + Free Markets
Hillary Clinton was in Florida this week and was campaigning at a nursing home. She was shaking hands with the residents and noticed a lady sitting quietly in a wheelchair. Mrs. Clinton leaned over to the woman and asked, “Ma’am, do you know who I am?” The elderly woman thought a moment, then answered: “No, I don’t know, but if you go over there to that counter, those people can tell you who you are.”
Now that I’ve got your attention, I want to tell you how America needs a reversal of democracy back to a Republic thru a revival of Common Law Principle while promoting the free market.
All good laws can be reduced to what Richard Mayberry calls, natural law, common law, or the two fundamental laws:
1. Do all you have agreed to do.
2. Do not encroach on other persons or their property.
In most nations, patriotism is a dedication to the homeland, the geographic area. America is different. With the possible exception of Switzerland, America was the first nation ever to be founded on a set of moral principles. Even today, America remains more of an idea than a place. That lump-in-the-throat patriotism inspired by the Statue of Liberty comes as a result of what our country means, not where it is….
The reasons immigrants have always flooded America is the superiority of our common law principle. Our country was founded on these two fundamental laws. With our founding fathers’ belief in this Natural Law, they proclaimed that a person is also endowed by his Creator with rights to life, liberty, and property. This system of liberty is a two-sided coin. Common Law is the legal side, and free markets are the economic side. A catalyst which began the erosion of this system of liberty is the Great Depression.
In the 1930’s Americans did not understand economics to know that inflation caused the Depression. We became desperate and frightened and demanded that our government solve the Depression. A different kind of law, not based on the fundamental laws, swept the world. Governments flooded the earth with new laws and new programs. This is called Political Law. It is arbitrary and created by the powerholders, and cannot be reduced to the two Fundamental Laws. The American Republic begins fading into a Democracy. Majority rules, and majority is as human as any dictator. Like the dictator, they do not vote for what is right, they vote for what they want. Imagine trying to play baseball while the audience is voting every few minutes to change the rules. The invention of Political Laws has snowballed until today when >100,000 new laws are passed every year. Political law has become the world’s new religion…Legislators have become priests, and capitol buildings have become temples and the Judges, gods.
Paul F. Oreffice, CEO of Dow Chemical said in 1987 that Americans have become the most litigious people on earth…there are more students in laws schools than in all the graduate schools in engineering, chemistry, physics and the biological sciences combined.
America has 5% of the world’s population but 75% of the lawyers. Kent Hovind once said that if you take all the lawyers in the world, and put them end to end, around the equator,
the world would be better off.
Richard J. Maybury: Whatever Happened to Justice? 1993
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 1:23am:Paul,
You have an unfortunate habit of ignoring points made in discussions and running off on your own chase. Fumanchu, an Englishman, has given an excellent brief summary of US judicial review and its authority which you just ignore. Please would you re-address his specific point and explain why, in your opinion and contrary to the specific word of the Constitution, the Supreme Court does not have the Constitutional power to examine acts of Congress for their Constitutional compliance.
Also, whatever happened to the mantra of “Checks and Balances”?
Samphire
[EDITOR'S NOTE: I would counter that I am not particularly a "last word" kind of person. You, sir, have answered a few of my previous messages (from many weeks ago) with scalding remarks. Okay, those were your words to say if you wished. I had already said what I wanted to say. (And as moderator of the site, et cetera, I need to go out of my way to try to stand aside for others to remark. Moderator, not controller, of course. (Just as for my web site, http://www.creationism.org, I want to allow it to be a conduit of information, not a controller. I even link to a few main evolution sites.) The orientation of the Bible itself is to give folks a set of information, and to let each individual decide as they will. God could have put a big neon sign in space above us; He didn't. (The equivalent is there - in the marvelous creation around us (Romans 1:20); but each individual is free to reject this.)
Let us contrast - who has the "final word" in US law, according to the "law of the land," i.e. the US Constitution? Firstly, all legislative (i.e. "law-making" power) is vested in the Congress. That is from Article 1; Section 1. The Executive Branch (Article 2) is then charged with enforcement of those duly passed laws. And the Judicial Branch (Article 3) is empowered to arbitrate between disputing parties, based upon the laws enacted by the (first branch) Legislative Branch. Checks and balances on this system are to ultimately rest with the citizens.
"We the people..." choose who the law-makers should be. The so-called "Judicial Review" is not in the Constitution, nor in any of the Amendments. It is "Citizen Review" (voting) that provides the ultimate checks & balances for the system. That was the design! Unelected persons should not be making laws. It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, based on the US Constitution and the 27 Amendments, for the Supreme Court to say "unconstitutional" in a decision. They should arbitrate BASED UPON the laws (made by the elected legislature), not take it upon themselves to question the laws passed by the will of the citizenry. The courts, unconstitutionally, are being used to implement a particular agenda. The Supreme Court (and other federal) justices have repeatedly asserted a right that they do not truly possess. Paul Abramson ]
JR Turner
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 1:25am:Mat 17:24 And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?
Mat 17:25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Mat 17:26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
Mat 17:27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.
Our SAVIOR knew full well that the kings of the earth only collected tribute from strangers and not their own children.
Excellent study of “Christian and Civil Government” here:
http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?currPage=4&keyword=John%5EWeaver&SpeakerOnly=true&currSection=sermonsspeaker&AudioOnly=false&SortBy=added
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 1:44am:Hi Ekkman,
“Many in these last days are so “open minded” that their brains leaked out. Truth is narrow by definition. 2+2=4 I could seek to be “open minded” and tell others that today 2+2=5. Well, I am open minded but I am wrong.”
No. Only in mathematics and publishing do we have “proofs”. We can prove using number theory that 2+2=4. You canot be open-mided about that. Everything else, however, requires evidence. Truth is only as narrow as the body of evidence allows. Physical evidence for a young Earth, zero; the tools used to show it: none. Physical evidence for an ancient Universe and old Earth is the entirety of the Universe itself; the tools used to show it: science. Get some knowledge and understanding of science and how it works. If your faith cannot stand up to it so much for the value of your faith. But if it does manage to withstand the “factuality” how much stronger will it be?
It was the creationists of 300 years ago who realised that wherever they looked the physical evidence contradicted their beliefs. Fortunately, no boneheads, they had the intellectual honesty to modify their beliefs to take account of the evidence. As an old master of mine at school used to say “ignorance is not knowing, it’s knowing you don’t know and not doing anything about it.”.
Perhaps you prefer to remain happy in your ignorance.
Samphire
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Now gentlemen, let us recall that we are not boneheads here, right? Let's shake hands here. Samphire ... of all the people to say there is "zero" evidence for a young Earth, tsk, tsk. You know that Dr. Hovind shows this over and over again in his Seminar #1. There was no time for supposed evolution to have happened since the Earth is young.
Mr. Ekkman & Mr. Samphire - if desired - please repeat to folks a few main links supporting your contending beliefs on this important matter, and then let us move on, please.
There is excellent scientific evidence that the Earth is young. (See Dr. Hovind's Seminar #1, "The Age of the Earth." http://shopping.drdino.com/view_item.php?id=440 )
(Free to view online:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2932359112394939560 )
Also, there is a good book on-line, free to download, "It's a Young World After All" by Dr. Ackerman: http://www.creationism.org/ackerman/ P.A. ]
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 2:26am:Hi Amigas,
What constitutes a church seems to me to be as basic a question as what constitutes a brick. However, despite the question’s simplicity we already have a disagreement between you and 3 Crosses. He says it’s when 2 or 3 christians are gathered together and you say it is the entirety of believers. So we already have a problem for the IRS.
To you, Endtimes, 3 Xs etc I am just trying to establish the ground rules. Where you all seem to see simplicity I see complexity. In early days of the Constitution religion and its attendant practice was simple. The separation of church and state was an easy matter. The churches’ incomes were relatively low and the uses to which those funds were put were limited and mainly charitable. Today, we have megachurches with congregations in their many thousands, tele-evangelists with huge incomes, world-wide crusades and an enormous amount of politicking and special pleading. Much of the funds raised by members is put to in-house use rather than wider charitable uses. Religion is now Big Business.
The times have changed and it does not seem to me to be unreasonable that the laws should change to recognize different circumstances. Under IRS rules and, notwithstanding 501(c)3s status, minister’s salaries remain untaxed. That is something I would fix straightaway if I had the power. I have many criticisms of Kent but, to his great credit, I believe that like most christian ministers, he has no regard for personal wealth. However, I believe that there is much abuse amongst the bigger, wealthier churches and it is not good these should go unmonitored. At the present time, you have a Mormon Presidential candidate presumably backed by huge church untaxed funds if he required it. Is that a good thing in a democracy?
So, I am still trying to discover exactly what your limits and boundaries are. At one extreme, why should Scientology pay no tax on its income? At the other, why should Kent not pay tax on his profit on Dinosaur Adventure Land entry fees – fees he dishonestly describes as “donations”?
Kind regards,
Samphire
darling
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:29am:2ndamenduser said this at 7:43pm Jun16:
“Would someone please post in simple, yet accurate terms the actual charges against the Hovind’s, ie. what laws are they charged with actually breaking?”
Mr. Hovind was charged (in part) under Title 26 USC § 7202:
Any person required under this title to collect, account for, and pay over any tax… shall be fined… or imprisoned.
Withholding is required under Title 26 USC § 3402:
every employer making payment of wages shall deduct and withhold upon such wages a tax…
§3401 defines wages as:
… all remuneration… for services performed by an employee for his employer…
And an employer as:
… the person for whom an individual performs or performed any service, of whatever nature, as the employee of such person…
The §3401 definition of employee, because of its use of “includes,” is not a comprehensive definition (see definition of “includes” in §7701(c)) so we need to look elsewhere.
For example, the taxes are listed in a number of places. The FICA tax is in Chapter 21 (§31xx), which defines an employee (in §3121(d)) as:
… any individual who, under the usual common law rules applicable in determining the employer-employee relationship, has the status of an employee…
So, we look to – and apply – the usual common law rules. For example:
http://www.wm.edu/grants/HANDBOOK/irs20ruletest.htm
Which is (partly) what the trial was about. The jury saw evidence showing Mr. Hovind exerted more than sufficient control over the people who worked at CSE/DAL for them to be considered employees.
“The Supreme Court ruled once, I believe, that a law that is unconstitutional is no law, and should be treated as if it did not exist.”
This may be true, but is of no use if Courts has ruled over and over and over again that something is constitutional, which is the case here.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Folks, if you use HTML (bold & italics) please remember to turn it off at the end of the post. Thanks, P.A. ]
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:36am:FuManChu [jun20 3.31pm] the tone of this tome is so much more pleasant to the ear. Might I suggest that it is for Juries to strike down legislation with their reason and following good moral principle. Is this too idealistic to entertain? Too simplistic? Too pure? Must we defer to experts?
If all men are equal before the law and power is vested in citizens as a matter of their freely exercised rights to association, how then can Judges interpretations be superior to those of Juries?
I side with the moderator.
What then is a Legal Authority? There can be only one and it cannot be divided. Respectfully I suggest that God is not optional to discussions of Juris Prudence.
Either moral authority exists and is the source of law, or it does not.
[and I respect your right to think me mad - even to reassert your earlier claims - better for me to fear God than man]
darling
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:40am:PHILLIP-GEORGE said this at 5:33am Jun13
“when writers descend to the ad hominem their wits are at an end. They have nothing to say…”
Thank you for your admission.
PHILLIP-GEORGE said this at 9:30pm Jun14:
” I repeat myself – you earlier asserted as positive “fact” that they did determine those people were “employees”
You later qualify your statement with what could have or should have happened.”
Criminal trials don’t specific findings of fact – the answer is “guilty” or “not guilty”.
But, to find Mr. Hovind guilty, the jury first had to determine there was an employer-employee relationship. No woulda, coulda. It did happen.
GORGE said this at 4:53pm Jun17:
“But “those kinds of things” can equally and obviously be applied to contractors.”
Not really. There’s a more in-depth discussion, and a lot more factors to consider, here:
http://www.wm.edu/grants/HANDBOOK/irs20ruletest.htm
Maturekid said this at 11:06pm Jun16:
“Prior to then Sen. Lyndon B Johnson inserting into the tax code 501.3c to effectively gag the preachers in the pulpit, government had no power or taxation ability over a church.”
Except that’s just not true. Absent that provision, churches would still have to adhere to the other rules.
(For an added bonus, just because a government doesn’t use power or ability to do something doesn’t mean they don’t have power and ability to do something.)
“The big bone of contention is how does the “gag order” Lyndon Johnson put in the IRS code and the later provision match up with “Congress shall make no law…”
In exactly the same way that other non-profit rules match up.
Paul said this:
“[EDITOR’S NOTE: … There is only a court case, Marbury v. Madison (1803), whose decision was actually never acted upon by President Jefferson.”
Why would Jefferson act? He didn’t have to – he won.
“What is Constitutional in the USA is “Citizen Review” of the legislators themselves, but not “Judicial Review” of the laws passed by the legislators.”
So Congress can pass blatantly unconstitutional laws, and that’s OK so long as Congress keeps getting reelected? Doesn’t that defeat the Constitution’s purpose of preventing tyranny of the majority?
Harriet said this at 10:48am Jun19:
“Does this have anything to do with “case law”?”
Judicial Review / case law are part of the same concept. What courts rule in the past guides us as to how they will rule in the future. Otherwise the legal system would be more like a lottery.
So, when the courts rule over and over and over again that the arguments Mr. Hovind used are bogus, it’s a pretty safe bet they’ll rule the same way in the future.
PHILLIP GEORGE said this at 8:40pm Jun19:
“These are not “opinions” from a Judge aka. Judicial Review.”
Indeed. Consequently they hold as little weight as your words or my words.
Samphire said this at 4:52pm Jun20:
“So anybody who claims to be a christian is part of the church ministry and any money they earn should, in your view, be free of tax?”
See, that’s the problem in a nutshell. When you create a set of ad-hoc rules to support a position it can lead to some crazy results:
PHILLIP-GEORGE is reduced to claiming laws don’t apply to him because they don’t mention him by name. Which renders the entire legal system pretty much meaningless.
And we have Maturekid and EndTimes with definitions of ‘church’ so broad that anybody can claim to be nontaxable (and nobody can claim they’re not). Which renders the tax system pretty much meaningless.
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 8:17am:“I hope this gives someone sensible something to chew on [I realise what I have just said excludes Samphire from being able to entertain an opinion on the matter]“
Little, P-G, of what you write is sensible, “sartorial ignorance”, for instance. “I have the privilege/ providential happenstance, of some source material…”. No, you don’t; you have a tape.
What on Earth has the criminal conviction of Kent Hovind to do with the civil (not common) law requirement that appeals must be filed or lodged (not launched) within 28 days of judgment? I do not know US law but I am willing to bet an elegant English golden guinea to the beer bottle top of an Aussie dollar that an appeal against a criminal conviction may be lodged at any time. In England, we have even had cases of appeals being brought 50 years and more after the poor guys have been executed (so not much longer for them to wait, eh, Endtimes, before they get resurrected?).
On one thing, P-G, I do agree. It is scandalous that the transcript should take so long. I doubt, though, that the courts owe a common law duty of care in the matter. Presumably, if Ed and Elaine Brown had paid their federal taxes there would be more money available to pay for more transcribers.
Sade Tennyson
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 8:22am:Brother Kent Hovind, Sister Jo, Eric, Hovind’s family & CSE family
Grace & peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.
Through the grace of God our Saviour all will be well. Our God is over all & He will see you through this time of storm in Jesus name. Keep your focus on the Lord & the work of winning souls from the captivity of the devil. Remember the agony that these souls will face eternally in Hell. Don’t get distracted from winning these souls from the hand of the devil. I pray we will all intensify our efforts in preaching the gospel & keep exposing the lies that th devil is using to hold them in captivity. As many as the devil has used to unjustly work against Dr Hovind, will keep finding it difficult to fight against their creator (the Lord Jesus Christ) all the days of their lives till they repent like Paul did in Jesus mighty name. Amen. I pray each of them will be brought under conviction that “what shall it profit them if they gain the whole world & loose their souls in HELL FIRE, where their worms dieth not & the FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED!!! I pray the Lord Jesus in his mercy will open their eyes to see the torments that awaits them before it is too late to REPENT, in Jesus name. Amen.
Sister Jo, I’ll keep praying for you, the Lord willgo ahead of you on the 29th of June 2007 in Jesus worthy name. Amen. Remember the Lord Jesus has promised never to leave nor forsake you. Keep following the Lord, never give up.
Be encouraged with this song:
Through good report and evil, Lord,
Still guided by Thy faithful Word,
Our staff, our buckler and our sword,
We follow Thee.
In silence of the lonely night,
In the full glow of day’s clear light,
Through life’s strange windings, dark or bright,
We follow Thee.
Strengthened by Thee we forward go,
’Mid smile or scoff of friend or foe,
Through pain or ease, through joy or woe,
We follow Thee.
With enemies on every side,
We lean on Thee, the Crucified;
Forsaking all on earth beside,
We follow Thee.
O Master, point Thou out the way,
Nor suffer Thou our steps to stray;
Then in the path that leads to day
We follow Thee.
Thou hast passed on before our face;
Thy footsteps on the way we trace;
O keep us, aid us by Thy grace;
We follow Thee.
Whom have we in the heaven above,
Whom on this earth, save Thee, to love?
Still in Thy light we onward move;
We follow Thee.
Sade Tennyson.
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 8:46am:Dear Paul,
No need to shout – my sincere apologies if I stepped on your gout. If you are going to come into the kitchen from time to time you are at risk of coming int contact with some hot water. We all admire the way you carry out your duties as moderator but, on this occasion, Fumanchu (as always) made an excellent post which, in my opinion, you criticised without detailed justification.
In my humble submission, Yer Honour, you have still not done so. Fumanchu stated “Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution states: “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution (and) the Laws of the United States”. It seems to Fumanchu and myself that if a case comes before the Supreme Court which involves a law which breaches an article of the Constitution then it is just the thing on which the court should be adjudicating. A man’s life should not depend on a four-yearly cycle of Congressional elections.
In England we rely on our Law Lords to protect our rights from the bad laws made by an incompetent legislative. Why does a certain US political element not trust their most senior judges? Is it because they are appointed only at long intervals in the political process by partisan presidents?
Enzyme
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 9:35am:Dear Dr Hovind, Friends and Enemies
I found this “very interesting” site at
Here is a snippet of the material, I hope it might be of interest to you. Yours sincerely Enzyme
PS. All things work for good to them in Christ Jesus.
Where did the Universe come from?
Einstein’s Big Blunder
100 years ago this year, Albert Einstein published three papers that rocked the world. These papers [...EDITED --- about 3 pages REMOVED ...]
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Enzyme, Is the person on "Myspace" - whom you appear to have plagiarized from (www.myspace.com/blakehofmann) - personally known to you? A few sentences (with proper credit), perfectly fine. But you submitted a tome. And you did not give credit regarding where you borrowed the text from, right? Your "site at" above had nothing afterwards. Were you going to add something after finding appropriate wording?
Please consider this edit an "all things work together" type reproof, brother.
Understand that a blog is for personal opinions. If you quote others (and please do, but as appropriate) give them credit. P.A. ]
In the beginning were words and language.
In the Beginning was Information.
When we consider the mystery of life – where it came from and how this miracle is possible – do we not at the same time
ask the question where it is going, and what its purpose is?
Respectfully Submitted,
Perry Marshall
CrossTheBorder.org
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 9:55am:Mat 22:17-22 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? (18) But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, [ye] hypocrites? (19) Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny. (20) And he saith unto them, Whose [is] this image and superscription? (21) They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s. (22) When they had heard [these words], they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.
When you belong to Ceaser, everything you have belongs to Ceaser. When you belong to the Creator, everything you have belongs to HIM. Render therefore to your god that which is due! Do you worship the IMAGE then render to it! The gold and the silver belong to the One Who Created them, those who are His will render to Him! The U.S. Government is an image that only exsists in the minds of men, certianly there are men and armies that breath life into the Image, but it is still only an image! Only HIS Kingdom will last forever! That is reality. Keep running the race Kent, you are doing a great job! We still hear your voice on FirstAmendmentRadio.com
All you nay-sayers, we percieve your wickedness! Repent, the Kinndon IS at hand!
Nicklas Arthur
Matthew
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 10:47am:[EDITOR’S NOTE: Samphire … of all the people to say there is “zero” evidence for a young Earth, tsk, tsk. You know that Dr. Hovind shows this over and over again in his Seminar #1. There was no time for supposed evolution to have happened since the Earth is young.
Paul, why do you not want to explain how the world is young? Why do you suggest that we should look at these videos? Maybe, you should do some research and learn the truth about Hovind’s arguments.
If you do not want to do the research, I suggest that you watch
Critical Analysis Of Age Of The Earth.
FuManchu
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 11:47am:“Must we defer to experts?”
(Aussie P-G, 21 June 2007)
And there we have the very essence of everything that has been wrong with your legal arguments for weeks. It takes a very special kind of person to use ‘expert’ as a derogatory term.
Of course we should defer to experts! What kind of a question is that? Law is an immensely complex area: so far I’ve studied it for only two years, but that’s long enough to know that I could study it for the rest of my life and not come close to knowing everything there is to know. It’s simply absurd to believe that a jury could be expected to decide on complex questions of law more accurately than a judge – any more than you’d expect a group of randomly-chosen passers-by to be able to perform appendectomies more competently than a doctor, or build a house more efficiently than an architect.
In a perfect world we wouldn’t need lawyers, true; but in a perfect world we wouldn’t get appendicitis and our houses would build themselves.
EndTimes
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 11:59am:Dear Samphire,
Everyone is forgetting the simple statement that is no longer honoured in America which is “the free exercise therof.” I earn $100.00 and I pay my dutiful 60% to Caesar quite cheerfully mind you. Am I not “free” to give whatever I want of the remaining $40.00 to who ever I wish? What if we gather all things in common and then live together and preach together as they did in Acts. Since I have already payed my lawful taxes, does Caesar have any authority over the lawful expression of my religion and that money that is donated to express my religious convictions? Under the original intent of the constitution, the answer is no. Now if my religious affiliation engages in a business, then that is likewise subject to taxation by the constitution. Yet, if several men performing the duties of the church that they are called to work in have no support outside of the donations of those that support them, should Caesar Tax those donations a second time?? Absolutely not. It is quite simple even with today’s “megachurches” which I personally shy away from.
But what about the Jerusalem “megachurch” in the book of Acts where over 5000 people joined in one day?
The constitution states that the government shall not infringe the free exercise of religious expression. Well, they no longer honour this constitutional protection and they now do use the IRS to subjugate the control of the summed total donations to an organization and treat it as a business entity when it is in fact a religious entity. So yes, Caesar now taxes my donations that previously were quite “nontaxable.” Such a simple concept for such divisive contentions. I dare say, that if the church of America today sought true scriptural adherance in doctrines and practices, a self governing religious institution could still operate in an above board manner with responsible care of all donations in a nontaxable manner. That is the entire concept of a “faithful steward.” Unfortunately, most church members don’t understand that it is not just the church staff that are accountable for that task as well.
So, the insidious movement by our government was changing the status of the American church from nontaxable to nonprofit and tax exempt status. These are totally different concepts. That is why Dr. Hovind is now in jail due to this simple “little” change that has such profound consequences with a total abrogation of the originally intended religious freedom protections. The nonprofit and tax expempt status is the one that engenders such complication, not the nontaxable position that we had prior to the 1950s. The other was administrated quite readily for over 150 years. I hope that this is a concise summary of the two positions.
In kindness,
EndTimes
GaryMurray
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 1:05pm:Samphire
Said this at 1:44am:
Physical evidence for a young Earth, zero; the tools used to show it: none. Physical evidence for an ancient Universe and old Earth is the entirety of the Universe itself; the tools used to show it: science. Get some knowledge and understanding of science and how it works. If your faith cannot stand up to it so much for the value of your faith. But if it does manage to withstand the “factuality” how much stronger will it be?
It was the creationists of 300 years ago who realised that wherever they looked the physical evidence contradicted their beliefs. Fortunately, no boneheads, they had the intellectual honesty to modify their beliefs to take account of the evidence. As an old master of mine at school used to say “ignorance is not knowing, it’s knowing you don’t know and not doing anything about it.”.
Perhaps you prefer to remain happy in your ignorance.
Samphire
_____________________________________
Once again Samphire completely disregards any evidence that has been published and resolved to the effect of a young earth (don’t ask me to post that evidence, its been done time and time again without any credible refutiation from any scenic on this board). There again, one would expect no less from his partisan faithfulness to the religion of science. Everyone believes their religion is right and (as he so eloquently stated) “factual” because it is their belief. This doesn’t make them or him right. I’ve come to realize Samphire’s type are going to believe only what is convenient to the lifestyle they have chosen. No sense in waisting effort to persuade them otherwise, they’re too grounded in their niche. Only stand resolved in your own faith and offer little credibility to their account.
I’ve pulled away from debating the same endless talking-points with those like Samphire on this site. I realized that the re-arrangement of canned foods in my cupboard is easier to stomach, more exhilarrating and rewarding than listening to the same brew-ha-ha these critics continue to spout.
In his arrogance, however, Samphire managed to redicule those of the past without “factually” stating history. It is true that when science began offering alternate ideas of creation rather than a divine architect some religious leaders of the past began developing and conforming their religious creation to explain the scientific ‘discoveries’. This was what could be considered a knee-jerk reaction without the benefit of true faith and understanding of ones religion and the Word of God. I assure you, though Samphire’s statement seems as though the entire religious community of the past was on this bandwagon of compromise, it is nothing more than a fabricated exaggeration of the real story, much like the mainstream liberal media over emphasizing a bad story because bad news makes for a great story.
These misguided invidual religious leaders did cause a minor upset and even division in some churches after developing alternate creation theories that weren’t listed in the Bible, just to support God, and nullify the scienfitic ‘discoveries’. Of course, the **majority** of religious factions stood firm in theif faith, not trying to explain or defend the Bible’s authority and just trusted that God’s Word is God’s Word, and accounted science as just another example of Timothy’s warning of false teachers and doctrine in 2 Timothy 4.
The Bible is clear to all believers that we should study to show ourselves approved. This isn’t just indicative toward God’s Word, but recorded history and all preserved recordings that will keep you founded and resolved in the true belief system of Christianity. There have been, are, and always will be those like Samphire who will offer attractive alternatives to sway your faith, God warned us of these people far before they were a glimmer in the eye of their Grandfather’s Grandfather, so don’t fret upon those such as Samphire. Keep grounded in your belief, remembering that faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. Remembering, also, that the scoffers, false teachers, and unbelievers will always go out of their way to disprove and discredit your beliefs, in order to amplify their own in their own eyes. They need their arguments against religion, it makes their faith in scientific ‘discovery’ seem more real and comforts them in their own heresy.
God Bless those in Christ. Praying always for the Hovind’s and their ministry and continuing faith in God, and his son Jesus Christ.
amigas
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 3:32pm:Dear Samphire,
You make a valid point, so let me attempt to explain. The Bible gives one definition of the Church and that is the entire body of Christ and it matters not what denomination (denominations were not part of the original Church and really shouldn’t be today either) they belong. There is also what most of us would call the local church body which is a localized group of believers that worship together but are also part of the Biblical body of Christ. Although many of us use different terminology I believe that if those on this blog that are true Christians could meet, we could probably come up with a definition
that would be suitable to all of us and the rest could probably understand also.
I also agree that we have a problem with the IRS, in fact I don’t believe we need them at all. I am not a tax protester although at times I feel like becoming one. I understand that there must be taxes for the government to run properly for them to provide the protection for US citizens right to LIFE, LIBERTY and THE PERSUIT OF HAPPINESS and that should be governments basic limit. I understand that we will probably never be able to get back to the intent of the constitution with respect to religion, and with so many false religions (look at NOAH WEBSTER’s definition of religion in his 1828 dictionary) and most of our government leaders not being Christian (by their fruits you shall know them) who would determine the taxable/nontaxable status of the many “religions” in this country.
Although it wouldn’t fix the “BIG” government problem the Fair Tax would fix the IRS problem.
Just because I understand that the chances of fixing some of our governments problem is a near impossibility doesn’t mean that I should cease to speak the truth and do my best to change what is wrong.
Also, the wealthiness of a church doesn’t determine the corruption it just makes it more noticeable.
Kind regards;
Gene Schmeling
Joshua Berndt
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 4:12pm:To the Editor,
Apparently there was a computer accident or you misunderstood my words and thought them to be mocking. I tried to post a note days ago, but I don’t find it. It was pretty much this:
God is Wonderful! All this time I have been getting angry at how Dr. Hovind is being treated. Imprisoned and shuffled around. But guess what? He is still a travelling Evangelist!
Maturekid
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 4:41pm:Darling -
“And we have Maturekid and EndTimes with definitions of ‘church’ so broad that anybody can claim to be nontaxable (and nobody can claim they’re not). Which renders the tax system pretty much meaningless.”
Congrats, you’ve got that part. Now here is the big emphasis of the main point many are trying to make. Which came first the Constitution & The Bill of Rights or the IRS Tax Code? Which has to answer to which?
Answers: USA Constitution & Bill of Rights; IRS Tax Code must answer to the Constitution & Bill of Rights. Does the broad definition of church make the tax code meaningless? Well, yes. Had those who authored the income tax code and added clauses to it to impact “churches” had a fraction of the wisdom of the Founding Fathers then this issue would never be talked about. The topic was covered by the Founding Fathers, later on we screwed it up. End of story, that simple. Reading your stuff reminds me of Ex-President Bill Clinton’s statement “It depends on what your definition of “is” is.” Pure semantics to undercut the Founding Fathers and the supreme law of the land. But that’s been done for so long, the Federal Government has forgotten its purpose and limitations.
Matthew
“Paul, why do you not want to explain how the world is young? Why do you suggest that we should look at these videos? Maybe, you should do some research and learn the truth about Hovind’s arguments.
If you do not want to do the research, I suggest that you watch
Critical Analysis Of Age Of The Earth. ”
Easy answer Matthew. We left this topic set a long time ago. Young Earth / Old Earth, Evol / Creation was nixed quite some time ago. Please move on. Give it a rest.
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:03pm:Hi, Endtimes
“Yet, if several men performing the duties of the church that they are called to work in have no support outside of the donations of those that support them, should Caesar Tax those donations a second time?”
Why not? If I decide to build a new house out of my tax-paid income then the money I pay (donate) to my builders as wages is also taxed. And when they take their taxed wages down the pub of an evening to wash the plaster dust out of their lungs then it will again be taxed etc etc. That is how general taxation works.
“The constitution states that the government shall not infringe the free exercise of religious expression. Well, they no longer honour this constitutional protection and they now do use the IRS to subjugate the control of the summed total donations to an organization and treat it as a business entity when it is in fact a religious entity. So yes, Caesar now taxes my donations that previously were quite “nontaxable.”
I don’t think that it is entirely true to claim that the IRS taxes your donations. The tax is charged on the retained profits. Corporation tax is not paid on monies expended in the church business. Was it your intention that your donations would be used for some useful ministry purpose or just sit in a bank account?
Again Kent is not in jail for failing to pay tax on profits but for failing to withhold payroll tax and employer’s contributions, the responsibility of a “faithful steward” to his employees. Again, I restate an earlier post that Kent did not claim that he was making a stand in not paying the tax for religious reasons but because he refused to accept that any law existed which required him to pay the tax. Ed & Elaine Brown seem to be making the exact same point. Am I wrong?
Kind regards
Samphire
Harriet
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:09pm:Mrs. Hovind,
We are praying for you!
My family
Harriet
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:10pm:P.A.:
Would there be a direct link to your broadcast on Judicial Review?
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Not at this time. I will put one up today. I'll post a link within the blog later today, for any who may be interested. P.A. ]
steveupsidedown
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:14pm:Thanks for sharing Kent. It is encouraging to see that you are looking to God to work all things for his glory. I just want to let you know that I am praying for you and your wife. Thanks again for all that you have done and are doing for the cause of Christ.
Stephen Keim
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:27pm:Hi Gary,
Sorry to drag you away from your tin sorting – what a fascinating hobby.
I think that you will find that your views are in the minority amongst educated Christians throughout the world.
Now your turn to denigrate those mis-guided so-called “educated Christians”.
“They need their arguments against religion, it makes their faith in scientific ‘discovery’ seem more real and comforts them in their own heresy.”
Wrong again. I’ve said it many times on this blog that science and religion are separate entities. Hold to your religion as you wish but in doing so do not abuse science. Scientific discovery is not faith but the absence of faith. Faith is the absence of evidence.
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 6:39pm:Hi amigas,
Thanks for the post. None of us very much like to pay tax. I try to take a positive view of what cannot be undone and feel myself fortunate to be in a position where I have income sufficient to be taxable. There are many poor people in the world who, by definition, are not so fortunate. Indeed, some of my taxes go to help relieve their poverty.
I disagree with you on one point. By Fair Tax I assume that you refer to a flat sales tax. This would be good for rich people with large incomes they can save but rough on poor people who have to spend a much larger proportion, if not all, of their income just to survive.
Kind regards
Samphire
Three Crosses
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 7:01pm:HEY ENDTIMES:
I would like to hear more of what you were saying about I.D. My only real problem with I.D. is that it is used by so many groups like, “the alien seed theory” that still avoids any approach to origins. I don’t see it as a movement at all to many variables but I do see it as obvious, on pretty much every level. Example: I don’t understand why evolutionists say the more complicated something is. The less likely it was to have been created. After studying the eye it appears obviously designed.
Anyway I don’t want to put everybody off but I will be very busy for the next couple of days and probably won’t be able to answer Samphire’s post to me until I get some time.
I do however think Warocuya did give a very good example of a large migration of people over a large area and I think most of your different languages not mixing has alot to do with racism I’ve worked with people at different places, who spoke perfect english but would not condesend to use it.
Thank you so much for your time!
God bless america, God save us all!
Samphire
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 7:06pm:Paul,
Just to let you now that I have taken your suggestion and have been watching Seminar no.1. 45 minutes in and I have yet to come across any science but I will persevere.
I enjoyed one comment: “Have you listened to rock music these days. Its all death and blood and destruction.”. Read any Old Testaments lately, Kent? And try listening to Oh Bla Di, Oh Bla Da.
Samphire
[EDITOR'S NOTE: And I in turn have looked up "Law Lords." The main body is composed of 12 members, is this correct? http://www.parliament.uk/about_lords/the_law_lords.cfm
Hmmm ... I am of the "in the multitude of counselors there is wisdom" persuasion. The US Supreme Court has but 9 members. Should a simple majority of only 5 of them have full sway over the combined wisdom of the 435 elected members in Congress? (Besides being unconstitutional, it is nonsensical, to the best of my understanding.)
The Law Lords and the Supreme Court are both deliberative bodies, of course, but if we respectively trust them (a chosen few) for the final say in what is lawful this seems less responsive to the will of the people (and collective wisdom) than in trusting hundreds of elected members in either Parliament or Congress; members who must later go back and justify their jobs as representatives before their respective constituents.
And in the case of the US, the "Judicial Review" concept (negating "Citizen Review" which is what is constitutional) was a legal "custom" that was added later, and has been mostly a recently used tool to steer US law away from justice. A half dozen souls with final say, but without sufficient recourse by the citizenry? The first chapter of "Men in Black" by Levin gives a litany of past US Supreme Court justices with various severe prejudices or who have become mentally ill with age. Yet they retained their voting power. Today, if 2 or 3 of them in their 70's or 80's began to get Alzheimer’s Disease, how could but 2 or 3 others then manipulate their votes? No, I must disagree with such a method to determine laws within a constitutional republic. They are to interpret BASED UPON the laws, with no actual power (Constitutionally-speaking) to question the duly passed laws of Congress, wherein is vested "all legislative powers." Judges saying "unconstitutional" is itself inherently unconstitutional. P.A. ]
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 7:06pm:FuManChu: Quote:
“It’s simply absurd to believe that a jury could be expected to decide on complex questions of law more accurately than a judge.”
Sorry, I disagree with you. As would Patrick Henry, I suspect, and possibly Lord Sir Edward Coke. Thankyou for getting back to me on the issue though. Your comments might cause some people concern. What really is tyranny?
Samphire: Quote:
“the criminal conviction”
Criminal or Quasi Criminal? Criminal as it might be constructed from acts of the Legislature? Or Criminal as it might be directly constructed from the Constitution? Or Criminal as it has long been understood from Common Law?
darling [jun21 6.40am]
thankyou for returning to the blog – you and FuManChu are the best of United State of America, and FuManChu doesn’t even live there.
Quote:
“Criminal trials don’t specific findings of fact – the answer is “guilty” or “not guilty”.
But, to find Mr. Hovind guilty, the jury first had to determine there was an employer-employee relationship. No woulda, coulda. It did happen.”
Unquote: so as with djhouk your rhetoric reduced to “it happened so it must have happened de jure” Something happened therefor the sequence of events leading up to that something “must” have occurred properly.
We both agree that Juries are there to establish “facts”.
The forensic question for a review is: Did the Jury understand what they “must”? and Did the Judge instruct the Jury correctly as to what they “must”?
I do not presume to know what happened. Especially in the “scandalous” absence of a transcript.
I would have thought such a level of incompetence renders doubts about the competence of the court – in a very serious way it casts a shadow a great distance over much terrain.
I would have thought that two twelve year old girls could walk into the supreme court [with a national enquirer photographer with them] with a one page writ of Habeus Corpus ad subjudicendum, written in their own hand writing, based on the denial of natural justice that seems to have occurred.
there is very much more that I have to say about your post but I shall sit on my hands for today and let the reader ponder what has been said. It is important that they consider where you are coming from. It is important that they see you in the light of day. You need much more exposure. So thankyou for your return.
djhouk
Said this on June 21st, 2007 at 11:18pm:Samphire
Said this at 2:26am:
——————————————————————————–
Under IRS rules and, notwithstanding 501(c)3s status, minister’s salaries remain untaxed.
Actually, no. Minister’s salary ARE taxed, and have always been; ever since the income tax was instituted. There seems to be a lot of confusion about taxation of churches on this board.
Churches and other nonprofits are NOT taxed at the organizational level (as are for-profit corporations). But I assure you, everyone employed by the church, including the minister, pays personal income tax on all earned income, including the salary paid to him by the church.
I know this from personal experience; my father has been a minister for over 50 years, and I have prepared and filed his taxes on many occasions. This is not a debatable point; it is a fact. Ministers (at least the honest ones) pay income tax just like everyone else.
Janet
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 2:00am:Hi Kent, I am still praying for you. May God’s will be done. I pray to God so much that you will be out with your family very soon and with your wife too. I sent you a paperback KJV bible. I figure you must have one, but I figured you could give it to someone who did not if you have one. HOwever, someone sent it back because I sent it in a bubblepacked envelope. Please tell us how paperback books are to be sent so that it won’t come back to me this time. It said unauthorized package. I signed the freekenthovind site and have encouraged others to do so. I just want you to be encouraged that the Lord loves and cares for you very much. Surely you still know that. I am praying for your wife also.
PAUL ABRAMSON: PLEASE DO NOT PUT THIS QUESTION ON IF IT IS NOT A GOOD TIME TO ASK THIS:
I may not know all the facts so please correct me if I am wrong, but the way I understand it was that you were operating under constitutional law and our judicial system is not allowing for that any longer and that Glen Stoll did not deliberately steer you wrong but that there were some things left undone that Mr. Stoll said needed to be taken care of and you hadn’t got around to it so that the IRS found an opening to attack. I guess what I want to know and direct this to Paul Abramson, cannot Glen Stoll be trusted to give good legal council or was he just mistaken or were there some things in the law that were not completed? I have read some remarks about Glen Stoll that I am wondering if they are unfair and that Kent made an error in leaving some things undone that the IRS and judge took advantage of unfairly. Please explain if you are able. PLEASE EDIT THIS PAUL IF NEED BE> I AM JUST DYING TO KNOW WHAT THE TRUTH IS ALSO TO AVOID MAKING THE SAME ERROR> if you cannot answer for some reason please say so and do not put this question on. Thanks. Janet
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Justice vs. Laws. In much of human history these two seem to not often coincide with each other. I ... had an example that I have used to discuss Dr. Hovind's situation, prior to the trial. Let's say that you are going to a distant village with the Gospel message. Thugs stop you and demand $100. If you pay they will let you pass and reach the village. You are the only Christian who has ever tried to reach that distant place. If you don't pay then you cannot go there. No one will be able to even hear the Good News that our sins have been paid for. Do you pay or not?
How important is money? Is is a goal or but a tool? How important is standing for your rights that such thugs are inherently wrong to be blocking the road? Paying them empowers them for future thievery. Not paying denies a village the Gospel. How do you decide what is best to do?
Back on May 15th -- I added the reminder (now again) posted below:
–(I wrote this below on Feb. 24th; it may interest recent bloggers)– I have personally met and spoken with Mr. Glen Stoll on multiple occasions. He has been charged over the years with a litany of misconduct and error. A previous posting (Feb. 7th) linked to: http://jensgems.blogspot.com/2007/02/kent-hovind-avoid-all-appearances-of.html Others have been badly hurt as well. But concerning Dr. Hovind’s character, I know him as a man who is self-sacrificing, almost a work-aholic, sincere, and who came to Berkeley, California, (twice!) when other creationist that I invited stayed away; and he came on his own dime, as I could not even promise to cover his airfare. He saw U.C. Berkeley as an important mission field. The sparks flew! (See Debate #18, “Berkeley Finally Hears the Truth”) Ed. note by: Paul Abramson ]
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 6:31am:I cannot sit on my hands on this particular issue.
FuManChu, It was “experts” who gave us partial birth abortions; poker machines and legal brothels and it is experts who want to ban “Christmas” trees and nativity scenes. With respect to moral questions the only authority is God; “human experts” on moral matters mean nothing to me – and the law divorced from the moral imperative is as sick a concept as ever a man could conceive of. When it comes to a Judge saying the framers of the Constitution did not want to discriminate against a woman’s right to kill her baby I am happy to call them “experts”. The bible has a great deal to say about people who are wise in their own eyes – it is a recurrent theme. Thus I think of you and darling as “experts” on all things legal.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
darling – were you at the trial? are you the trial judge? do you work for the IRS? Perhaps you know a lot more than any of us could about what took place. What is your source of specific information?
amigas
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 10:14am:Dear Samphire,
You may not be informed on the Fair Tax, there is a book by John Linder and Neal Boortz titled The Fair Tax. According to this plan there would be a prebate for all families based on the tax that will be imbeded in the cost of necessity consumables. This system will provide incentive for productivity unlike our present system that rewards non productivity. With this system those who buy more will pay more in taxes. It would also take away the incentive to lie about income because of a tax burden that will no longer be there. It would also do away with an unwanted, unwarranted, unforgiving, non caring government orginization.
The FAIR TAX book can be purchased for about $15.00US.
steveupsidedown
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 1:17pm:Dear Samphire,
As you seem to hold the evolutionary principles in such high regard as scientific, perhaps you would oblige the rest of us in providing even one example of genetic mutations increasing cellular complexity. This would be a great example of real evolution.
But please, do not waste our time with such examples as superbug gaining resistance to antibiotics. We already know that this is an example of a loss of information in the bacteria’s nutrient exchange. Also, leave off the example of malaria resistance in humans. We know that this is only sickle cell anemia, which is obviously a loss of information.
In fact, …[...EDITED...]
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Stephen - I'm sorry. ...We had to make a decision a few months back to limit the then raging creation-evolution debate. It was quite contentious. Folks (including myself) still make comments and provide a few links ... but alas ... all good things must come to an end.
You mentioned a Dr. Humphreys article? Please provide the link to this - as some folks may want to follow up on that portion. Please do continue to read and participate in this blog ... but I am afraid that we have to limit the direct C v. E content, or else it overwhelms everything else. P.A. ]
Paul spoke about your type in Romans when he said
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse:
Rom 1:21 because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.
Please repent.
Stephen Keim
pabramson
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 2:02pm:¡Hola! If any of you amigos are interested, I have posted a few of my recent “SMART Hour” broadcasts in MP3 format.
Sincerely, Paul Abramson
(P.S. I hope this posting can make it past that darn persnickety moderator of this site!)
Creation Science Evidences (45 min.) – http://www.creationism.org/mp3/AbramsonSmartHr_CrtnOvrw.mp3 (11MB)
History of the Creation Movement (45 min.) – http://www.creationism.org/mp3/AbramsonSmartHr_CrtnHist.mp3 (17MB)
Nutrition, Toxins, and Modern Times (45 min.) – http://www.creationism.org/mp3/AbramsonSmartHr_ToxinsNutrition.mp3 (16MB)
Unconstitutional Judicial Review (45 min.) – http://www.creationism.org/mp3/AbramsonSmartHr_JudicialRvw.mp3 (16MB)
Electromagnetic Pulse Danger (45 min.) – http://www.creationism.org/mp3/AbramsonSmartHr_EMP_Danger.mp3 (15MB)
FuManchu
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 2:53pm:Aussie P-G:
‘Experts’ may have given us a lot of things you disagree with, but that’s not really a problem with experts per se, it’s just that not everyone in the world agrees with you. God may well be the only authority on moral questions, but He hasn’t really made much of an effort to put His point of view across in that last couple of millennia, so let’s concentrate on the legal questions.
With regard to the many plagues that ‘experts’ have visited upon society, any one of the problems you mentioned could be solved by law or constitutional amendment; it’s hardly the fault of the judges that the legislature doesn’t want to act on a particular issue. The fact that some judgments have not gone the way you wanted them to does not invalidate them or make them bad law. I don’t agree with most of the decisions of my Government; that doesn’t mean I don’t think we should have a Government at all.
I’m assuming you don’t define yourself as an ‘expert’? You certainly have a lot to say.
Harriet
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 2:57pm:America is in great need of a complete spiritual overhaul.
in the individual, in legislation, in courts…
[more from Richard Mayberry]
Although our Founders wrote the Constitution to be consistent with natural law, (common law)it was never intended to answer all questions. Early legislation (before 1930) was based on case law which was true to natural law. The judicial and legislative branches agreed on this common law and both had a healthy respect for the Higher Law (who is God). When FDR rescued America from the Depression, his new type of legislation, unlike natural law, ed open the back door for a growing monster of legislation. ‘Political laws’ created a few government programs, and led America decades later to so much legislation that we have an almost tyrannical government.
Moreover, both the legislative and the judicial branch have grown cold towards the Higher Law. While senators and congressman author many corrupt laws, wrapping a rope around the neck of the ordinary citizens, Paul Abramson’s ‘judicial review’ paints the judges tightening the noose.
“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
Benjamin Franklin
America is in great need of a complete spiritual overhaul.
Harriet
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 3:06pm:EDITOR’S NOTE: Justice vs. Laws. In much of human history these two seem to not often coincide with each other. I … had an example that I have used to discuss Dr. Hovind’s situation, prior to the trial. Let’s say that you are going to a distant village with the Gospel message. Thugs stop you and demand $100. If you pay they will let you pass and reach the village. You are the only Christian who has ever tried to reach that distant place. If you don’t pay then you cannot go there. No one will be able to even hear the Good News that our sins have been paid for. Do you pay or not?
How important is money? Is is a goal or but a tool? How important is standing for your rights that such thugs are inherently wrong to be blocking the road? Paying them empowers them for future thievery. Not paying denies a village the Gospel. How do you decide what is best to do?
ANSWER
It depends on if the thugs are a government entity or not. We are advised to be wise as serpents and as gentle as doves. A serpent could slip past the slugs, and a dove can fly over. Or both serpent and dove could wait until the thugs are gone. It’s a matter of prayer and guidance by the Holy Spirit.
Harriet
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 4:24pm:Have listened to “Judicial Review” and will comment on different points later.
Must reply to the remark about homeschool population being outnumbered by the bullies in public school. True! However, married Christians everywhere have truth to pass along to the next generation. What we teach our children affects up to the fourth generation.
If more Christians would allow Christ to be lord of their family size (and stop being DECEIVED that 2 children are enough!), then in 4 generations, cultural trends in America will be reversed. It is simple mathematics:
2 parents with 2 children who have 2 children, etc. will in 4 generations affect 32 people.
2 parents with 5 children who also have 5 children, etc. will in 4 generations affect 625 people.
2 parents with 8 children who also have 8 children, etc. will in 4 generations affect 4096 people.
2 parents with 12 children who also have 12 children, etc. will in 4 generations affect 20,736.
20,736 will outvote 32 votes everytime! Even when they cheat!
I think this is TRUE survival of the fittest!
Harriet
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 6:23pm:Sorry, bloggers, I don’t mean to do all the talking. After this comment, I’ll wait & see if you are as interested in this topic as I am.
I believe the problem caused by Judicial Review also includes legislators.
Legislators and Judges work together to bring lawfulness or corruption to a culture. Originally in Germany, killing of any innocent humans was “murder.” Then political leaders acquired the power to change the law, (‘political law’) and the judges went along. Exceptions crept in, such as ‘mental incompetency’. Later, other ‘undesirables’ became exceptions until finally millions were killed.
Legally.
In 1946 the Nuremberg trials exposed this ‘political law’ for the barbaric system it was. Nazi defendants claimed innocence because they were within their nation’s laws and were following orders. The Nuremberg Judges agreed: “the fact that the defendants acted pursuant to order of his government or of a superior shall not free him from responsibility.” Defendants were judged guilty, and some were executed.
Richard J. Maybury [Whatever Happened to Justice?, 1993] calls the Nuremberg trials the most important legal decision of the 20th century. Maybury calls it a barefaced admission that:
1. There is a Higher Law than any government’s law.
2. We are all obliged to obey this Higher Law.
3. Courts must seek out and enforce this Higher Law.
Still quoting Maybury, ‘ever since [the Nuremberg trials], governments have done their best to bury the significance of the Nuremberg decision. They have largely succeeded. Today no one searches for Higher Law. [Conventional] schools teach nothing about it. Few students know anything about Nuremberg.
EndTimes
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 6:58pm:Jun 22 Janet/Said this at 2:00am:
“I may not know all the facts so please correct me if I am wrong, but the way I understand it was that you were operating under constitutional law and our judicial system is not allowing for that any longer and that Glen Stoll did not deliberately steer you wrong but that there were some things left undone that Mr. Stoll said needed to be taken care of and you hadn’t got around to it so that the IRS found an opening to attack. I guess what I want to know and direct this to Paul Abramson, cannot Glen Stoll be trusted to give good legal council or was he just mistaken or were there some things in the law that were not completed? I have read some remarks about Glen Stoll that I am wondering if they are unfair and that Kent made an error in leaving some things undone that the IRS and judge took advantage of unfairly. Please explain if you are able. PLEASE EDIT THIS PAUL IF NEED BE> I AM JUST DYING TO KNOW WHAT THE TRUTH IS ALSO TO AVOID MAKING THE SAME ERROR> if you cannot answer for some reason please say so and do not put this question on. Thanks. Janet”
Dear Janet,
Your plea leads me to write the most difficult post that I have ever written on this blog because of your expressed trust in Glen Stoll based by your comments above. From the comments that you have made, it appears that you hold him in much higher regard than is due to this man and I hope and pray that you have not yourself hooked up with his swindling “law firm” which is anything but a law firm. Since there have been many others at times with favorable comments about this man, let me show you what he truly is and what he believes and why he is a cult leader doing great harm to the body of Christ and why he needs to be publicly RENOUNCED to prevent others from being hurt. So, not by my words, but by Glen Stoll’s will we see that he is making merchandise of the household of God and even worse, setting them up for long prison sentences such as Dr. Hovind. First of all, looking on his home page, he has a list for those “currently in jail” which states “NONE.” It appears that he has either divorced himself from Dr. Hovind or he is simply a LIAR.
Many have already commented on this blog about this man. I don’t recall the specific entries from other CSE bloggers, but I did do some extensive research on Mr. Stoll’s Embassy of Heaven website back in March and I would first refer you to those specific posts to understand more of who this man is by his own writings.
http://www.cseblogs.com/?p=64#comments
1) Mar 3 EndTimes/Said this at 1:43pm:
2) Mar3 EndTimes/Said this at 6:32pm:
3) Mar3 EndTimes/Said this at 6:45pm:
Specifically, his most self-incriminating writings are tucked away in an obscure booklet on his website that is a little hard to find without DILIGENTLY SEARCHING called: What is Embassy of Heaven Church?/Published in the Kingdom of Heaven/Year of Our Lord, 1991
http://www.embassyofheaven.com/catalog/whateohc.htm
In this booklet, Glen Stoll, aka “pastor Paul Revere,” states that any “ambassador of heaven” that have would even obtain a state drivers license would “lose his salvation” for such a simple act. Thus, by Glen Stoll’s own doctrine openly declared in his writings, his church is a cult lead by a false teacher with false rules of salvation and thus his is a false gospel for which the Bible declares that he is accursed. (Galatians 1: 6-9) No Christian should have any dealings with this man, and any man that has been hurt by this man should publicly declare the injury done to prevent unsuspecting believers any future hurt. Please look for yourself in the section called:
Ambassadors for Heaven’s Government
“We are ambassadors in the world.36 2 Corinthians 5:20 Therefore we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God. Our laws are the Kingdom of Heaven laws, which are reflected in the Sermon on the Mount. Our ambassadors will lose their ambassadorial status if they participate in the politics of the world, if they become involved in State affairs. If an ambassador goes down and gets a State driver’s license, he would lose his ambassadorship. He would lose his salvation. He effectively will be cast from the Kingdom of Heaven. He would be thrown out because he would be considered an adulterer or an adulteress with the world.”
The most difficult part of understanding who Glen Stoll is comes from the horrific situation his most famous client now faces directly by his “LAW ADVICE.” Jo Hovind is at risk of long term incarceration COMPLETELY AT THE HANDS OF GLEN STOLL from Glen Stoll’s “recommendation” to never withdraw or deposit more than $10,000.00 in any single transaction. There are no other allegations against her. She is a godly woman who deserves our love and support. She needs our prayers that the Lord would have mercy on her for she did not believe she was doing anything unlawful BECAUSE OF GLEN STOLL’S “LAW” ADVICE. Glen Stoll denies this is his advice in his affidavit to the IRS, yet the Hovind trial confirms that was the source. See item number 17:
http://www.remediesatlaw.com/courtesy_response_2005-10-15.pdf
It is with great sadness and extreme disbelief that we must acknowledge Dr. Hovind’s dependence on this man to “protect” him from the IRS that has instead brought destruction to his once very effective ministry. Yet these are the plain facts that are presented before us that we cannot deny no matter how much we wish that we could. That is the one aspect of this case that I have never understood nor probably ever will. The truth is, Kent Hovind not only trusted Glen Stoll for his advice, he also turned over OWNERSHIP of his ministry to Glen Stoll.
“While the building permit case was tied up in a four-year court battle, ownership of the theme park was turned over to Glen Stoll, who works with Hovind on legal issues and is based in Washington.”
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/15261/kent-hovind-evangelist-arrested-on-federal-charges
I will ask a very difficult question that I wish not to ask, yet I must. Is God ever happy when a true believer entrusts God’s assets to a cult leader? (Forgive me, I do not ask this lightly) We all know the answer to that question. It is my belief that the fight against the IRS over the sovereignty of the CSE church ministry was lost not on principles, but completely on his association with a very dangerous man who has harmed many immensely over the years, but none as much as CSE, Kent Hovind and Jo Hovind. Search the Scriptures for the many times that various kings of Israel sought protection from ungodly sources instead of God Himself and we can see the example that we are likewise to avoid. It is something to behold and tremble in godly fear and reverence. It is something to behold and ask for the mercy of God upon Kent and Jo Hovind who I KNOW have a godly testimony and abundant fruits of righteousness to present before our heavenly Father.
The answer of why Kent Hovind hooked up with this man shall always haunt me even if my love and admiration for Kent Hovind shall never diminish in any manner because he brought salvation to a very special man in my own family. Kent Hovind’s present situation could never diminish the true blessing he has brought to me personally because of this and I will always praise my Saviour and God that he sent a man named Kent Hovind to preach the gospel through the creation story to my son in law in November of 2004. May the Lord preserve for all eternity the crowns of joy and precious stones sent to heaven through his faithful ministry.
I speak this only that no one else would ever be harmed by the so called “the Embassy of Heaven church.” Please remember that although on the surface, many of Glen Stoll’s writings will appeal to those that recognize the overt abrogation of our constitutional protections, we are nevertheless commanded to prove all things and hold fast that which is good. (I Thessalonians 5:21). I obeyed that commandment when I searched for several hours last March through Glen Stoll’s writings until I came across the reference above which PROVES he is not a minister of the true gospel. I beg of you to likewise search out the MANY false interpretations of Romans 13 by this man who leads his cult unto eternal destruction for those that trust his word over the Word of God. Those are fairly easy to find.
I write to you Janet only for the purpose of exposing a man that you apparently have continued trust in that is not well founded to have in any manner. Please accept these remarks with the gravity of my heartfelt sorrow for a man of great danger to the true church. Please protect yourself from him quickly.
May God have mercy on any man harmed by the false “law” advice of Glen Stoll. May God have mercy on Kent and Jo Hovind. May God have mercy on all men.
With a sickened heart for the harm that one man has brought to so many people that have a true love of the Lord.
EndTimes
P.S. Some further quotes from and about “lawyer” Glen Stoll:
Glen Stoll
Director and General Counsel
• Contract Negotiations
• Risk Management
• Special Projects
• Document Creation
Mr. Stoll has been the Director and General Counsel of Remedies at Law since its inception. Mr. Stoll has been engaged in full time Christian missionary work since 1970. He began his legal career with family law in 1988 and then expanded his area of practice generally into our current religious liberty and human rights law firm in 1993, as an exclusive church ministry.
http://www.remediesatlaw.com/staff.asp?email=Glen+Stoll
The men are also being accused of falsely claiming to be lawyers and advising their clients, who have been targeted for IRS audits, to repeatedly cancel appointments and attempt to physically avoid tax investigators.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/212422_corpsole17.html
Going to Jail
http://goingtojail.embassyofheaven.com/
Avoid making commitments that depend upon a set schedule. One ambassador was in the midst of a roofing job when he was called to jail. He remained in jail for several weeks. Meanwhile, parts of the roof were left exposed to the weather. When it rained, the interior of the building was damaged.
To avoid these problems, bear in mind that you might be hauled to jail at any moment. Therefore, as you work, think ahead. If necessary, line up a buddy to temporarily take care of the situation until you can return.
(If you hook up with Glen Stoll, start planning to “care” for your family from a very small concrete room with very poor scenic views)
EndTimes
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 7:08pm:Jun 21 djhouk/Said this at 11:18pm:
“Samphire
Said this at 2:26am:
Under IRS rules and, notwithstanding 501(c)3s status, minister’s salaries remain untaxed.
Actually, no. Minister’s salary ARE taxed, and have always been; ever since the income tax was instituted. There seems to be a lot of confusion about taxation of churches on this board.
Churches and other nonprofits are NOT taxed at the organizational level (as are for-profit corporations). But I assure you, everyone employed by the church, including the minister, pays personal income tax on all earned income, including the salary paid to him by the church.
I know this from personal experience; my father has been a minister for over 50 years, and I have prepared and filed his taxes on many occasions. This is not a debatable point; it is a fact. Ministers (at least the honest ones) pay income tax just like everyone else.”
Yup, so did my dad for over 40 years but the point we are discussing is not the individual income tax which also has many constitutional issues, but that of the church or church ministry. Dr. Hovind never told his “employees” not to pay their tax, but he instead refused to be their tax collector. Again, before 1984, there was not any law that made the church a TAX COLLECTOR. This is the issue before us. I understand that it will not ever return to pre 1984 rules, yet it should according to the constitution. We are in perilous times that shall only worsen and not improve until Jesus stands again on this earth and all men will know Him and worship him IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH. Until then, we shall see further loss of our natural “rights” by the hands of those trusted to protect those rights.
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 7:21pm:Dear Three Crosses,
I would advise you to look at the ID literature for yourself and what they have to say about the Bible. It turns out to not be any different than the evolutionists. So, are they a friend of the true church? I don’t think so. Again, you have to spend some time looking at the “fine print” to know who they really are. (I Thessalonians 5:21) It takes a lot of exercise of the gluteus maximus to find such things.
Secondly, the ID arguments lost from day one in the Dover trial not because of ANY of the DATA, but instead due the philosophical basis of ID as presented by the Discovery Institute where they utilized a negative argument against evolution instead of a positive argument for ID/creationism. Thus the defeat is predicted based on the philosophy of ID alone which has nothing to do with the facts of the case itself. Again, take a close look at Judge Jone’s discussion in his lengthy decision and you will find that was his biggest objection to the ID case, the philosophy of ID and not as much the facts themselves. So, is this one of the biggest strawman “victories” for evolution ever?? I personally see it that way.
So, be careful of so called friends who really are not especially when you read their public castigations of the Bible from their own website. I believe that they have been replaced by more “recent” articles but they are probably available someway or another.
In kindness,
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 7:24pm:Jun 21 Samphire
“Said this at 6:03pm: Again Kent is not in jail for failing to pay tax on profits but for failing to withhold payroll tax and employer’s contributions, the responsibility of a “faithful steward” to his employees. Again, I restate an earlier post that Kent did not claim that he was making a stand in not paying the tax for religious reasons but because he refused to accept that any law existed which required him to pay the tax. Ed & Elaine Brown seem to be making the exact same point. Am I wrong?”
Sorry, who are Ed and Elaine Brown? I missed that somewhere along the way. I think I also answered your other question in the post above to djhouk.
In kindness,
EndTimes
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 7:28pm:FuManChu: RE: who is an Authority/ who is an Expert?
Isaish 5.21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, And clever in their own sight
Proverbs 3.7 Do not be wise in your own eyes
Romans 12.26 ……do not be haughty in mind, but associate with the lowly. Do not be wise in your own eyes.
There are literally dozens of scriptures like these spanning over a thousand years of writings and from all the classes of scripture;ie. the Mosaic books of the “law”, the poetic “writings” and the books of the Prophets; the New Covenant – Epistles [simply means letters] and the Gospel [that which immediately related to Jesus]
God gives out “talents” unique and special and diverse to each and to every man, given from birth, given without repentance [they are never retracted] – note: “to each and to every” differs from saying “to every” or “of every” [I say this for a variety of witnesses to these proceedings - "every-individual" might be one of the most profound oxymorons ever penned]
I suggest that a question as primitive as “Did the authors of the Constitution intend for doctors to abort healthy babies?” should have been tested before a Jury as a matter of first course; so as to avoid ?20 million dead babies. Any permanent, paid judiciary should be there simply to assist the Jury with Judicial opinions which are essentially non binding opinions on matters in question.
If the “society” believes in permanent and paid sitting Jurists/ Judicial office bearers, to decide any matters at all I suggest that there should be at least twelve of them [not 9] – to properly convene a minyan/ community judicial council of sorts; freely elected from among the sovereign people in whom all power is vested – this would not necessarily abrogate the right to a trial by Jury; and Juries could still strike down/ disallow applications of legislation they deemed unjust or unconstitutional.
I also suggest that if both and/or all parties interested be agreed to it, civil matters could still be heard and decided before single magistrates or panels of Judges few in number.
but anything patently effecting all of the community or criminal or quasi-criminal in nature should be heard before a Jury of 12 Sovereign sui juris jurymen sitting without fear or favour and able to question and set sentences.
I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion.
Thomas Jefferson
Perhaps you should become a public teacher of the laws of the land – north America might need you very much indeed.
If men and women are in chains, anywhere in the world, then freedom is endangered everywhere.
John F. Kennedy [ a man who would print sovereign fiat currency ]
If we are here to review, let it be rigorous, diligent, exacting and exhaustive.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 10:08pm:To Samphire [I have to tidy this point up]
I thought to just expand on “sartorial ignorance” for your own benefit.
That is the ignorance that is tailored for your own personal needs and to your own personal taste.
Obviously there is “off-the-shelf-ignorance” – the ignorance that suits just about everyone and is sold through mainstream media outlets; or there is sartorial-ignorance – the expensive one that particularly appeals to lawyers – it has a bit of silk around the crotch – to engender comfort for the extraordinary length of time it has to be worn pursuant to the profession chosen by the wearer.
as for “providential happenstance” – it is important if you want to convey the reality that the information was not specifically solicited/ sought out. It came my way like rain from the sky; with certain thanksgiving.
An English golden guinea sounds good – we need to work on it.
the bible uses the expression “wilfully ignorant”, 2Peter 3 I think it is – implying that those too whom such applies secretly know in part what it is they are turning away from.
perhaps it was a vain choice of words; or perhaps it was too close to where you are to countenance seriously. Otherwise the only lesson is: never try to out-pompous an Englishman – it will only leave you having to explain the obvious – and that to your own distraction.
I shall leave that one for the Watchers of all Generations.
yours sincerely,
the usual signing -
from somewhere in the colonial back waters; frolicking with naked cave-women you suppose.
wrightgross
Said this on June 22nd, 2007 at 11:31pm:Dr. Hovind, my name is Precious and my husband Kenny introduced me to your blue series when we first married back in 2003. We love you and your ministry and will pray for you to be comforted in your spirit continually with each passing moment. We pray for your peace in transition and believe that when you return to your family and ministry you already a spiritual giant will be a five-star general spiritual giant. It’s amazing to see you seeing into the prophetic and I thank God for making Himself known to you in the way that He has, as I also seek a closer relationship with Him in that way. You encourage me to keep on praying and believing God for a better relationship with Him, and that He might use me also. Thanks for your faithfulness to God as you have inspired me and my husband, family, and friends. Thanks so much and God bless you. ~Precious W-G
djhouk
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 1:11am:I’ve been meaning to collect my thoughts and respond at some length to the comments here, but haven’t had the time to do so until now.
So, I’ll dive right in….
First, EndTimes has accused me of being repetitive. To some degree, he is correct. I have found many of the Kent supporters on this blog (particularly newbies) to be woefully ignorant of the actual charges that put Kent in jail. And I have pointed out more than once what the actual charges were.
EndTimes has also accused me of being angry. I’m not, and I apologize if my tone has come across that way – it’s not my intent. I will, however, plead guilty to being occasionally annoyed by comments on the blog.
Finally, EndTimes has disagreed with my statement that Kent’s case was really unrelated to church taxation issues and the separation of church and state. Here, I want to give a more detailed response:
It’s not that I don’t think that church taxation and the separation of church and state are issues worthy of debate — I do. And the moderator apparently agrees. It’s just that Kent’s case doesn’t raise any of those issues. Let me explain why:
Kent is sitting in prison today because he failed to withhold payroll taxes for his employees and then tried to hide that fact from the government. All employers in the US are required to withhold payroll taxes. It doesn’t matter whether you are a for-profit, non-profit, 501c3 or any other 501 designation, registered, unregistered, Christian, or non-Christian; if you have employees, you have a duty to withhold taxes; it’s really that simple.
Kent is NOT in prison because he failed to register as a 501c3, or because his organization failed to pay income tax, or because he is a YEC. If you or I did what Kent did, we’d be jail too.
About now, someone will point out that churches did not always have to withhold payroll taxes. This is, in fact, quite true; but it is also irrelevant to Kent’s case. Why? Because Kent’s organization was not a church, and thus would not have qualified in any case. Kent’s organization was just like many other nonprofits which solicit funds and argue for a particular point-of-view; it was not a church.
Many Kent supporters on this blog appear to believe that Kent took a principled stand by not withholding taxes; that he is, in essence, a “prisoner of conscience”, jailed for disobeying an unjust law.
I must disagree. Here’s why:
– Kent is a notorious tax protester, suing and harassing IRS agents, going as far as filing an affidavit renouncing his U.S. citizenship in an attempt to avoid personal taxes.
– Kent has not filed a PERSONAL tax return in over 20 years, and claims to have no income. While one can argue the merits of church taxation; personal income of individuals, including ministers, has always been taxable.
– In 1996, a federal bankruptcy judge accused Kent of perjury when he stated under oath that “he receives no income, has no expenses, owns absolutely no property, and has no creditors except for the IRS”, to quote from the judge’s decision. The judge noted that court records showed that he owned a home, had a mortgage, and had three motor vehicles registered in his name. The judge rejected Kent’s bankruptcy filing as “bad faith” for the sole purpose of voiding his IRS debt.
– Kent has never claimed that his tax stance was a principled stand. At the trial, he told the judge, “Show me the law and I will pay the tax”, indicating not that he was protesting an unjust law, but that he believed he had not violated the law.
– Finally, I think the best evidence that he was not making a principled stand is simply that he provided no defense at trial. Think about it — if it’s your goal to point out that a law is unjust or unconstitutional, or whatever Kent believed, you HAVE TO POINT IT OUT. The defense is the part of the trial where you explain your actions and the basis of your stance. Kent offered no defense; which is quite unusual in itself. It would make even less sense if he were taking some kind of principled stand. What’s the point of taking a principled stand if you don’t explain the principle on which you are standing?
GrammaPat
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 2:26am:Well, it certainly would not be right for Kent Hovind or any other American to defraud the government whose sworn goal is to “Provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity.” Unmerciful judgment should befall anyone who would dare defraud the defrauders. Somehow we thought that the government was “We the people”. The Hovinds can be thankful the same fate did not fall upon them as what happened almost 15 years ago when armored tanks fired upon a religious “cult” in a small town in Texas and when the 51 day siege by the military ended almost 100 people were dead, a dozen or so children because of alleged gun violations and the speculation that children there were being abused. ‘Is it rational and humane to send 150 ATF and other law enforcement officers with guns drawn to storm a home on a quiet Sunday morning for a five hour tank attack (to fill) the house with tear gas (because they claim they were) “acting in the best interests of the children’s welfare”? Information from
http://www.islandone.org/Politics/Waco.McCurry.html
Mr. Hovind can also be thankful that his lovely wife was not shot by FBI snipers in the head and killed as Randy Weaver’s wife (holding an infant in her arms) was at Ruby Ridge, Idaho in 1992 for trumped up charges (of which he was) later acquitted of all criminal charges and “when Weaver sued the federal government for the wrongful death of his wife and son, the government that had tried to kill him twice now sought an out-of-court settlement. In August 1995 the U.S. government paid the Weaver family $3.1 million.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-lynch082102.asp
How many of us remember that April day 1999 when US INS agents stormed a house in Florida with a gun pointed at a little six year old’s face and “rescued” him to return him to Cuba as Castro’s prize?
http://www.therealcuba.com/elian_gonzalez.htm
http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2006/0823zizza.html
Yes, there have been many shocking things that government agencies have had to do to “protect Americans from evil doers” but none so shocking and heartrending as this statistic: There have been more than 40 million abortions since 1973 when the Supreme Court ruled in the infamous Roe V. Wade decision. And our tax dollars foot the bill for this government-funded organization: Planned Parenthood. “Someone pays for every service Planned Parenthood provides. Every “free” abortion, birth control pill, condom, STD treatment, or pregnancy test they dole out is paid for by either their donors or by the American taxpayer. (In case you were wondering, last year the taxpayer’s “contribution” to this scam was about three-quarters of a million dollars – a day!)” from Mark’s Blog:
http://www.markcrutcherblog.com/
What we seem to forget (or perhaps never learned) is that the government does not give us rights or freedoms, the Constitution enumerates these rights, but as stated in the Declaration of Independence the Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness (property rights) are inalienable, God given Rights. And that’s one of the reasons Kent Hovind was (is) so adamant about creation and our Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ, but if evolution is true none of the things I have mentioned are wrong because man has no rights-and sadly no hope! But I am so thankful in Jesus we have hope not only in this world but also in the life to come! Look up, Brother Hovind! Look up!
FreedomFighter
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 6:00am:FREE OURSELFS FROM THE IRS! VOTE RON PAUL IN 2008!
http://WWW.RONPAUL2008.COM
http://WWW.RONPAUL2008BLOG.COM
JR Turner
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 11:55am:$300,000.00 dollar reward for the LAW.
http://www.livefreenow.org/30K_challenge.cfm
The constitution is not just a good idea, it is the LAW.
Kent and Jo Hovind are INNOCENT! The FRAUD continues!
EndTimes
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 12:28pm:Dear djhouk,
Yes, I am not happy with the tax protestor actions that Dr. Hovind participated in but to imply that they were not based on pure constitutional principle ignores Dr. Hovind’s own testimony on this issue. Just look at the Ron Paul website above and you will see the same constitutional issues debated here echoed on his website as we also see on CSE seminar 5. The facts that you have laid out cannot be disputed as much as many would like to. Yet, the principles that lead to such drastic actions are just as real. To deny either is not accurate. So, like all men on this earth it is the sum of some good and some bad actions that define the man. There are many things that I am not proud of as well. It thus goes back to standing before your own master and giving accout. Who can dispute the terrible price Dr. Hovind is now paying for these actions, right or wrong? Don’t you think that he has already had time to reevaluate his position on these issues in the last several months? He will likely have quite a bit more time to consider all things as well.
So, who named you his chief prosecutor and judge? I have noted my disagreements yet at the same time it is not for me or you to judge, it is for the Lord. Kent Hovind owes no man on this blog any further explanations. It is his matter with his God and his family alone. Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt that all these issues have been on his heart and those conversations with God are his alone.
Now, the simple fact remains that Kent Hovind has dedicated his life to preaching the gospel and winning souls. He is a child of God that shall be rewarded in heaven for the work that he has done. Shouldn’t we likewise support a man who has lost all? I for one wouldn’t want to have everyone in the world know of all of my failures and my short comings, yet so many on this blog eagerly reach out to show every little detail of shame that they can find in this man. I for one wouldn’t want others to completely ignore the fact that I have tried to serve the Lord in the best way that I know how, yet as time goes on, I can look back at certain stands that I have taken and realized it was not the best that I could have done at the time. Hopefully, I will do better the next time I encounter those circumstances. The process of growing in the grace of the Lord is often a painful and self assessing pattern of growth, but this is the Lord’s manner of purifying us to be able to present a spotless bride.
I leave you with the knowledge that although the tax protestor side of Dr. Hovind leaves him vulnerable to criticism, his heartfelt work to bring the truth and wisdom of the Bible should not be dismissed easily. Kent Hovind has and still is a man of God, limited by his own fleshly understanding and finite knowledge as are we all, yet nevertheless he still is one of the most tireless soul winners of our generation. I know in my heart that he has tried to serve his God and I will thank him once again for presenting the gospel in such a manner that my son in law is now on his way to heaven. If only those that have been saved through his ministry would reach out to this man in unity there would be such a great chorus that the angels in heaven would stop all of their tasks and stand in awe of the fruit that this man has sown and reaped. May the Lord comfort, protect and encourage this man. May we do no less.
EndTimes
EndTimes
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 1:06pm:Dear Three Crosses,
Here are a few quotes from the Discovery Institute about YECs and cretionism. They are not our friends at all on this matter. The Bible makes it plainly clear that those that do not work for the Lord, work against the Lord:
Matthew 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
Discovery Institute Quotes:
“As an indefatigable fan of metaphor, I am personally disinclined to go literal on most anything beyond instructions for dismantling bombs. But if the creationists are right and Genesis is to be taken literally, I’d bet my immortal soul that God is shaking his head right now thinking, “I never shoulda created the apple.”
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2772
“Creationism is focused on defending a literal reading of the Genesis account, usually including the creation of the earth by the Biblical God a few thousand years ago. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design is agnostic regarding the source of design and has no commitment to defending Genesis, the Bible or any other sacred text.”
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1329
“He described his main focus as a matter of elucidating some “fundamental problems with Darwinism,” including what he considers some big gaps in the overwhelming scientific consensus supporting the evolutionary model. Like most of the others in the design camp, he steers clear of the so-called “young-Earth” creationists who argue for a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis. Instead, he talks of the complexity found in nature, perhaps evidence for “systems that have no function until you have a whole integrated package in place.” It takes a leap of faith to conclude that this means someone or something must have designed such a system.”
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1139
Three Crosses
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 1:09pm:FIRST TO ENDTIMES:
Thanks for the answer, I figured that was what you meant. I agree that using design as some kind of movement is a bad idea and to easy to pervert. I beleive people are much better off to take responsibility for the education of their own families withholding “obvious exceptions”.
/////////////////////////////
To Samphire you said a some things I would like to address.
1.)”If nomadic people interbred with other nomadics of different tribes they would still be nomadic and, assuming only sporadic interbreeding, the tribal traits would be retained.”
Answer/question: I think if as an evolutionist you’re claiming “sporadic interbreeding” over hundreds of thousands or millions of years, it would be a very thorough mix. I thought we were also in agreement that there is only one species of human. Why would it matter if they are still nomadic? I think exceptions would occur.
2.)”Of course galleys and sailing ships existed before steam engines were invented but it takes more than a large rowing boat to move populations into other populations.”
Answer: Usually when a large population moved into another large population it seems to have been a conquering force, raping and pillaging. This is why I mentioned these also and not just ” galleys and sailing ships”. Some other great examples were given by Warocuya, overpopulation and not to tax the resources. My problem with this statement is that “evolutionists” are claiming millions of years without any mixing! I don’t think racism is that strong of a force.
3.)”Although there were migrations of populations throughout history and pre-history many of which can still be traced in large measure such movements were relatively localised and not great enough or often enough to cause all of humanity to become coffee-coloured.”
Answer/question: What is “pre-history”? It wouldn’t take many migrations over millions of years to cause all of mankind to blend! Stop and think about what you are saying. You are claiming “millions” of years not 4 or a hundred or a thousand. If the population migrated every 100 yrs. for only “one million years” that would be mixing the pot 10,000 times! If they migrate every year…[...EDITED...]
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Sorry, sorry ... we had to limit (a few months ago) the creation-evolution debating on http://www.cseblogs.com as it took over everything else. The primary intent is to inform folks about Dr. & Mrs. Hovind, and the CSE Ministry; though other things get discussed too. // We are all one human race, of course. The illustrations within the ancient Egyptian pyramids show that people of all "shades" were present in Egypt back then. Egypt influenced Greece, of course, etc. Since most people in the world even today are more olive skinned, this may be our human ancestry, i.e. somewhere in the middle. Not black or white, but brown or light brown. Answers in Genesis has a good article on "human races": http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/races18.asp P.A. ]
In closing if you would like to discuss the age of the universe, I’m willing.
Why is it that the earth’s core hasn’t cooled down after “4.6 billion years”? That’s an awfully long time! Why is Jupiter peppered with hundreds of volcanos? It is a very long ways from the sun! Do you not think after “18 billion + yrs.” it would have cooled down? Once again the “tax free” religion of evolution does not mix with science! Science contradicts it, evolution is a hinderence to intelligent thought!
God bless america, God save us all!
sjab1958
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 3:57pm:Mr Hovind,
I am rather interested in your thesis which you worked on prior to obtaining your Ph.D.
So many have been incredibly critical of this document and its content, I would very much like to see it for myself.
And with that in mind I contacted the Patriot Bible University and was informed that they dont keep copies of their students’ theses on the premises.
I even contacted your own organisation and they said that they didnt have a copy either.
So now I am asking you for your permission to examine your thesis, so that I can reach my own conclusions about it.
I will not let any other person or organisation see it in any form at any time while I have a copy in my possession.
And once I am finished with it, the said copy will either be returned to you, or deleted from my computer completely.
If you are agreeable to this could you send word to your organisation and instruct them to send me a copy by email.
Thanking you in advance.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Whom did you contact within CSE? P.A. ]
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 6:57pm:Saints, simply arm yourselves with Truth that makes free.
Harriet and djhouk: to both of you my profound thanks.
Harriet, you are painting pictures of social commentary that have very broad brush strokes
djhouk, you are being quite focused and precise but are you focused finely enough?
Casuistry [a non derogatory] is imperative to establish the moral cause.
Question; was the court a court of competent jurisdiction or essentially an admiralty court?
Question: was a truly “united States of American” flag flying in said court?
Question: did Brother Kent really “understand the charges”?
Question: were the charges truly criminal or were they something called quasi-criminal?
Question: Has there been a failure of “duty of care” because a transcript has not been released [purportedly]?
Question: Does the failure to release a transcript represent incompetence of the court?
Question: Who is the real creditor?
Question: Was the Jury properly instructed as to what they “must” determine or establish as “fact”?
Question: Did the applicant successfully establish “mens rea”?
Question: Did the Jury comprehend that they had to determine “mens rea”?
Question: Does Brother Kent understand court process sufficiently to be considered “PERSON FIT FOR TRIAL”
Question: Are there limitations in connection with these IRS actions as to when appeals can be “filed or lodged” and the number of appeals that can be “filed or lodged”?
Question: Did any of the “so-called” or “alleged” EMPLOYEES give testimony at the said trial? Why not? Have the “alleged-EMPLOYEES”, OR PERSONS WANTING TO BE IDENTIFIED AS “CONTRACTORS” BEEN DEFAMED and will they be bringing actions against those possibly defaming them?
Question: did the judge have plenary jurisdiction in connection with the resolution of constitutional questions?
there are other questions that need to be asked; this is a very short list.
quote:
Kent’s organization was not a church, and thus would not have qualified in any case. Kent’s organization was just like many other nonprofits which solicit funds and argue for a particular point-of-view; it was not a church.
Unquote:
I simply disagree> the only purpose for the existence of CSE is to save souls. The only truly interested party is Jesus. Kent is nothing but a slightly incompetent steward; talented in some areas, bumbling in others. The bible remains true from cover to cover and I shall return [god willing] to this blog with very specific information to feed into man’s soul – lest he perish for lack of vision.
God bless you djhouk and Harriet, we need you here; you have ears and eyes and can walk and talk at the same time.
Ekkman
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 9:44pm:Jun
21Samphire
Said this at 1:44am:
——————————————————————————–
Hi Ekkman,
“Many in these last days are so “open minded” that their brains leaked out. Truth is narrow by definition. 2+2=4 I could seek to be “open minded” and tell others that today 2+2=5. Well, I am open minded but I am wrong.”
No. Only in mathematics and publishing do we have “proofs”. We can prove using number theory that 2+2=4. You canot be open-mided about that. Everything else, however, requires evidence. Truth is only as narrow as the body of evidence allows. Physical evidence for a young Earth, zero; the tools used to show it: none. Physical evidence for an ancient Universe and old Earth is the entirety of the Universe itself; the tools used to show it: science. Get some knowledge and understanding of science and how it works. If your faith cannot stand up to it so much for the value of your faith. But if it does manage to withstand the “factuality” how much stronger will it be?
Hey Samphire! Thanks for writing me. I noticed here that you determined that “Only” in mathematics and publishing do we have “proofs”? Then am I right in determining that we don’t have “proofs” in other areas according to what you said above? Except in what you call evidence. I would like to share with you a little bit more of the song that I was quoting from…
‘Sally’s into knowledge
Spent her years in college
Just to find out nothing is true
She can hardly speak now
Words are not unique now
‘Cause they can’t say anything new
You say humanist philosophy is what it’s all about?
You’re so open-minded that your brains leaked out”
We tend to think if we hear something from someone who is a college professor that we are hearing truth but not necessarily so. Many with “degrees disagree” with each other.
The word of God tells us to prove all things, hold fast to what is good.
It is like Kent Hovind has said in his teachings. Many who go to college come out as unbelievers since they think they are hearing the facts and they are only hearing partial truth and the devil is good at giving partial truth because you mix lies with it, you don’t have truth anymore.
Speaking of numbers, it is God’s way of saying many things to us by way of numbers.
http://www.fillthevoid.org/Apologetics/number7MikeHoggard.html
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Hoggard_KJV_Code.html
It is good to see that you think “in numbers we have proofs”. God knows that that we do but not only in numbers.
“It was the creationists of 300 years ago who realised that wherever they looked the physical evidence contradicted their beliefs. Fortunately, no boneheads, they had the intellectual honesty to modify their beliefs to take account of the evidence. As an old master of mine at school used to say “ignorance is not knowing, it’s knowing you don’t know and not doing anything about it.”.
Now you are telling me that Creationists realized that they didn’t have any evidence for their beliefs. That was a strange statement to me. Anyway, we will start off doing it Paul’s way. He wants me to furnish links to show my position.
“Perhaps you prefer to remain happy in your ignorance.
Samphire”
That was a good statement but now we need to see which one of us really chooses to remain in ignorance. I have a personal definition of ignorance too. I call it “chosen stupidity”.
[EDITOR’S NOTE: Now gentlemen, let us recall that we are not boneheads here, right? Let’s shake hands here. Samphire … of all the people to say there is “zero” evidence for a young Earth, tsk, tsk. You know that Dr. Hovind shows this over and over again in his Seminar #1. There was no time for supposed evolution to have happened since the Earth is young.
Paul, I was not sure why you said the comments above and below. This is the first time that I have had the priviledge of talking with Samphire. I am not upset with him or anything close to it. I have never even written him before. My comments to Phillip-George were not even about evolution/creation, so to speak, but about truth in any area of life.
"Mr. Ekkman & Mr. Samphire - if desired - please repeat to folks a few main links supporting your contending beliefs on this important matter, and then let us move on, please.
There is excellent scientific evidence that the Earth is young. (See Dr. Hovind’s Seminar #1, “The Age of the Earth.” http://shopping.drdino.com/view_item.php?id=440 )
(Free to view online:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2932359112394939560 )
Also, there is a good book on-line, free to download, “It’s a Young World After All” by Dr. Ackerman: http://www.creationism.org/ackerman/ P.A. ] ”
Anyway, here are a few links to show that Creationists are scientists. I wonder if Samphire will like it since they have those nice letters behind their names like Ph.D’s.
I will be giving you a little bit of infomation in each to get you hungry to check it out.
http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/40/40_4/Bergman.htm
“Conclusions
Hair appears in the fossil record as a complex, fully functional structure, without antecedent evolutionary stages. The reason for the putative problem of human hair loss in evolution is unknown, and the reasons proposed are contradictory. Studies of 23 anthropoid primate taxa have found that the larger (and usually more human-like) the primates, the fewer hairs per equal unit of body surface (Schwartz and Rosenblum, 1981). ”
http://www.icr.org/article/3343/
“A fair question deserves a fair answer. Some critics of Biblical creationism, however, use this question to play “king of the hill.” Not getting the one-sentence answer they demand, they think they have established the superiority of the old-age contender, the Big Bang. I find it helpful in such situations to level the playing field. Supporters of the Big Bang have no cause for pride, because they have a light-distance problem, too! It is called the horizon problem. And it is serious.”
Samphire, I read the book below, it was very good overall. I think you might even enjoy reading it, hoping that you could prove him wrong. He was an evolutionist until he found not that it could not stand the test.
http://evolutionofacreationist.com/
The Evolution of a Creationist is an exciting, entertaining and challenging lecture series by Dr. Jobe Martin, presenting key ideas and concepts from his book of the same name. Dr. Martin discusses some of the Incredible Creatures that Defy Evolution as well as the many facts and findings in our world and our universe that evolutionists are unable to explain.
This four-part lecture is presented in front of a live audience, with photos, charts and video clips interspersed to aid in understanding. A 70-page workbook accompanies each video set, with fill-in-the-blank questions to stimulate discussion and comprehension. You can make your own copies of the workbook or purchase additional copies separately. Each part of the lecture is approximately one hour long, making the series perfect for Sunday School classes, Sunday evening services, Home Bible Studies, home schooling and small group meetings.”
I was taught evolution by some of the schools that I went to. So I was in your shoes until I find out that it was wrong. If you haven’t already, I would highly advise you to watch the debates that Kent Hovind has had with evolutionists. I would be ashamed to be on their side of the fence, it was embarassing to see the evolutionists in the debates. I even felt sorry for them.
An evolutionist said this,
“It is not the duty of science to defend the theory of evolution, and stick by it to the bitter end—no matter which illogical and unsupported conclusions it offers. On the contrary, it is expected that scientists recognize the patently obvious impossibility of Darwin’s pronouncements and predictions . . Let’s cut the umbilical cord that tied us down to Darwin for such a long time. It is choking us and holding us back.”—I.L. Cohen, Darwin Was Wrong: A Study in Probabilities (1985).
Well we close with what would be the forbidden fruit to the evolutionist, that being the banana and we are left with nothing but the skin. When we pulled back the covering, there was no banana inside just as we pulled the covering off of evolution and there was no proof inside. Just weak, pitiful theories, guesswork, wishful thinking and why would anyone think that coming from a monkey is wishful thinking is beyond me. Oh well, we all live and learn and some learn less than others. If we are not willing to test our beliefs with the facts then I guess we can all go out and have a banana, life is short. Eating the ‘forbidden’ fruit will make one wise or at least that is what the devil said at one time. But then most evolutionists (that I have talked with) say they don’t believe in a devil. So we will see in the end but if the Christian is correct then the end is to late to see. It is now or never. Jesus is still in the saving business and I am not talking green stamps as one gang member had on the back of his jacket in a book that I read. Jesus is into saving souls, lives from hell and giving life at its fullest.
Thanks again for writing me, Samphire. I would have gotten back with you sooner but my computer is not hooked up at the moment so I had to use a friend’s.
I have a lot more information my my computer or easier access since I save a lot of information that I read on the web. So I just gave you a few that I remember without my computer that I have saved for future discussions with evolutionists. Maybe later. Jesus is calling people to himself, Samphire. You still have a chance or at least I think you do since you are still breathing..
Ekkman
djhouk
Said this on June 23rd, 2007 at 9:54pm:EndTimes,
Thanks for your post. I am not disputing the good that Kent did. You make a good case that we should balance both the good and bad. While I have never met Kent, he is by all accounts kind, unselfish, and very dedicated. His actions were clearly not for personal gain.
Please keep up the posting. I find both yours and Samphire’s posts interesting and enlightening. You are one of the reasons this blog has become so popular.
Three Crosses
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 12:33am:Dear Editor: that was some good stuff you edited. If convenient you could e-mail it back to me as I didn’t save it, was hoping to copy it later.
In the meantime has there been any word on the Hovinds?
We will continue to keep them in our prayers.
God bless america, God save us all!
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Well ... can I leave what the creationists write and then only excise arguments from the skeptics? We had to decide to END the previous C v. E debate (several months back). It had become pretty contentious with many unanswered charges filling the blog. (The past messages are still out there, if you may be interested.) And there are souls who revert to clever insults (rather than repentance) when cornered. Others (reading the blog for other reasons), with less external resilience were becoming quite offended by the meanness that was exhibited. They did not want the debate at all; they just wanted the latest on Dr. Hovind. The meanness is still sometimes there, but I am charged with limiting it, which I try to do, albeit imperfectly. We know that one cannot reason a nonbeliever into the Kingdom. It is not an intellectual lacking but a spiritual one. One admitting creation necessitates the that the Creator is there. A mental hiding place (from God) is needed. Evolution can fill that purpose in one's mind. Showing them lots of science does not seem to help; but as we show them love with science, perhaps there is a chance for their redemption. ...And finally, I regret that I did not save a copy of the full message you had written. You did make good points. You and Samphire have been sparring of late - and again, it is unfortunately necessary, per the intentions of this blog, to curtail any raging creation-evolution debates. Yes, that is the focus of CSE itself. But "intellectuals" (per my past experience) will begin lashing out in all directions once their mental hiding place from God get exposed for what it is. I have to moderate also for the benefit of all of the others who peruse this blog each week. .... P.A. ]
Three Crosses
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 1:06am:Letter to Editor:
You made this note “[EDITOR’S NOTE: Sorry, sorry … we had to limit (a few months ago) the creation-evolution debating on http://www.cseblogs.com as it took over everything else. The primary intent is to inform folks about Dr. & Mrs. Hovind, and the CSE Ministry; though other things get discussed too. // We are all one human race, of course. The illustrations within the ancient Egyptian pyramids show that people of all “shades” were present in Egypt back then. Egypt influenced Greece, of course, etc. Since most people in the world even today are more olive skinned, this may be our human ancestry, i.e. somewhere in the middle. Not black or white, but brown or light brown. Answers in Genesis has a good article on “human races”: http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/races18.asp P.A. ]”
My post was not intended as racial or discriminating. I thought that CSE stood for creation science evangalism. I disagree that you should drop showing obvious discrepencies between science and the religion of evolution. I appreciate that you want to inform the general public of the injustices imposed on Dr. and Mrs. Hovind. I just don’t understand why, that should stop discussion of the very subject that brought Dr. Hovind under the hammer of our judicial system.
My knowledge of the laws in this country are fairly well founded, but I do not have free access to a law library or a license from the state bar. I do however, have very thorough scientific resources. I don’t post here to the Bible believing Christians or to the evolutionists. I post for the bennefit of those who are undecided. Those who believe that the judicial system in this country is infallible and therefore that the creation science arguement is mute. It is just as obvious now as it ever was! I don’t think we should sweep it aside. Maybe you could start a thread just for this discussion.
With Love your brother in Christ Mr. Cross
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Well, as an attendee at the trial in Pensacola, and as one who spoke briefly as a character witness for Dr. Hovind, I think that at least part of the contentions of the I.R.S. side was that taxes were owed and papers had needed to be filed. Some would contend that it was not creation nor belief in the Bible "...that brought Dr. Hovind under the hammer of our judicial system." (as you wrote) - but rather a contended "non-compliance with IRS regulations", which a jury ... concurred with. Such persons would contend that his beliefs about the Bible and creation had absolutely nothing to do with it. In fact, some Bible-believing Christians were among those called to the witness stand by the IRS for their testimony about the tax-related issues. I am not defending their position, of course. But there is another side to this very difficult situation. He was not able to "fly like a dove" or "wiggle through like a serpent" from the consequences; he is now incarcerated instead. For 10 years. Brother, I linked to the AiG pamphlet as a web location for those who may want more information, without posting long detailed messages - as a certain number of persons do complain about the debates on cseblogs.com on a regular basis. ...It is hard to find the best approach to both "limit" offensive material, while allowing for a "freedom of speech" ... as again, the debates are not the primary intent of this blog site in the first place. ... Please correct me if you think my approach is incorrect. And also, go back about 6 months and look at some of the postings back when the C v. E debate was raging back then. P.A. ]
CreationCD
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 1:11am:Dear Endtimes,
I have said before in a post that I do not give my time or energy to support the Intelligent Design movement, mostly because it does not of itself lead to Christ and Salvation. It was an attempt, like the Catholic Church, to get people into a “Christian Church” by removing objectionable doctrines and accepting pagan practices.
A year ago, however, I found a book by William Dembski in our library book sale called Unapologetic Apologetics. I’m sorry, I’ve misplaced the book and cannot quote it or give correct names. Still, you should look into this man’s history. He studied theology at Princeton and helped start a student Apologetic Society to try and combat the liberal theology taught there. He knew that Princeton had once been a fundamental bible believing school and that liberalism in its time had crept in partially through liberal student societies and movements affecting the next generation of teachers.
For one thing you wouldn’t believe the things taught in liberal theological schools. The student lectures given by the society taught some basic and conservative truths we take for granted. The students in this society were threatened with failing grades and expulsion if they persisted, and for the most part they stood their ground. William Dembski was however brought up in liberal Christianity and like Martin Luther who was brought up in Catholicism he never got all his doctrines straight. Both tried to reform the Church they were in.
All creationists use arguments against evolution that were brought to light by Intelligent Design people such as Michael Behe who are not Christians and would not support a young earth creation, but will fight against evolution or at least biogenesis under the intelligent design banner. God used some pagan kings in the old testament and even called them his servants. We are debters to these men and should pray that God will fully reveal His truth to them.
And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us. Luke 9:50
I few threads ago a posted a link to Sean D. Pitman M.D. and his website
http://www.detectingdesign.com
Because the title contains the word design and because no bible verses or articles on how to be saved leap out a you, it was immediately assumed to be an intelligent design site and some comment was made about the I.D. movement. However after reading or listening to most of the articles I find Sean D. Pittman is a young earth creationist who believes in the Bible. In addition, I found a wealth of good information on the site against evolution.
Actually Endtimes, I first thought this might be your site or MatureKid’s because one of you linked to an article on the detectingdesign site. I’m still looking for your site. I’ve learned so much in the past 6 months just listening and following your links on this site, I’m sorry we can’t debate evolution here anymore. Could you send me a link to your site.
My e-mail is CreationCD@Hotmail.com
Thanks
Doug Hove
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 1:18am:Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics; but then you have Lawyers using Statistics; but then you have the devil using lawyers using statistics -
so all one can do is pray, and walk humbly before God.
a short essay on: the word “each” and the word “every”
each: everyone of two or more considered individually, one by one.
every: can indicate “each”, but can indicate the “all” as a necessity.
Compare: “I am going to spend time with each one of you” to “I am going to spend some time with every one”
Compare: My thoughts are towards each one of you” to “My thoughts are for every one”
Thus, in saying, “I am going to give to “each individual” a very great surprise”: your individuality is maintained/ protected/ recognised and everyone of you is included in the epiphany of thought processes promised. To “each” individual is truly a reference to the individual and will include all of them.
But what happens if “I am going to give to “every individual” a very great surprise”: The “every individual” can have the characteristic of the “indivisible corporate “all”"; or a being comprising of a plurality of form; or more importantly, an identity which is collectively and exclusively collectively owned.
This is to say that if “the promise” were to leave anyone out it isn’t really about everyone. It becomes and “untruth” – which no-one can be forced to accommodate.
The assets of “every individual” may not be talking about individuals as individuals at all. The air we breath is an asset of “every individual”. If I am going to tax the assets of “every individual” I may not be talking about the assets of any individual at all – but only about the assets of “every individual”
Now the currency, legal tender in circulation may well be the assets of “every individual”, but individually owned by none of them at all.
I hope you are all, each one of you, having an epiphanous and spiffing time with the blog.
Bill Clinton did not have sex with that woman.
If it is good enough for Law Professors, President, Ex-NFL football players and Lawyers; it is good enough for man on the street [read: those on the highways and byways; 12.46 Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage feast.]
Not only doesn’t table 26 name me, I don’t see that it identifies me in a either a generic or specific sense. [more to say later about "applications sections"]
If any thinking Brother can find any fault with these words please hasten to the task of better informing me – the body needs you!
CreationCD
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 2:20am:Has anyone else seen this months Discover Magazine and its cover story; SCIENCE AND ISLAM.
page 39: “Islam is in many ways more tolerant of scientific study than is Christian fundamentalism. It does not, for example, argue that the world is only 6,000 years old.”
This long article portrays Islamic scientists as very competent men with deep religious beliefs even if they don’t believe in the evolution of humans from non-humans and believe in Adam and Eve because the Koran says so. Or who labor as Galileo for the betterment of there fellow citizens under religious persecution.
Samphire, I asked you in a thread long ago if you would argue against Islamic Creationism as you do Christian Creationism and you responded in the negative.
If I find myself fighting against one religion for teaching a doctrine and I do not fight against another religion who teaches nearly the same doctrine, what am I really fighting against. Ignorance? No. Lies? No. False science? No. I must be fighting against that one religion. Why?
How about Samphire, could something be manipulating you to fight against a particular God while making you believe you’re fighting for truth and science.
Vladimir Makarenko …
http://www.unshackled.org/listen_04.html
was a Russian atheist who realized that Communism was fighting against God, while proclaiming it fought against all sorts of causes. He also realized that they were fighting against the person of the Christian / Jewish Godhead and that you can’t personally attack a person that doesn’t exist.
One reason I don’t like to follow debates on atheist/skeptic websites is that they take every opportunity to insult, defame, and slander the God of the Bible using every filthy world or picture they can come up with. Why, If they are so intellectual and free from religious bias?
Another small article on page 16, under Stupid Science Word of the Month, is about Gary Larson of the Far Side Comic Strip who draws dinosaurs and humans together. It is reported that he later joked, “Father, I have sinned – I have drawn dinosaurs and hominids together in the same cartoon.” Ken Carpenter, a paleontologist at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, likes Larson because “He has a completely warped mind, which we absolutely love,” and wants to name the weapon on the end a stegosaurus’ tail the thagomizer in honor of a Farside cartoon eulogizing one Thag Simmons.
Why mock Christianity with “I have sinned” if we’re talking about a scientific goof?
There is also feedback about a May article “Built in Morality” about the evolution of morals and the morals of evolutionist that might bear reading that issue.
**** HEY, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THIS IS THE WEEK TO PRAY AND FAST FOR MRS. HOVIND AS SHE WILL BE SENTENCED ON THE 29TH. LET’S NOT FORGET THE TRUE PURPOSE OF THIS BLOG SITE. ****
Sincerely
Doug Hove
darling
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 6:45am:Maturekid said this at 4:41pm Jun21:
“Does the broad definition of church make the tax code meaningless? Well, yes.”
Why stop at the tax code? It makes pretty much every law meaningless.
Which is a good indication that it’s not a reasonable position to take.
Paul said this at 7:06pm Jun21:
“if we respectively trust them for the final say in what is lawful…”
We don’t.
If the Supreme Court rules any law unconstitutional, the people can change the constitution.
“than in trusting hundreds of elected members in either Parliament or Congress; members who must later go back and justify their jobs as representatives before their respective constituents.”
What if those constituents want to elect representatives who pass unconstitutional laws?
“Judges saying “unconstitutional” is itself inherently unconstitutional.”
Says who? Serious question.
Congress has never said such a thing. Nor have presidents. Nor have a decent number of people expressed an interest in changing the constitution to explicitly prevent judges from doing what they’ve been doing for the past two hundred years.
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974 said this at 7:06pm Jun21:
“Did the Judge instruct the Jury correctly as to what they “must”?”
Yes.
(At least, to any reasonable person’s satisfaction. I doubt someone like you, who insists laws must mention them by name, would be satisfied by anything that didn’t give you the answer you wanted.)
“Especially in the “scandalous” absence of a transcript.”
If you want a copy of the transcript, all you have do is a little research. Call the court reporter, and you can get one. Perhaps Mr. Hovind’s defense team already has a copy.
“What is your source of specific information?”
Which particular specific information are you talking about? It could be Mr. Hovind himself, published reports, court filings, legal decisions, statutes, personal knowledge, any combination of the above, or something completely different.
djhouk said this at 1:11am Jun23:
“Kent has not filed a PERSONAL tax return in over 20 years…
For what it’s worth, in July 2001 Mr Hovind said: “I have not filed a 1040 form or kept tax records for over 25 years… Call the IRS and tell them to arrest me if I am breaking a law!”
Samphire
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 9:35am:Hi, Three Crosses,
If humankind is only 6,000 years old then how is it we all come in such a variety of different sizes and colours when we are all the relatively recent descendants of the unmarried Adam and Eve? Time does not make us more the same but more different and gene-mixing is a digital rather than an analogue process. It isn’t like putting milk in coffee so that white becomes more brown and brown becomes more white.
Look at Indians and Pakistanis. Just over sixty years ago they lived together in a single country. Independence brought partition and partition separation. Populations separated into the two main religious groupings, the Muslims went to the North East and North West to form East and West Pakistan with the Hindu Indians remaining in the main body of the sub-continent.. But even though they had lived together for hundreds of years and more they still retained their own racial characteristics. Even in Britain and Ireland we can still identify physical characteristics between Irish, Welsh, Scottish, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings etc despite a couple of thousand years of invasion and inter-mixing. And, of course, contrary to what you write, modern man is not millions of years old – just a hundred thousand or so.
“Why is it that the earth’s core hasn’t cooled down after “4.6 billion years”?”
Because the process which made the Earth hot in the first place still continues – radio-activity, a process that was discovered by scientists only 100 years ago. It seems that it takes somewhat longer for creationist apologetics to assimilate such discoveries. Even Lord Kelvin, a brilliant Christian scientist, who destroyed the caloric theory of heat and discovered the 2nd Law of thermodynamics thought that the Earth was at least 20 million years old basing it on his estimate of the rate of cooling of the Earth’s core. But he did not then know about radio-activity. The geologists told him that from their studies that he must be wrong and so it proved.
The sun is not 18 billion years old (neither is the Universe). And what keeps the sun hot is what makes a hydrogen bomb work so terrifyingly and effectively. It is the fusion of hydrogen into helium with the consequent release of enormous quantities of energy.
“Once again the “tax free” religion of evolution does not mix with science! Science contradicts it, evolution is a hinderence to intelligent thought”
From the erroneous examples you have produced above I don’t think that you have yet acquired a sufficiently knowledgeable grounding in science to enable you to make any reliable judgment on the matter.
Kind regards
Samphire
Matthew
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 9:35am:Paul said Why is Jupiter peppered with hundreds of volcanos? It is a very long ways from the sun!
I believe you are referring Jupiter’s moon Io as I cannot find info on volcanoes on Jupiter.
Three Crosses
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 10:32am:Dear Samphire I don’t know where this discussion will be cut off but to address a couple of your statements.
But first my apologies: I now see why you don’t do point by point.
you said “Because the process which made the Earth hot in the first place still continues – radio-activity, a process that was discovered by scientists only 100 years ago. It seems that it takes somewhat longer for creationist apologetics to assimilate such discoveries.”
Answer: Everything has some level of radioactivity, I’m afraid I would need some reference on this subject, where a core sample was taken, at what depth? Aside from just that point, any time you have fire or great amounts of heat it produces a great amount of radioactivity. So a hundred years ago it seems, it would have been very dificult to distinguish between whether the heat was causing the radioactivity, or the radioactivity was causing the heat (please refer to explosives). Please do not state theory as fact.
Is process your god? You claim it can make planets. Or did process just make the Earth hot and something else make it?
Your points about the sun also seem to be founded in theory. While theories are tools for the scientific method, they are often proven wrong.
I would have to know how old you want the Earth or Sun to be to thoroughly answer your question.
You also said
“From the erroneous examples you have produced above I don’t think that you have yet acquired a sufficiently knowledgeable grounding in science to enable you to make any reliable judgment on the matter.”
Answer: I try to only offer evidence, not strictly theories that might have, could have, along time ago, sort of explained one small piece of a very large puzzle; which all rely on a god named process.
On a more personal note you seem to have a very different religion of evolution than what I’ve read in most modern references. Are you making it up as you go?
///////////////////////////////
Mediator/Editor I concede your point.
God bless america, God save us all
Harriet
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 12:22pm:EMP
Nuclear electromagnetic pulse
http://www.creationism.org/mp3/AbramsonSmartHr_EMP_Danger.mp3 (15MB)
Yet another topic for the CSE Blog.
Disturbed about EMP, I wrote my brother who is a Navy pilot and complained to him. He wrote back, calling me “Chicken Little” and then shared the following very wise words:
quote
Our enemies. They us, yes, but they love economic vitality. In my travels, lets just say to the Persian Gulf. There is a stark difference between the lands that are on the Southern side of the Gulf and those on the North. Saudi Arabia, Oman, UAE to the south and Iran Iraq etc to the north. I think of the northern region as the wild wild west, where as the southern region is rich, and has a thriving economy. The powers in the southern region cherish their economic vitality. This keeps the nut jobs up north more or less in check. But even the nut jobs to the north recognize the fruits of a vital economy.
SO to EMP the east coast of the US and essentially grind the global economy to a halt is not gonna happen. They still us, yes, but they don’t . (They talk young idiots into doing that, the leaders are still alive and well.)
Lets take a look at this from a different angle. They nut jobs are truly evil and they do this anyway. You have God on your side, right. You are not really worried.
end of quote
Samphire
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 4:04pm:Hi Ekkman
Just a quick response to yours of the 23rd.
Science doesn’t prove anything; it can only falsify. Think of it as a railway line rather than a train terminus. It is a way of finding things out, a journey, rather than a destination. For instance, by being able to measure the distance to the stars and knowing the speed of light scientists are able to demonstrate that the universe is much older than 10,000 years thereby falsifying the Young Universe theory. However, demonstrating that the Universe is a lot older than 10,000 years does not prove the alternative thesis that it is 14ish billion years old.
As for the Horizon Problem, so what? It’s a problem which has been solved supposedly by Barry Setterfield’s “theory” that the speed of light at creation was 10 trillion times that which it is now. Only this YEC “theory” has a number of problems of its own. Firstly, it isn’t supported by the relevant observations and, secondly, if it were true we would not be here today as the same process that still keeps the Earth’s core hot would have blown the newly created globe to smithereens; the faster the speed of light so the energy released increases geometrically (e=mc^2). OK, Setterfield was wrong and we still have the Horizon Problem. But perhaps Brane theory might outlive the idea of an Inflationary Universe. Who knows? I certainly don’t.
Just because there are as yet unsolved difficulties with one theory doesn’t automatically make yours right. Science may not yet have developed a convincing naturalistic theory as to how primitive life started on Earth but that does not mean that God’s treatment for leprosy given in Leviticus 14 is superior to that which you would receive today at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. I cannot imagine you lying in a ward shouting at the nurse “I don’t want the multidrug therapy – get me a rabbi, two live chickens, some cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet”. But I might be wrong.
Kind regards
Samphire
Samphire
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 4:39pm:Hi Doug,
“Samphire, I asked you in a thread long ago if you would argue against Islamic Creationism as you do Christian Creationism and you responded in the negative.”
My apologies if I did not respond. I have looked at the blog back to 18th April and cannot find your question so I do not know the context. However, if it was as simply put as above then I would have said that I do not know what Islam says about the creation myth but, as it claims to be a religion of the Book and speaks of Adam and Eve, I would assume its myth is similar to one of the two contradicting myths in Genesis. This being the case then my words would be no different.
However, I should point out that I don’t understand why you call it “Christian Creationism”. I would prefer to call it “literal biblical creationism” as there are many Christians who do not agree with the fundamentalists’ position.
I repeat for the hundredth time that I am not fighting against your religious beliefs with which I choose to take no sides but against the misrepresentation and misappropriation of science in support of Christian fundamentalist beliefs. If your religion cannot stand alone then bastardising science to defend or support it will not help it. Nobody on this blog objects to Endtimes giving his thorough and erudite theological explanations, corrections and admonishments so in the interests of balance why should I not point out in my far less scholarly manner blatant errors of understanding in relation to scientific issues of which many posters, including our gallant Paul, are guilty.
Kind regards
Samphire
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 5:08pm:Dear darling [jun 24 6.45]
not so easy to dialogue with someone who ignores most of your questions:-
quote: “reasonable person’s satisfaction”
unquote: 1. what is unreasonable about asking polite questions and examing a lawyer”s performance?
Quote: “personal knowledge”
unquote: 2. What is your personal involvement with this case?
Question: 3. How many people personally stood up in this case and testified that they had personally suffered any loss due to the life lived by Brother Kent?
Question: 4. Do you understand the difference between Criminal and Quasi Criminal?
Question: 5. Have you been paid Federal Reserve Bank “Legal Tender” to be involved with this court case? Would you call the usage of U.S.A.- Federal Reserve Bank “Legal Tender” a conflict of interest?
Question: 6. Is the Fifth Ammendment Constitutional Law? And have you been using it on this blog without citing it?
I count 6 questions with supplementaries; could you be so “reasonable” as to answer both “each and every” one of them!
All Glory to Jesus of course.
Ekkman
Said this on June 24th, 2007 at 5:28pm:Check out this Page. It seems like many are dealing with Kent Hovind’s ministry as to whether they are defining it as a “church” or not. The issue is in reality that the income tax is illegal not only for “churches” but for all Americans. That is why Ron Paul, one of the ones running for President will phase the IRS out immediately.
http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/InfoCenter.htm
Scroll down the page a little ways and click on the picture of the CD.
We have a corrupt government that has gone crazy with power.
Ekkman
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 5:40am:Dear Jason,
I understand you have been quite a fan of EndTimes; just be careful! Be careful, where you walk and with whom you shake hands. Do not hasten to lay hands on a man lest you partake in his sins.
djhouk [jun 23 1.11am] said ” Because Kent’s organization was not a church, ………. ”
EndTimes [jun 23 12.28 pm] said “The facts that you have laid out cannot be disputed …………….. ”
Think about it; CSE’s express purpose is evengelism and communicating Biblical Truth. djhouk says “that ain’t church”; EndTimes chips in and agrees with him.
There’s an old expression “with friends like that …………. ”
also “‘Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again’ — George W. Bush.
Church is nothing more or less than the body of Born Again Christians meeting however they will. Where ever two or more are gathered.
The bible says to guard your lips lest you curse what God has made in his own image; even unintentionally.
I am appalled, but then how many people spotted it ?
Just be careful – lest you even accidentally agree with a curse or imputation against the Holy Spirit.
lagomorph2
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 8:16am:Dear sjab1958 -
sjab1958 said this at 3:57pm:
“Mr Hovind,
I am rather interested in your thesis which you worked on prior to obtaining your Ph.D. So many have been incredibly critical of this document and its content, I would very much like to see it for myself. And with that in mind I contacted the Patriot Bible University and was informed that they dont keep copies of their students’ theses on the premises….”
The subject of Hovind’s thesis is well discussed by many sources that can be found by searching on Google.com or other search engines. The most extensive review is the one given below:
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/bartelt_dissertation_on_hovind_thesis.htm
The central point of all of the criticisms is that the document in question fails to be a legitimate thesis in many areas, including its lack of public availability, its shoddy composition, its lack of institutional review, and its unfinished state. If it were ever made available to the general public (which is a requirement for all theses from bona fide institutions), it would be seen for the tawdry document that it is.
So please don’t look forward to its being made available any time soon.
Regards,
Lagomorph
Sade Tennyson
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 10:33am:Hello brother Paul Abramson,
Can we be kind enough on this blog to ONLY allow posts relating to brother Kent Hovind & sister Jo’s sentencing on the 29th of June ( just few days to come!!!) for now?
It is better to let all brethren focus on praying & encouraging sister Jo now & not focusing on debates while the evil deed against our sister is done.
PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THIS DISTRACTION THIS TIME!!!!
PLEASE LET ALL THOSE WHO WANT TO DEBATE HOLD THEIR DEBATES WHILE BRETHREN WHO ARE HERE TO SUPPORT BROTHER HOVIND & SISTER JO, KEEP SENDING ENCOURAGING MESSGAES TO THEM
SIX ENCOURAGING MESSAGES NOW IS BETTER THAN HUNDREDS OF COMMENTS ON THIS BLOG NOW!!!!
I BESEECH YOU PLEASE!!!!
Sade Tennyson
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This is a good idea.
I will discuss this with Eric today. I need to speak with him anyway, as I have a letter in hand from Dr. Hovind that I received this morning - with an intended posting to the blog site. I should be able to put this online later today.
(Dr. Hovind is reading the postings, by the way, albeit later, printed out for him. He gave me 2 things that needed correcting. He says, "I read the blogs with great interest." -And a REMINDER that this Friday, June 29th, Mrs. Hovind will appear in court again; the schedule is that it is for sentencing at that time.
================================================
-- ATTENTION ALL!! -- we may suspend the DEBATES for this week! (details to follow ... ) P.A. ]
================================================
Sade Tennyson
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 10:38am:Dear Sister Jo,
Grace & peace of the Lord be upon you in Jesus worthy name.
I’ll keep praying for you & I pray that the Lord in His mercy will undertake for you in the mighty name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Though we pass through tribulation, all will be well in Jesus name.
Be encouraged that the Lord Jesus is over all.
Keep pleading the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ in your mind constantly & if possible during the court proceedings.
I will be praying along.
Sade Tennyson
joshtriangle
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 11:27am:Thanks so much for that wonderful post Kent!
May God keep a hedge of protection about you… stay healthy and fit for His Glory!
Followup—
Several weeks ago I was censored on this blog, mainly for being full of spiritual pride (quite likely)!
I just wanted to report that I fasted that same weekend for three full days – water only… The Lord provided – it was the right timing, it was kind of scary, I was really committed to going the full three days, wherein I had only done 1 day previously…
God brought me through it, and I look forward to serving Him, praying through the same attitude of humble grace as Jesus.
Thought this site was pretty interesting: http://www.thegodargument.com/
One final thing:
—Samphire wrote—
I enjoyed one comment: “Have you listened to rock music these days. Its all death and blood and destruction.”. Read any Old Testaments lately, Kent? And try listening to Oh Bla Di, Oh Bla Da.
Samphire
———————
It’s meant to be learned from Samphire – you know how history is supposed to be a lesson to learn from our mistakes?
But, it’s meant for anyone “with ears to hear”….
You can fight fight fight… but how silly when all one really need do is turn to Him and receive His awesome love!
Peace!
J
childrenrtreasures
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 12:32pm:Praying for you Mr. Hovind. We’ll be thinking of Mrs. Hovind this week and lifting her up to the Lord in prayer. We know God is using both of your lives to reach others for His sake…praying His strength will hold you up as you walk in His will…it’s only by His good grace we can “walk” at all.
Lamentations 3:22-26 It is of the LORD’s mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions fail not. They are new every morning: great is thy faithfulness. The LORD is my portion, saith my soul; therefore will I hope in him. The Lord is good unto them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him. It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the LORD.
2 Corinthians 12:7-10 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reporoaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.
Deuteronomy 31:8 And the LORD, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he will not fail thee, neither forsake thee: fear not, neither be dismayed.
Our hearts and prayers are with you Brother Hovind.
Samphire
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 1:20pm:Hi Three Crosses,
“Answer: Everything has some level of radioactivity, I’m afraid I would need some reference on this subject, where a core sample was taken, at what depth? Aside from just that point, any time you have fire or great amounts of heat it produces a great amount of radioactivity. So a hundred years ago it seems, it would have been very dificult to distinguish between whether the heat was causing the radioactivity, or the radioactivity was causing the heat (please refer to explosives). Please do not state theory as fact.”
Have a look at http://www.mantleplumes.org/WebDocuments/Hofmeister2005.pdf although its language is very technical. Deep level radio-activity measurements are not taken from bore holes for obvious reasons but reasonable assumptions (nothing in science is definite but provisional) can be made from the measurement of lead isotopes in meteorites that the Earth is constituted from material within the solar system – the same material which comprises meteorites.
I do not understand why you believe that fire produces radio-activity – it doesn’t. When fissile material decays one by-product is heat so it is the decay of radio-activite elements which replenishes the heat in the core which escapes to the surface.
Why should I refer to explosives? They have no relevance to radio-activity.
I hesitate to recommend Dalrymple’s “The Age of the Earth” because it does have a bit of a rant at YECs which might cause offence but, if you are interested in learning the science, you won’t find a more thorough book.
“Is process your god? You claim it can make planets. Or did process just make the Earth hot and something else make it?”
I don’t have a god. What do you mean by process?
“Your points about the sun also seem to be founded in theory. While theories are tools for the scientific method, they are often proven wrong. “
You can have a look at the practical results of the theory if you wish at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMQnALZKAG4
Quite an impressive theory, eh? Imagine 5 billion of those mothers going off every second. Well, you don’t have to – just look at the Sun instead. http://www.nineplanets.org/sol.html gives quite a bit more information, if you are interested. How many of those statistics do you wish to dispute?
“I would have to know how old you want the Earth or Sun to be to thoroughly answer your question.”
I don’t want them to be any age. I just hope they both last till after me and my offspring are long dead. You want them both to be young to prove your YEC thesis presumably. If they really were that young then my understanding of reality could not possibly be true and I would have to seriously question it. But as they aren’t, I don’t.
“Answer: I try to only offer evidence, not strictly theories that might have, could have, along time ago, sort of explained one small piece of a very large puzzle; which all rely on a god named process.”
What evidence have you offered – I haven’t seen any? As far as I know my evidence over all science disciplines is internally consistent and predictive.
“On a more personal note you seem to have a very different religion of evolution than what I’ve read in most modern references. Are you making it up as you go?”.
Please could you give a couple of examples of my unique insights. I am not a scientific guru and my understanding is probably often in error.
Kind regards
Samphire
Ekkman
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 3:01pm:Jun
25Sade Tennyson
Said this at 10:38am:
——————————————————————————–
Dear Sister Jo,
Grace & peace of the Lord be upon you in Jesus worthy name.
I’ll keep praying for you & I pray that the Lord in His mercy will undertake for you in the mighty name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Though we pass through tribulation, all will be well in Jesus name.
Be encouraged that the Lord Jesus is over all.
Keep pleading the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ in your mind constantly & if possible during the court proceedings.
I will be praying along.
Sade Tennyson
Sade said some super important words here, all born-again, blood washed believers need to keep in mind. There are all kinds of evil things happening at a tremendous rate in these last days, the body of Christ, his people are being tested, tried before the Lord comes to take us home. He wants a “bride” walking in his righteousness, his holiness as we are walking submitted to him.
I am sure that Jo is going though a lot of “hell” on earth, so to speak as well as Kent. Jesus made it plain that if the world hated him then it will hate us as we walk in his life and light. Kent and Jo need our prayers and we need theirs. As I said before I am going through the hardest time that I have ever been through in my life but I know that the Lord Jesus Christ is my sufficiency, my strength, my peace and life.
Below is a link, we need to keep this organization in prayer too since they are working on getting our Constitution back in the “books”. In other words, to cause it to be back in force in America.
http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/#LatestNews
We are a fallen nation, sin does that to any nation, no matter how big they are. Sin destroys individuals and nations. It looks like we will cease to be if we do not repent pretty soon.
We, who are Christians. are called to shine the light of the Lord Jesus Christ to this lost, evil world. I have seen one life after another completely changed for his glory. People who were drunkards, whores, thieves, and other types of sinners coming to know the Lord Jesus and delivered from their own evil ways. I would like to see more of our judges, politicians, doctors, lawyers, policemen, businessmen, bankers and the like saved but many times those people are harder to reach since they usually think they have their act together.
Since the link above and what Ron Paul said about phasing the IRS out if he were President has to do with what Kent and Jo are going through then I thought I would mention them too.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
In closing, if the tax issue were the main thing that they are really messing with Kent and Jo about then common sense would tell me that Sun Myung Moon would still be in prison instead of out and getting the praise and adoration of those in Congress and his “church”.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sun_Myung_Moon#Congressional_attendees
Ekkman
Janet
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 3:30pm:Hello Kent, Thankyou for all the work you have done in behalf of our dear Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Please do not be weary in well doing. YOu have been such an encouragement to me and my family. We want to encourage you and pray for you and your wife with her sentencing coming up. I pray God’s will to be done and not man’s. We pray to the Holy Father on behalf of the HOvinds and we know that thou are sovereign and in control. Please help us to see the big picture and wait on you so we can mount up with wings of an eagle and not faint as we put our trust in you Lord. Amen
Ekkman
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 3:56pm:I logged out too soon. Here is a video that helps us understand where the united States of America is headed and who is in control. This has to do with the problems that Kent and Jo are going through.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaUhGpBNBtk
Hey, FuManchu
I haven’t heard from you lately. What do you think of Ron Paul’s definition of ‘a police state’ in the above clip? Even though I have shown you that we are in one but it will get worse. To define a police state, they don’t have to be doing all the things that a ‘police state’ does by definition at the beginning of their rise to power or if at their end of power.
I am not expecting an apology but I would love to hear that you have given your life to the Lord Jesus Christ. He is an awesome God!
Ekkman
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 6:05pm:matt 19.5,6 ….’For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh’ ‘consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.
mark 10.8,9 ‘For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and the two shall become one flesh; consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.
Genesis 2.24 For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
Sade Tennyson said “while the evil deed against our sister is done”
Sade, I don’t think you even understand the depth of depravity of these people. In the Greek the words for “put asunder” can simply mean to physically separate – and that should not be done! But in the Hebrew the language is much stronger; meaning that you shouldn’t even think of those married as separable from unity. Even to mentally conceive of division is evil.
The prisoner movements Brother Kent has undergone is nothing short of torture – and that against both husband and wife.
But the fact that there is even a separate set of charges for husband and wife is evidence that the brains of the people constructing the charges are deeply depraved.
This is biblical law and it is also inherent in natural law – the law straight from the observation of nature – to separate husband and wife even for a custodial prison sentence is wicked. All hands involved are covered in wickedness. This is the law of the Bible and God shall hold every man accountable for this wickedness.
Technocrats who think that they have immunities shall discover otherwise. Nuremberg trials were an overall disaster for juris prudence but they did set a standard that technicians could not hide behind acts of legislation.
Do not pray for Mercy because God is ‘forgiveness’ towards His Children born through blood and spirit – pray for real Justice – even the wrath of a Holy God who shall redress wrongs.
[Paul, please print this today, but I shall leave it to you discretion]
btodd
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 6:11pm:I cannot believe the mental gymnastics some of you will resort to in order to maintain faith in this man and his actions. I am constantly amazed how much instant credibility many are able to garner just by invoking the name ‘Jesus’ in front of other Christians.
I don’t know if any of you want to critically examine him, because it seems that for some of you, questioning Kent Hovind is the equivalent of questioning God. But I would encourage you to listen to his prison tapes on YouTube. You might notice how Jo Hovind seems to question their previous actions, but is bullied into submission by Kent. She seems to know deep down that they’ve been wrong (whether intentionally or not), so I particularly feel sorry for her and what she may have to endure.
And one last thing. That ‘conversation with God’ (which ironically reads just like the new-age book of that title) is ridiculous. Just another attempt by a man to equate himself with heroes of the Bible. Instead of offender, he’s playing victim. And God’s on his side, because they had a conversation about it!
Btodd
Harriet
Said this on June 25th, 2007 at 8:03pm:My family is praying for you, Hovinds! Especially Mrs. Hovind this week!
Sade Tennyson
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 9:21am:Sister Jo,
Grace & peace of our loving Lord be upon you in Jesus name.
The Lord Jesus knows what you have been through & what you are going through.
Remember he promised never to leave you nor forsake you. he is with you & will perfect all that concerns you in Jesus name.
Remember to read Philippians 4:6-8 often to keep your at peace despite the turmoil around:
6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.
7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.
8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
Your treasures are in heaven & the trials you’re going through work for you a far more weight of glory. It is well with you in Jesus mighty name & the joy of the Lord will remian your strength. Be encouraged with this Hymn copied from http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/t/e/tellitto.htm
Are you weary, are you heavy hearted?
Tell it to Jesus, tell it to Jesus.
Are you grieving over joys departed?
Tell it to Jesus alone.
Refrain
Tell it to Jesus, tell it to Jesus,
He is a Friend that’s well known.
You’ve no other such a friend or brother,
Tell it to Jesus alone.
Do the tears flow down your cheeks unbidden?
Tell it to Jesus, tell it to Jesus.
Have you sins that to men’s eyes are hidden?
Tell it to Jesus alone.
Refrain
Do you fear the gathering clouds of sorrow?
Tell it to Jesus, tell it to Jesus.
Are you anxious what shall be tomorrow?
Tell it to Jesus alone.
The Lord has a plan or allowing you to go through this. His will be done for it is always going to work together for good for you love the Lord & you are called according to his purpose.
When the enemy rejoiced that Jesus died, his doom started, so shall it be with this case & brother Kent Hovind’s case in Jesus name. The camp of the devil will regret this evil mission construed against you & your husband in Jesus name. Remember you are targetted for your stand for the creator of the whole universe & he is in control.
I am praying along. Remember to keep pleading the precious blood of Jesus Christ in your mind throughout the proceedings.
Please read psalm 4 regularly
1 A Psalm of David. Hear me when I call, O God of my righteousness: thou hast enlarged me when I was in distress; have mercy upon me, and hear my prayer.
2 O ye sons of men, how long will ye turn my glory into shame? how long will ye love vanity, and seek after leasing? Selah.
3 But know that the LORD hath set apart him that is godly for himself: the LORD will hear when I call unto him.
4 Stand in awe, and sin not: commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still. Selah.
5 Offer the sacrifices of righteousness, and put your trust in the LORD.
6 ¶ There be many that say, Who will shew us any good? LORD, lift thou up the light of thy countenance upon us.
7 Thou hast put gladness in my heart, more than in the time that their corn and their wine increased.
8 I will both lay me down in peace, and sleep: for thou, LORD, only makest me dwell in safety.
Your sister
Sade Tennyson
Sade Tennyson
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 9:25am:Thanks brother Paul Abramson for the hold on debate for now.
Please keep it up for this week & tighten it as the time for sister Jo’s sentencing gets closer, so that brethren can be better focused to keep praying fervently for sister Jo thiese few days to the sentencing. She really needs this support now!!!
Once more, thanks.
Sade Tennyson.
Sade Tennyson
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 9:32am:Brother Kent,
Peace & grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be upon you.
The wisdom of the Lord will confound the enemy irrespective of what is done to you.
This situation will keep working together for good so has the Lord decree it.
The purpose for which God has allowed this current situation to happen, let it stand in Jesus name.
We are praying for sister Jo, the Lord is over all. I pray the Almghty God will sustain you & keep upholding you with the right hand of his righteousness in Jesus name. I pray our living God will be the judge with respect to proceedings on sister Jo’s sentencing on the 29th in Jesus name.
I pray our merciful advocate the Lord Jesus Christ will advocate for sister Jo on the 29th in Jesus name. Our God is over all. He reigns over all situations for he is the reigning King no matter what the devil may do.
ERIC, THE JOY OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST WILL REMAIN YOUR STRENGTH & THE STRENGTH OF ALL THE HOVIND’S FAMILY & CSE FAMILY IN JESUS NAME. AMEN.
Sade Tennyson
Sade Tennyson
childrenrtreasures
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 10:27am:Just a hymn to hopefully encourage:
Day by day and with each passing moment, strength I find to meet my trials here; trusting in my Father’s wise bestowment, I’ve no cause for worry or for fear. He whose heart is kind beyond all measure gives unto each day what He deems best–lovingly, its part of pain and pleasure, mingling toil with peace and rest.
Ev’ry day the Lord Himself is near me with a special mercy for each hour; all my cares He fain would bear, and cheer me, He whose name is Counsellor and Pow’r. The protection of His child and treasure is a charge that on Himself He laid; “As thy days, thy strength shall be in measure,” this the pledge to me He made.
Help me then in ev’ry tribulation so to trust Thy promises, O Lord, that I lose not faith’s sweet consolation offered me within Thy holy Word. Help me, Lord, when toil and trouble meeting, e’er to take, as from a father’s hand, one by one, the days, the moments fleeting, till I reach the promised land.
2 Corinthians 4:8-11 We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body.
Praying for God’s presence and “peace that passeth understanding” to overwhelm you and your family in the days ahead.
GaryMurray
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 10:34am:Samphire said this (one day)
Hi Gary,
I think that you will find that your views are in the minority amongst educated Christians throughout the world.
____________________________
Perhaps, Samphire, this is true. Although there is no worldwide census counted amongst ‘educated Christians’ however truthful your statement ‘may’ (and I use that term loosely) be, until it is a calculated and surveyed fact I wouldn’t place such faith in what is more of your own observation rather than factual evidence. Secondly, granting the slim possibility that this statement is true, it still doesn’t hold water when using it to claim my ‘view’ is incorrect. Majority vs Minority never proves the majority to be right… Perhaps it just proves that the majority is ignorant and foolish. One could use Hitler’s gain of popularity in his day through brainwashing an entire nation to prove that just because the majority believe in something, doesn’t make it true. Are you in the majority, Samphire?
_______________________________
“They need their arguments against religion, it makes their faith in scientific ‘discovery’ seem more real and comforts them in their own heresy.”
Samphire said in response…
Wrong again. I’ve said it many times on this blog that science and religion are separate entities. Hold to your religion as you wish but in doing so do not abuse science. Scientific discovery is not faith but the absence of faith. Faith is the absence of evidence.
______________________________
True, faith is the absence of evidence, but by your own statement do you proclaim your foolishness. Scientific discovery is not fact, but ones best guess discovery by testing and research to find the best fit explanation to a question. Every form of dating any type of matter is flawed with a high margin of error, however, such obscurities as the Fossil Record and the Geologic Column are considered by most in the scientific community ‘Scientific Discoveries’. You can claim no real truth to any ’scientific discovery’ that isn’t observed but only tested and researched because there is no evidence to support that at the time it happened, it happened that way. You only have FAITH in your scientific research and testing that this ‘Scientific Discovery’ is a discovery of anything at all.
You may not like to mix the words Faith and Science, but regardless your own personal opinion I will use the Majority opinion (as you often do) of scientists agree that it takes a level of faith to believe in most (if not all) unobserved ‘Scientific Discoveries’.
Again, you may not accept it, but think not that you are the first individual not to accept the truth because it devistates your own belief structure. What I find odd is those scientists and their discoveries is exactly what you put your FAITH in to determine what you believe to be. What if these ‘discoveries’ that you have such FAITH in are wrong or worse yet those people, but published to be accurate because it’s the closest explanation for them to save face, or budget. Hmmmmm…
You’re no different as a man than I, Samphire. You believe in others who publish findings and ’scientific discoveries’ that which you read and believe by faith that what you’re reading is accurate.
We believe in the Apostles and the plenary verbal inspiration of God that which was inspired to the writers of the books in the Bible, and which was recorded into the scriptures. We just believe what we read from them.
Its all FAITH brother, no matter how you really want to slice it up and feed it to others, your piece may taste different than mine, but its all still from the same serving of man’s FAITH.
God Bless those in Christ,
Gary Murray
darling
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 12:47pm:Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974 said this at 5:08pm Jun24:
“not so easy to dialogue with someone who ignores most of your questions:”-
Crikey! Does this mean you’re going to start answering my questions?
Strike a light – I’d given up.
1. what is unreasonable about asking polite questions and examing a lawyer”s performance?”
That depends entirely on the questions.
2. What is your personal involvement with this case?”
I have none.
“Question: 3. How many people personally stood up in this case and testified that they had personally suffered any loss due to the life lived by Brother Kent?”
I don’t know.
“Question: 4. Do you understand the difference between Criminal and Quasi Criminal?”
Yes.
“Question: 5. Have you been paid Federal Reserve Bank “Legal Tender” to be involved with this court case? Would you call the usage of U.S.A.- Federal Reserve Bank “Legal Tender” a conflict of interest?”
No.
No.
Question: 6. Is the Fifth Ammendment Constitutional Law? And have you been using it on this blog without citing it?
Yes.
No.
I count 6 questions with supplementaries; could you be so “reasonable” as to answer both “each and every” one of them!
Done. Now your turn.
1. What is your understanding of the concept of stare decisis?
2. What evidence, exactly, do you have that the British Accredited Registry exists?
3. By what authority did you demand responses of me within a certain time frame?
4. Why haven’t you offered any evidence to support the claims you’ve made on this site?
5. What American court decisions support any of the contentions you’ve made on this site?
6. How could a disinterested observer distinguish the arguments you’ve been making from arguments that are completely made up?
Three Crosses
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 1:56pm:Dear Samphire: Theories are not fact. Some of your explanations puzzle me for instance:
“Deep level radio-activity measurements are not taken from bore holes for obvious reasons but reasonable assumptions”
Answer: I really don’t think “measurements” and “reasonable assumptions” are the same thing. I guess if you are trying to say, everything comes from nothing. Anything is a “reasonable assumption”.
“(nothing in science is definite but provisional)”
Answer: I thought science was supposed to be testable, demonstratable, observable, and repeatable.
“I don’t have a god. What do you mean by process?”
Answer: You have a God, you’re just denying it. There’s a big difference. You seem to fill in your word for God with the word “process”. This seems to be the big failure of evolution it can’t be a theory because it relies on conscious thought! For instance “rather than die, the giraffe grew a long neck to reach food high in the trees”. The process by which the giraffe grew it’s neck in this statement would be capable of conscious thought. How many mobster’s do you think tried to evolve gills rather than die when sent to sleep with the fishes in cement shoes?
You still seem to offer only theories where is the science again? Even practical theories are often disproven!
I hope you get what you want thanks and God bless ya!
warocuya
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 2:13pm:btodd,
I have heard them and encourage everyone to listen. You will note that Kent is asking for everyone to obey the law including the people that did several illegal things in regard to his arrest. Only evolutionists see something wrong with asking for your Constitutional rights. You see the Declaration of Independance says that we are endowed by our Creator… if you are an evolutionist then the Constitution would have little meaning. I mean it doesn’t say “endowed by the ancient prebiotic soup…”
Enough said,
Warocuya
EndTimes
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 4:19pm:I wish to thank you Paul for the update on Jo Hovind. It truly is a time of prayer for this woman of God who was simply under obedience of authority in her actions. I pray that this judge will give her a sentence that excludes incarceration. The same judge had a tax case about the same time as the Hovind case where she was quite lenient on the wife but threw the key away on the husband. This judge can apparently at times operate under the auspices of mercy based on that case.
May the Lord be with both of these faithful souls this week. I have and will continue to pray diligently for both of them and the entire CSE ministry which is worthy of our support.
May the power of God shine on Jo Hovind whatever the outcome this week shall bring. Let it be known that there are many that love and support you from a distance, yet in the Lord, we are ALL brought close.
EndTimes
P.S.
Dear Paul, forgive me for replying to anything but Jo Hovind’s circumstances this week, but I must give at least a short answer to an outrageous accusation against me by the Australian Phillip-George. I have bent over backwards from criticizing his often confusing and unintelligible diatribes on many different subjects. He has been nearly the only person that I did not take into question over some really ridiculous statements that he has made. Several others including yourself have commented on this very issue. However, it now appears that after several inflammatory comments from Australian Philip-George in the last month that I likewise sidestepped as best that I could, nevertheless, he has now “excommunicated” me from the body of Christ. I didn’t realize that he was the Pope as well as the Australian P-G.
I am sorry if I have offended you in any manner Mr. Philip-George. I have never intended to offend and if I have I apologize. However, you have crossed the line with your last statement and as a fellow believer in Christ, I state to you that I am offended by your comments and I ask you to retract them in accordance with the gospel of Christ.
If you look at my response to djhouk, I only agreed in the CONTEXT of his issues over the “tax protestor” history of Dr. Hovind which cannot be disputed. I did not at all respond to any church ministry issue in that post since I have done that very task in a multitude of other posts. My many comments in support of the church ministry of Dr. Hovind in the last 7 months are my testimony that you have laid a false accusation against me and if you are a Christian man, you will obey the gospel of Christ in your response to my request to you for a retraction. Please tell me if you could, what I have cursed or imputed against the Holy Spirit? These are quite strong words that MUST be accompanied by strong evidence before one ventures such a comment in public. Your accusations are false and your response is now requested.
I ask of you to be more careful in your comments in the future, and I likewise will as well so that we may all focus on the mission of support for CSE and the Hovind ministry and their much troubled situation at this time.
Most sincerely, EndTimes, a faithful believer in Christ which means that my sins, which like yours are many, but they are ALL forgiven for all eternity.
Jun 25 Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this at 5:40am:
“Dear Jason,
I understand you have been quite a fan of EndTimes; just be careful! Be careful, where you walk and with whom you shake hands. Do not hasten to lay hands on a man lest you partake in his sins.
djhouk [jun 23 1.11am] said ” Because Kent’s organization was not a church, ………. ”
EndTimes [jun 23 12.28 pm] said “The facts that you have laid out cannot be disputed …………….. ”
Think about it; CSE’s express purpose is evengelism and communicating Biblical Truth. djhouk says “that ain’t church”; EndTimes chips in and agrees with him.
There’s an old expression “with friends like that …………. ”
also “‘Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again’ — George W. Bush.
Church is nothing more or less than the body of Born Again Christians meeting however they will. Where ever two or more are gathered.
The bible says to guard your lips lest you curse what God has made in his own image; even unintentionally.
I am appalled, but then how many people spotted it ?
Just be careful – lest you even accidentally agree with a curse or imputation against the Holy Spirit.”
clozapine
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 5:03pm:The only thing more insane than Kent Hovind are his followers that eat this stuff up. It’s terribly depressing to know there are grown adults who believe this convicted tax cheat is having conversations with “god”, and embarass themselves by defending his nonsense. I think we’ve arrived at the point when you Hovind followers are obligated take the time to consider leaving this false prophet crying behind a jail cell for crimes he very obviously committed, as documented in his trial.
Ekkman
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 8:43pm:25btodd
Said this at 6:11pm:
——————————————————————————–
I cannot believe the mental gymnastics some of you will resort to in order to maintain faith in this man and his actions. I am constantly amazed how much instant credibility many are able to garner just by invoking the name ‘Jesus’ in front of other Christians.
25btodd
My commnets to you were going to be ????????????? but I decided to add more to it.
I am not sure if you have been reading much of anything on this blog. Maybe you were reading with your eyes closed but you will get more insight into this scenario if you read with your eyes open and your mind open but “not too open”, we don’t want our brains to “leak out”. (Thoughts from a previous blog.) Anyway, I have posted many, many links regarding organizations fighting the government in relation to the IRS, federal reserve, and others have written and linked pages too. The income tax is ‘illegal’, Kent knows that. It seems like that are those on here that think that Wikipedia and others out there reporting on Kent Hovind are right on the “money”, so to speak. It seems to me that many think it to be an “infallible” source. Kent is also in the spotlight because he comes against the government’s sacred cow, “evolution”. It is pretty important that particular religion be soaked into people’s minds in these last days because of all the killing that is going to take place. We must see people as unimportant. Then when we cage them like animals, or experiment on them won’t seem like a big deal since we do it to monkeys and the link. Since that is where, we are being taught that we can from with government approval, of course.
I don’t know if any of you want to critically examine him, because it seems that for some of you, questioning Kent Hovind is the equivalent of questioning God. But I would encourage you to listen to his prison tapes on YouTube. You might notice how Jo Hovind seems to question their previous actions, but is bullied into submission by Kent. She seems to know deep down that they’ve been wrong (whether intentionally or not), so I particularly feel sorry for her and what she may have to endure.
On this part, I wanted to ask you what John the Baptist thought when he was put in jail for preaching against Herod and the evil that he was doing. I will give you a hint by telling you it was something to do with the Lord Jesus Christ. What did John think of Jesus Christ after he was put in prison that wasn’t anything like he thought before he was put in prison? It might help you to understand why Jo seems to be “questioning” the stand that they have been taking for years. John had a lot of questions too, so to speak.
And one last thing. That ‘conversation with God’ (which ironically reads just like the new-age book of that title) is ridiculous. Just another attempt by a man to equate himself with heroes of the Bible. Instead of offender, he’s playing victim. And God’s on his side, because they had a conversation about it!
Btodd
I have been studying the new age movement for a little bit, please show me how Kent’s writings appear new age to you. That statement you made makes me very curious as to the why he appears new age to you.
Kent is a ‘victim’ of a corrupt government. They are going to swallow up all the ‘peons’ very soon if we let it happen. I am talking about the “fighers”, the others will be allowed to live if they submit to their authority.
Go back and check a lot of our links on the income tax and why it is illegal.
Especially read on the ‘Sun M Moon’ and the millions of dollars that he took from our fine govenment, spent a few months in jail and now has the adoration of some in congress. And by your definition of theft, he stole a whole lot more than Kent did.
Ekkman
Steve’s No Direction Home Page » Blog Archive » Emailing with God
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 9:31pm:[...] I kid you not. Kent Hovind, in jail for tax fraud, has been emailing with God. God, of course, is on Kent’s side. But that’s not the real strange part of this. Kent Hovind is obviously a sick puppy; what’s really sad is all the commenters who seem to actually believe this! [...]
btodd
Said this on June 27th, 2007 at 10:44pm:Warocuya,
What I noticed in those tapes are a man desperately trying to rationalize his illegal acts as some heroic stance bestowed on him by God. I noticed the talks about hiding assets, I noticed the veiled threats as to how he could make things miserable for his persecutors, I noticed the intellectual bullying of his wife when she tried to be the voice of reason and contrition, and I noticed him referring to his persecutors as ‘evil, wicked people’. All of this on tape, and these jail conversations are well-known to be recorded by everyone (including his attorney!). He literally flaunts all of this, and that’s one of the reasons his sentence was 10 years. He not only refuses to accept any responsibility, but instead hangs it on God’s will and all those evil people who dare question his faulty reasoning.
And I notice a lot of people lapping it up, and refusing to face reality. I only wish that every time I did something wrong, I could just claim that it’s God’s will and everyone who disagrees with me is an evil, wicked person. Wouldn’t that be nice?
Lastly, I don’t know why you said ‘evolutionist’. That’s not part of the legal discussion at all, unless you want to change the subject for some reason.
btodd
Australian: Phillip-George (c)1974
Said this on June 28th, 2007 at 2:05am:EndTimes [jun27 4.19]
quote: the “tax protestor” history of Dr. Hovind which cannot be disputed
unquote:
I still disagree with you!!! look the dialogue between the two of you. Look at what djhouk said: “Kent is a notorious tax protester, suing and harassing IRS agents” and that which you have agreed to by way of the language you employed and continue to employ.
And if the plain meaning of the words you employ are not the intent you wish to convey then my advice is get someone to proof read your work or write it as a co-ordinated team effort with your prayer team.
if what you have done is unconscious then even more so “you” should
Just be careful – lest you even accidentally agree with a curse or imputation against the Holy Spirit !!!
[I am moving to the new page after this post - and hopefully, God willing, I will be able to take permanent leave very soon]
Ekkman
Said this on June 28th, 2007 at 6:01pm:Jun
25btodd
Said this at 6:11pm:
——————————————————————————–
I cannot believe the mental gymnastics some of you will resort to in order to maintain faith in this man and his actions. I am constantly amazed how much instant credibility many are able to garner just by invoking the name ‘Jesus’ in front of other Christians.
btodd,
I answered this one before but I don’t know why it didn’t get posted and I did not save it so I will deal with it again.
When I read your remarks, my reply was going to be ???????? but then I decided to give it a longer reply. It has already been discussed on this blog that our faith is not in a man but in the Lord Jesus Christ. He saved all who are born again in the same way that he saved Kent Hovind.
I will agree that many are “invoking the name of ‘Jesus’” that are not Chirstians such as Roman Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and many, many other cults, psuedo Christian religions, but Kent is “not” one of them.
I don’t know if any of you want to critically examine him, because it seems that for some of you, questioning Kent Hovind is the equivalent of questioning God. But I would encourage you to listen to his prison tapes on YouTube. You might notice how Jo Hovind seems to question their previous actions, but is bullied into submission by Kent. She seems to know deep down that they’ve been wrong (whether intentionally or not), so I particularly feel sorry for her and what she may have to endure.
I have listened to them. Now have you listened to or watched the movies on the links we have supplied or are you like the woman whom I shared with who has shown me government pages put out by our government to show they are innocent of any wrong doing?
In regards to Jo Hovind. Have you read what John the Baptist did when he was thrown in jail (prison) in regards to the question that he sent back to Jesus Christ? Sometimes jail, prison does those type of things to people.
And one last thing. That ‘conversation with God’ (which ironically reads just like the new-age book of that title) is ridiculous. Just another attempt by a man to equate himself with heroes of the Bible. Instead of offender, he’s playing victim. And God’s on his side, because they had a conversation about it!
Btodd
In conclusion, would you mind sharing with me your views on why Kent Hovind’s ‘conversation with God’ reads just like the new-age book of that title so I won’t have to go out and buy the book?
I have been studying new age beliefs and the like for a short time and I see no parallels. I would really appreciate you sharing with me some of the similar types, pictures in the two writings, Kent Hovind’s and the book’s.
Please to remember to check out the links we have supplied to show that the income tax is illegal. And there are IRS agents coming out and exposing the IRS as well as lawyers, and legal professionals based on the Constitution.
Ekkman
Enzyme
Said this on June 29th, 2007 at 9:14am:Regarding my submission of information on 21st June.”Where did the Universe come from?”
My apologies if I used a larger portion than I should have, but I did credit it to Perry Marshall
I find the material totally Fascinating although he seems to be talking about an old earth whereas I am like Dr Hovind a young earth adherent.
As Dr Hovind said quite often “Eat the meat, spit out the bones”.
I think this material has some good stuff in it that can be reconciled to a young earth belief
Yours sincerely Enzyme
Ekkman
Said this on July 2nd, 2007 at 12:35am:Samphire,
I am glad that you said that science “doesn’t prove anything; it can only falsify”. I can see that with the help of creation scientists, they are “falsifying their “proofs” of man coming from the monkey. All of their “evidence” for monkey men have been “proven” wrong, I mean “falsified”. If only they knew that they couldn’t “prove” anything they would quit trying since they will never “prove” something that never happened. The missing links will forever remain missing since they were never there to be found. You cannot find something that was never there.
Speaking of “falsifying” something, I am cutting out some info in this web site by
Dr. David Plaisted. http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/
“Dr. Colin Patterson, a paleontologist, realized that amino acid sequences in near-relatives on the phylogenic tree would be expected to show close correlation, according to evolutionary theory… So here was a chance to prove or disprove evolution. If two species were considered by comparative anatomy to be near relatives, then they also should be very nearly alike when their biology is examined at the microscopic level. To Patterson, this was a great opportunity to test the theory. The results: absolutely no correlation between similarity of sequences and nearness on the evolutionary tree. Patterson, in a speech given Nov. 5, 1981 before other evolutionists, pointed out to a stunned audience that the new data on amino acid sequences contradicts the theory of evolution. He said, ‘The theory makes a prediction; we’ve tested it, and the prediction is falsified precisely… evolution not only conveys no knowledge but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge’…”
A little down in the same article, he talks about genetic mutation.
“The evidence obtained from the Human Genome Project indicates that a genetic mutation of as little as 0.0000001% of an animal’s genome is fatal… Obviously there is no way to bridge even a small genetic gap in animal species by random genetic changes.
Quantitative genetic information from the Human Genome Project is proving the theory of evolution to be the most irrational belief ever held by mankind. Individual species had to be assembled separately in the genetic code by an intelligent being whose electrical and chemical engineering technology is vastly superior to ours. The only word for such intelligence is GOD.”
The next paragraph is a little info on the light problem and as I said before, evolutionists have problems there too. I am not a scientist but since God created everything fully mature then I don’t see why the light problem wouldn’t be that way too. If you asked a Christian or creationist which came first the chicken or the egg. They would tell you the chicken. The evolutionist would say, “The Primordial Soup.”
“We can quantify how much slowdown there would be if the universe is about 6000 years old. Let’s consider a star that was 60,000 light years away when a beam of light left it. For the light to reach us, its average speed would have to be 10 light years per year. Assuming the speed of light has been decreasing, this means that the speed of light when it left the star was at least 10 times its current value. This would mean that the star would be seen changing 10 times as slowly as it really is. For a star that was 6 million light years away when a beam of light left, it would be seen slowed down by a factor of 1000 at least. A star 6 billion years away when a beam of light left would be seen slowed down by a factor of a million at least. For objects within about 50 light years, there will be no slowdown, since we know that the velocity of light has not changed much in that time.
“Similar calculations apply if space has stretched out, stretching light beams with it. If one has a light beam 60,000 light years long with at most 6,000 years of history in it, then this history will arrive on the average at most one year of history per 10 years of time, that is, slowed down by a factor of at least ten. Farther objects would have greater slowdowns. However, I believe that one could only observe distant objects in the condition they were in when they were 6,000 light years or less away from us.
“This would seem to be a good way to settle once and for all the question of whether the speed of light has decreased, or whether space has recently been stretched out. One only needs to measure rates of change of close and distant objects. Our own galaxy is, I believe, about 100,000 light years across, so there should even be some slowdown for stars in the Milky Way.
“Unfortunately, there is a tremendous variation in the lengths of periods for pulsars, binary stars, and Cepheid variables, making it difficult to detect any slowdown or to know if there is a slowdown with distance at all. Even supernovae shine for weeks, months, or years in different cases. So it is conceivable that such a slowdown exists, and simply has not been observed.”
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/universe.html
And as Kent Hovind said in one of his lectures, we really can’t measure the distances that the stars are from us with very much accuracy. They are too far out to be able to measure them very well.
Samphire, you compared science to a journey not a destination. I think I could agree with that concept. If you will agree with me based on the rocks proving the age of the fossils and the fossils proving the age of the rocks is “circular reasoning.” In the same way, the journey for the evolutionists is a journey going in circles, you never arrive at your “destination” and you keep running into the same old problems that will never be solved because there isn’t anything to find to solve the unsolvable. Evolution is a myth and many evolutionists are finding that out.
Now some of the evolutionists are going to the “Punctuated Equilibrium”. They have all these missing links that can’t be found so now they have decided that it happened so fast that you didn’t see it happen.
I cut out a piece of one of the first articles that I read on this. It says,
“However, if you study the fossils of organisms found in subsequent geological layers, you will see long intervals in which nothing changed (“equilibrium”), “punctuated” by short, revolutionary transitions, in which species became extinct and replaced by wholly new forms. Instead of a slow, continous progression, the evolution of life on Earth seems more like the life of a soldier: long periods of boredom interrupted by rare moments of terror.”
http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/PUNCTUEQ.html
Think about that Samphire, they became extinct and replaced by “wholly new forms”. Wow! That sounds pretty miraculous. Now “time and chance” or is it “no time and a lot of chance” can do the miraculous but God can’t do it fast miracle, “punctuated” that is. Such as them not believing God created the heaven and the earth in six literal days. Sad! And then with man in time we have the “equilibrium”?. Such as man interbreeding making different kinds of dogs from a dog kind or different kinds of birds from the bird kind that Darwin noticed and other kinds within the same kind, so to speak.
Even though they (the evolutionists) are getting closer in one way, they are still very far off in another way. A dinosaur didn’t have a baby bird. They are different kinds. The concept, theory is true based on beginnings, “it happened so fast they didn’t see it happen”. Their conclusions are wrong.
Samphire said, “Just because there are as yet unsolved difficulties that doesn’t automatically make yours right.”
Almost everything in evolution is “unsolved difficulties”. Even if they gave up on their billion of years nonsense, they still won’t kiss a frog and see if become a prince. It happens in fairy tales not real life. Whether it is a long time or a short time, we are of a certain kind and that kind doesn’t go from one kind to another kind.
I didn’t know that I presented you with my theory since you said “that doesn’t automatically make yours right.”
I have watched a few videos on “intelligent design” but I didn’t see that they are admitting or even seeing who the “intelligent designer” is. At least they are admitting that the world, universe had to have happened by design not chance. They are seeing that it is impossible for the things we see to just have happened.
Back to mathematics. In the book entitled,” ‘Darwin’s Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems” by Luther S. Sunderland
” “It is often stated by evolutionists that with enough time,
anything could happen regardless of how improbable it might be.
Nobel prize winner George Wald has said, ‘Time is the hero of the
plot. Given enough time anything can happen- the impossible
becomes probable, the improbable becomes certain.’ (Beverly
Halstead, ‘Popper: Good Philosophy, Bad Science?’, New Scientist,
V.87, No. 1210, 17 July 1980, pp. 215-217) Prominent evolutionist
Julian Huxley has stated that, given enough time, monkeys typing
on typewriters could eventually type out the complete words of
Shakespeare. Such uniformed statements[...EDITED...].”
” I thought I knew the word of God a little bit [...EDITED...]
“And anthropologist Lyall Watson, writing in Science Digest (Vol. 90), said: “Modern apes.., seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no yesterday, no fossil record. And the true origin of modern humans—of upright, naked, tool making, big-brained beings—is . . . . an equally mysterious matter.”
“Far too often anthropologists stretch the evidence to fit their preconceptions. Tim White, an anthropologist from the University of California, Berkeley, offers an explanation. He is quoted in an article in New Scientist (April 28, 1983) entitled “Hominid [early man] Collarbone Exposed As Dolphin’s Rib”: “The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone be comes a hominid bone.”
http://www.mazeministry.com/resources/books/hardcasetext/hardcase9.htm
In closing, I am going to give you a link to read where one of your “religious” leaders known as Stephen Jay Gould is speaking. It is an interesting article. I especially liked the ending of it. It was kind of a “happy ending” for everyone?.
http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od182/gould182.htm
The Lord Jesus Christ said, “…I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
Jesus Christ also said, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
He is just a prayer away from each and every one of us.
Ekkman
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Again, we must LIMIT the creation-evolution debate. I understand that you and Samphire each have excellent points to make, but ... I have to go limit this. It was a decision made months ago, as it tends to take over the blog and get quite contentious. ... sorry ... P.A. ]
Ekkman
Said this on July 2nd, 2007 at 12:50am:27GaryMurray
Said this at 10:34am:
…You’re no different as a man than I, Samphire. You believe in others who publish findings and ’scientific discoveries’ that which you read and believe by faith that what you’re reading is accurate.
We believe in the Apostles and the plenary verbal inspiration of God that which was inspired to the writers of the books in the Bible, and which was recorded into the scriptures. We just believe what we read from them.
Its all FAITH brother, no matter how you really want to slice it up and feed it to others, your piece may taste different than mine, but its all still from the same serving of man’s FAITH.
God Bless those in Christ,
Gary Murray
Gary said a mouthful here. It was full of truth. I tell people much of the time, we all live by faith. We put faith in our spouses, our jobs, our financial position, our looks, etc. Even in everyday life we put faith in our cars, believing they will start or we would not even get in them. When we hit a light switch, we believe the light will come on or we would not even bother to hit it. We do all kinds of things every day by faith whether we are believers or not. Some “believe” their government will never do them wrong. (“Believe” is a verb for the noun “faith”.) They have faith in that and prove it by the things they say and do. The Lord Jesus Christ said, “Have faith in God.” That’s all for now.
Ekkman
Ekkman
Said this on July 2nd, 2007 at 1:17pm:http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50747
Above is a link showing that many scientists are coming out from under Darwinism. As one scientist said that it is against knowledge and another said that it is holding true science back. The bible says, “…of science falsely so called:”
Ekkman
btodd
Said this on July 2nd, 2007 at 5:16pm:QUOTE BY EKKMAN: My commnets to you were going to be ????????????? but I decided to add more to it.
I am not sure if you have been reading much of anything on this blog. Maybe you were reading with your eyes closed but you will get more insight into this scenario if you read with your eyes open and your mind open but “not too open”, we don’t want our brains to “leak out”. (Thoughts from a previous blog.) Anyway, I have posted many, many links regarding organizations fighting the government in relation to the IRS, federal reserve, and others have written and linked pages too. The income tax is ‘illegal’, Kent knows that. END QUOTE
Yes, I understand. Aside from being a ‘doctor’ and a ’scientist’, Kent is also a ‘tax expert’. I’ll skip re-treading the facts about Kent’s credentials in those areas (I’m sure you’ve ignored them before). I don’t know which video you’re referring to, and I’m certainly not going to watch several to appease your sense of fairness, so is there one in particular you can point me to? The first thing I ran across (going back UP the page) was a link regarding Ron Paul, taxes, fascism, blah blah blah. So immediately, we’re thrown into this world of 9/11 Conspiracy (I dare you to start that debate with me), police states, New World Orders and fascism claims. Yes, I see how seriously I should take your sources and beliefs now. Please don’t waste my time with paranoia.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: It seems like that are those on here that think that Wikipedia and others out there reporting on Kent Hovind are right on the “money”, so to speak. It seems to me that many think it to be an “infallible” source.END QUOTE
Is there a reason you’re trying to erect a Wikipedia strawman? I haven’t cited it as a source, so I don’t even know why you’re trying to use this.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Kent is also in the spotlight because he comes against the government’s sacred cow, “evolution”. It is pretty important that particular religion be soaked into people’s minds in these last days because of all the killing that is going to take place. We must see people as unimportant. Then when we cage them like animals, or experiment on them won’t seem like a big deal since we do it to monkeys and the link. Since that is where, we are being taught that we can from with government approval, of course.END QUOTE
Paranoid much? Jeez, I don’t even know how to respond to that. First of all, evolution isn’t the argument regarding Kent’s tax crimes. You keep wanting to drag that into the argument, because this all revolves around your religious beliefs, and Kent has done a good snow job on you by CONNECTING THIS TAX ISSUE WITH GOD. BUT….If EVER in recent years there has been an administration that would refrain from attacking Creationism, THIS IS THE ONE. The claim that the government is out to get him because of evolution is pure comedy. Only in recent years have we had to re-tread the waters of religion trying to pose as science again (Intelligent Design). We have faith-based initiatives, too. Yeah, George Bush sure hates you Christians and your Creationism.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: On this part, I wanted to ask you what John the Baptist thought when he was put in jail for preaching against Herod and the evil that he was doing. I will give you a hint by telling you it was something to do with the Lord Jesus Christ. What did John think of Jesus Christ after he was put in prison that wasn’t anything like he thought before he was put in prison? It might help you to understand why Jo seems to be “questioning” the stand that they have been taking for years. John had a lot of questions too, so to speak. END QUOTE
Ekkman, John the Baptist has nothing to do with this issue. Kent can compare himself to Bible figures all he wants, and you can lap it up all you want. Once again, this tax thing is tied to your religious beliefs. You simply cannot face the fact that Kent might be wrong about some things. It’s painfully obvious to an outsider what Jo is doing there. She’s responding to that little voice of guilt and recognition that this tax belief is all a big sham. Luckily for you, Kent just bullies her intellectually by putting the onus on her to tell him which law the government is referring to. When she can’t answer (as he knows she can’t), she’s forced right back into submission. Yes, how admirable!
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I have been studying the new age movement for a little bit, please show me how Kent’s writings appear new age to you. That statement you made makes me very curious as to the why he appears new age to you. END QUOTE
I’ll come back and post some lines from it to compare, but I’m going to finish this post. My point was NOT that Kent is new-agey. The point was partially that the dialogue between the two books is strikingly similar, but you would consider one of them a total lie, and the other total truth. He’s definitely not; he’s Fundamentalist and paranoid. Let me ask you, do you really believe that was a real dialogue between he and God? Does it bother you that Kent thinks you’re stupid enough to believe that just because he wrote it? Let me put it another way…..is there any method that you use to discern the truth of such a claim? What method? If someone says they’re a Christian, and then proceeds to tell you an exact conversation they had with God, do you automatically swallow that?
EKKMAN WROTE: Kent is a ‘victim’ of a corrupt government. They are going to swallow up all the ‘peons’ very soon if we let it happen. I am talking about the “fighers”, the others will be allowed to live if they submit to their authority. END QUOTE
More paranoia and conspiracy claims. Welcome to the same techniques used by 9/11 “Truthers”, Scientology, and just about every other bogus belief that can’t produce tangible facts.
EKKMAN WROTE: Go back and check a lot of our links on the income tax and why it is illegal.
Especially read on the ‘Sun M Moon’ and the millions of dollars that he took from our fine govenment, spent a few months in jail and now has the adoration of some in congress. And by your definition of theft, he stole a whole lot more than Kent did. END QUOTE
Once again, you want to talk about everyone else and how it makes what Kent did OK. Sun Yung Moon doesn’t have anything to do with this, and you certainly won’t see me defending him, either. What’s your point, that if Sun Yung Moon broke the law and didn’t get as much time as Kent, then it was OK for Kent to break the law? I’m having trouble with your reasoning, because…..well, there isn’t any.
If Kent was not a Creationist, and didn’t invoke Jesus as the reason for his cause, then you wouldn’t be defending the cause. This is simply tied to your religious fervor. Since you love bringing evolution / creationism into this, it’s very similar to that situation. You have a bunch of laypersons who are trying to tell the body of science that it’s wrong….about SCIENCE! Now if evolution is the bold-faced lie that you claim, wouldn’t there be quite a few non-religious scientists that notice that and bring it up? But no, there are only the fanatically religious who do so…why is that? The greatest way to make a name for yourself in the science world is to overturn a widely-held theory….no one is willing to do that? What’s your explanation for why only the uber-fundamentalist-religious take this stance? I know what the answer is, but I’m sure you will resort to conspiracy again (the grandest one of them all), by saying something to the effect of them being evil, blinded by Satan, or the like.
btodd
Three Crosses
Said this on July 3rd, 2007 at 10:52am:To btodd you said this:
“If Kent was not a Creationist, and didn’t invoke Jesus as the reason for his cause, then you wouldn’t be defending the cause. This is simply tied to your religious fervor. Since you love bringing evolution / creationism into this, it’s very similar to that situation. You have a bunch of laypersons who are trying to tell the body of science that it’s wrong….about SCIENCE! Now if evolution is the bold-faced lie that you claim, wouldn’t there be quite a few non-religious scientists that notice that and bring it up? But no, there are only the fanatically religious who do so…why is that? The greatest way to make a name for yourself in the science world is to overturn a widely-held theory….no one is willing to do that? What’s your explanation for why only the uber-fundamentalist-religious take this stance? I know what the answer is, but I’m sure you will resort to conspiracy again (the grandest one of them all), by saying something to the effect of them being evil, blinded by Satan, or the like.”
Hey you answered yourself! I guess you need open eyes and ears to have noticed!
“Now if evolution is the bold-faced lie that you claim, wouldn’t there be quite a few non-religious scientists that notice that and bring it up?”
Answer: I know of no “non-religious scientists” but as far as scientists go; They do! You know it, or you’re faking you knowledge of science. [...EDITED...]
God bless america God save us all!
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Sorry, we're not doing a creation-evolution debate. But is it good to know that someone has everything figured out. You spelled America wrong again, by the way. P.A. ]
Ekkman
Said this on July 4th, 2007 at 12:32am:2btodd
Said this at 5:16pm:
——————————————————————————–
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: My commnets to you were going to be ????????????? but I decided to add more to it.
I am not sure if you have been reading much of anything on this blog. Maybe you were reading with your eyes closed but you will get more insight into this scenario if you read with your eyes open and your mind open but “not too open”, we don’t want our brains to “leak out”. (Thoughts from a previous blog.) Anyway, I have posted many, many links regarding organizations fighting the government in relation to the IRS, federal reserve, and others have written and linked pages too. The income tax is ‘illegal’, Kent knows that. END QUOTE
Yes, I understand. Aside from being a ‘doctor’ and a ’scientist’, Kent is also a ‘tax expert’. I’ll skip re-treading the facts about Kent’s credentials in those areas (I’m sure you’ve ignored them before). I don’t know which video you’re referring to, and I’m certainly not going to watch several to appease your sense of fairness, so is there one in particular you can point me to? The first thing I ran across (going back UP the page) was a link regarding Ron Paul, taxes, fascism, blah blah blah. So immediately, we’re thrown into this world of 9/11 Conspiracy (I dare you to start that debate with me), police states, New World Orders and fascism claims. Yes, I see how seriously I should take your sources and beliefs now. Please don’t waste my time with paranoia.
From reading the above, I see that you are a ‘doctor’, ’scientist’, and ‘tax expert’. There are tons of scientists who reject Darwinism, always have and always will. I haven’t ignored the clips, writings showing how corrupt Kent is. Not only have I read them and watched some of them. I actually listened to the other side, Kent’s side, that is. I am sure if you were in his position that you would want all people just listening to “the other side” whether government or experts as some on this site seem to think such as Widipedia and NOT listen to your side also. Tsk! Tsk!
I am not referring to “a video” but many videos and web sites of those who are against the IRS whether ex-IRS agents, lawyers, business professionals and the list is growing. One of the most popular presidential candidates, Ron Paul, in spite of the media seeking to ignore him will outlaw the Federal Reserve and IRS if elected. Those who study law who are working to outlaw the IRS and many other government organizations.
I will be more than happy to take you up on your dare. There are tons of agencies, people, who know that 9/11 was a conspiracy to destroy America freedoms. There are those who think that giving up freedoms for protection is freedom, it isn’t. There are big wheels in government who believe that the government was behind the attack at 9/11 as well as Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, etc. I am beginning to think that you MUST think that our government is innocent of all crimes since they appear to be your god. The one who will “protect you from cradle to grave”. I would be paranoid too if I thought that and then I am exposed to how corrupt they are. That would be a nightmare. Some of the videos are below. A government who will allow the killing of innocent little babies in the wombs of their mothers will do anything in the negative.
http://www.givemeliberty.org/
http://www.freedomabovefortune.com/
http://showmethelaw.net/
http://www.theft-by-deception.com/
Many who are professionals in the income tax area not paying income taxes and are letting it be known that no normal everyday working American should be paying it.
http://www.theadvocates.org/civilliberties.html
Our civil liberties are at stake.
A couple of good links to see where Congressman Ron Paul stands with the IRS and other agencies and/or laws.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peBGJwE9NXo
http://www.atgpress.com/
This link shows us that the media has been lying to us on many issues.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: It seems like that are those on here that think that Wikipedia and others out there reporting on Kent Hovind are right on the “money”, so to speak. It seems to me that many think it to be an “infallible” source.END QUOTE
Is there a reason you’re trying to erect a Wikipedia strawman? I haven’t cited it as a source, so I don’t even know why you’re trying to use this.
Todd, it appears to me that you are erecting the “strawman” here. I never said that “you” use wikipedia but others that I have been debating have. Sorry you were offended at that statement. It appears that you are the one who is paranoid with about any statement made that contradicts your beliefs or your stand with our fine government.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Kent is also in the spotlight because he comes against the government’s sacred cow, “evolution”. It is pretty important that particular religion be soaked into people’s minds in these last days because of all the killing that is going to take place. We must see people as unimportant. Then when we cage them like animals, or experiment on them won’t seem like a big deal since we do it to monkeys and the link. Since that is where, we are being taught that we can from with government approval, of course.END QUOTE
Paranoid much? Jeez, I don’t even know how to respond to that. First of all, evolution isn’t the argument regarding Kent’s tax crimes. You keep wanting to drag that into the argument, because this all revolves around your religious beliefs, and Kent has done a good snow job on you by CONNECTING THIS TAX ISSUE WITH GOD. BUT….If EVER in recent years there has been an administration that would refrain from attacking Creationism, THIS IS THE ONE. The claim that the government is out to get him because of evolution is pure comedy. Only in recent years have we had to re-tread the waters of religion trying to pose as science again (Intelligent Design). We have faith-based initiatives, too. Yeah, George Bush sure hates you Christians and your Creationism.
I love your arguments. “Paranoid much? Jeez,…” Is evolution a government sponsored “science” i.e. religion for our public schools? Sure it is! So do you think that the government takes it lightly when a man comes against it in the name of science?
Anybody can see that it didn’t take an intelligent designer to make all we see around us even though our smartest scientists cannot make what we see in this world via nature, the heavens, etc. We really only have science because of a Creator, if no design there wouldn’t be anything to study. All would be by chance and chance has no design, does it? And if so where did it come from? And when you tell me that, I ask you, do you have absolutes? And if not, how can you have science, isn’t that based on absolutes? Here is a very good link on my web site to deal with this, too much to type.
http://www.ekkcom.net/western.htm
Speaking of Bush, he is in a secretive, Satanic society called the Skull and Bones. He was “born again” when one of the members pulled him out of a casket. It could have been Kerry lifting him out, who knows? I can almost sense the “paranoia” in your comments. Calm down and read, study the posts made. Don’t get angry, just focus on the subjects at hand. Compare what you “believe” with the facts.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: On this part, I wanted to ask you what John the Baptist thought when he was put in jail for preaching against Herod and the evil that he was doing. I will give you a hint by telling you it was something to do with the Lord Jesus Christ. What did John think of Jesus Christ after he was put in prison that wasn’t anything like he thought before he was put in prison? It might help you to understand why Jo seems to be “questioning” the stand that they have been taking for years. John had a lot of questions too, so to speak. END QUOTE
Ekkman, John the Baptist has nothing to do with this issue. Kent can compare himself to Bible figures all he wants, and you can lap it up all you want. Once again, this tax thing is tied to your religious beliefs. You simply cannot face the fact that Kent might be wrong about some things. It’s painfully obvious to an outsider what Jo is doing there. She’s responding to that little voice of guilt and recognition that this tax belief is all a big sham. Luckily for you, Kent just bullies her intellectually by putting the onus on her to tell him which law the government is referring to. When she can’t answer (as he knows she can’t), she’s forced right back into submission. Yes, how admirable!
John the Baptist has everything to do with the situation. If you had really read it in context and know the scriptures that I am referring to then you couldn’t miss the parallel. Now you are telling me that I took my John the Baptist illustration from Kent??? That is strange. I said that you know us a lot better than we know ourselves. Where did Kent said that? Please furnish a reference to it. Thanks! But if you were just saying it from bible figures then that is all right since Kent is a saint of God as well as any of them are.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I have been studying the new age movement for a little bit, please show me how Kent’s writings appear new age to you. That statement you made makes me very curious as to the why he appears new age to you. END QUOTE
I’ll come back and post some lines from it to compare, but I’m going to finish this post. My point was NOT that Kent is new-agey. The point was partially that the dialogue between the two books is strikingly similar, but you would consider one of them a total lie, and the other total truth. He’s definitely not; he’s Fundamentalist and paranoid. Let me ask you, do you really believe that was a real dialogue between he and God? Does it bother you that Kent thinks you’re stupid enough to believe that just because he wrote it? Let me put it another way…..is there any method that you use to discern the truth of such a claim? What method? If someone says they’re a Christian, and then proceeds to tell you an exact conversation they had with God, do you automatically swallow that?
Here you had a wonderful opportunity to support some of your “beliefs” in this blog but you flunked out ‘for now’. I await your “proof” to show that Kent is ‘new age’ plus “fundmentalist and paranoid”. I believe that you will be able to show me that he is Fundamentalist but the paranoid doesn’t fit with a Fundamentalist unless to you, they are one and the same.
EKKMAN WROTE: Kent is a ‘victim’ of a corrupt government. They are going to swallow up all the ‘peons’ very soon if we let it happen. I am talking about the “fighers”, the others will be allowed to live if they submit to their authority. END QUOTE
More paranoia and conspiracy claims. Welcome to the same techniques used by 9/11 “Truthers”, Scientology, and just about every other bogus belief that can’t produce tangible facts.
Another good answer. 9/11 “Truthers” and “Scientology” have nothing in common from what I know of them. Please furnish parallels. It goes back to your “belief” system. The government can do no wrong and if you find out they could, there goes your god. Scary!
EKKMAN WROTE: Go back and check a lot of our links on the income tax and why it is illegal.
Especially read on the ‘Sun M Moon’ and the millions of dollars that he took from our fine govenment, spent a few months in jail and now has the adoration of some in congress. And by your definition of theft, he stole a whole lot more than Kent did. END QUOTE
Once again, you want to talk about everyone else and how it makes what Kent did OK. Sun Yung Moon doesn’t have anything to do with this, and you certainly won’t see me defending him, either. What’s your point, that if Sun Yung Moon broke the law and didn’t get as much time as Kent, then it was OK for Kent to break the law? I’m having trouble with your reasoning, because…..well, there isn’t any.
Sun M Moon is not an American as far as I know. If he were, the laws would apply to him like any other American. I would defend his right to not pay income taxes if he were an American just as I would defend Kent’s right. You also didn’t read my blog very well even though it is in your rebuttal. I said, “…by your definition of theft,”
I believe to understand “reason”, a person has to operating in reason. You need to calm down and read, not only read but read in context with the subject at hand. You don’t seem to be doing that by your comments all through this blog.
If Kent was not a Creationist, and didn’t invoke Jesus as the reason for his cause, then you wouldn’t be defending the cause. This is simply tied to your religious fervor. Since you love bringing evolution / creationism into this, it’s very similar to that situation. You have a bunch of laypersons who are trying to tell the body of science that it’s wrong….about SCIENCE! Now if evolution is the bold-faced lie that you claim, wouldn’t there be quite a few non-religious scientists that notice that and bring it up? But no, there are only the fanatically religious who do so…why is that? The greatest way to make a name for yourself in the science world is to overturn a widely-held theory….no one is willing to do that? What’s your explanation for why only the uber-fundamentalist-religious take this stance? I know what the answer is, but I’m sure you will resort to conspiracy again (the grandest one of them all), by saying something to the effect of them being evil, blinded by Satan, or the like.
btodd
By the Constitution and Bill of Rights, no American should be paying income taxes, they are illegal. Well, it is to those who were endowed with rights by their Creator, not the ones who came out of primordial soup, oceans or whatever. Seriously though, because of the bible this land was based on you have freedoms too even though you deny the one who gave us those freedoms, the Lord Jesus Christ. One of the first things Ron Paul would do if he were President is take the IRS out.
There are others who are not Christians or creationists but are against a corrupt government, I would back them too in that area.
Make sure that you read the page link below and tell me if you really believe those scientists are “religious” people by your definition of religion. But they are rejecting Darwinism, not because of religion but because of science.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50747
Ekkman
btodd
Said this on July 4th, 2007 at 9:29pm:QUOTE BY EKKMAN: From reading the above, I see that you are a ‘doctor’, ’scientist’, and ‘tax expert’. There are tons of scientists who reject Darwinism, always have and always will. I haven’t ignored the clips, writings showing how corrupt Kent is. Not only have I read them and watched some of them. I actually listened to the other side, Kent’s side, that is. I am sure if you were in his position that you would want all people just listening to “the other side” whether government or experts as some on this site seem to think such as Widipedia and NOT listen to your side also. Tsk! Tsk! END QUOTE
You caught me. I’m not a doctor, scientist or tax expert. In that sense, Kent and I are the same. Which is why I’m not going to defy the knowledge of doctors, scientists or tax experts on a subject I’m barely familiar with. Do you see my point? And if Kent’s stance was that the tax code is illegal, and he has sound reasons to believe it, then why was his defense one of ‘I don’t know who’s charging me, and what I’m being charged with”? Why wasn’t a case presented on the merits you are now espousing?
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I am not referring to “a video” but many videos and web sites of those who are against the IRS whether ex-IRS agents, lawyers, business professionals and the list is growing. One of the most popular presidential candidates, Ron Paul, in spite of the media seeking to ignore him will outlaw the Federal Reserve and IRS if elected. Those who study law who are working to outlaw the IRS and many other government organizations. END QUOTE
Good luck to them. I don’t have a stake in such things, if there’s a better system available, then great. I’m glad you said that those who study law are working on it, because that implies that they will cooperate with the law and bring their case through the proper channels. That’s not what happened here.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I will be more than happy to take you up on your dare. There are tons of agencies, people, who know that 9/11 was a conspiracy to destroy America freedoms. There are those who think that giving up freedoms for protection is freedom, it isn’t. There are big wheels in government who believe that the government was behind the attack at 9/11 as well as Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, etc. I am beginning to think that you MUST think that our government is innocent of all crimes since they appear to be your god. The one who will “protect you from cradle to grave”. I would be paranoid too if I thought that and then I am exposed to how corrupt they are. That would be a nightmare. Some of the videos are below. A government who will allow the killing of innocent little babies in the wombs of their mothers will do anything in the negative. END QUOTE
I’ve spent a fair amount of time debating 9/11 Truthers, and they operate on many of the same principles of Creationist arguments. A layperson with little understanding of a complex topic ignores monumental physical and tangible evidence (agreed upon by virtually the entire body of experts)in favor of a default, a priori assumption. For 9/11 Truth, it’s that the government was behind it, without ever producing any arguments or evidence that they did it. Instead, the entire movement is based on trying to knock holes in the information that is physical and tangible in nature, instead in favor of appeals to motive, conspiracy, distrust of the government, and wild theories about one world governments, illuminati, and whatever else sounds good to the ears that week. But the eventual conclusion is, “well, I don’t like the official story, therefore the government did it”. It’s a default position based on the original assumption. We’re almost six years out from the events of 9/11, and the “Truth” movement still has no tangible evidence. It’s still operating on appeals to motive, and YouTube videos with spooky soundtracks. Much like Creationism, we need everything to fit into a quick soundbite and catch-phrase (like ‘teach the controversy’ and such), so people who have very little understanding of the subject matter can feel like they really do, and keep their a priori assumptions.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Todd, it appears to me that you are erecting the “strawman” here. I never said that “you” use wikipedia but others that I have been debating have. Sorry you were offended at that statement. It appears that you are the one who is paranoid with about any statement made that contradicts your beliefs or your stand with our fine government. END QUOTE
You’re not debating those others when you type ‘btodd’. That’s me. Bring it up with them. Even if one does use Wikipedia, however, you can actually check the sources. Not everything on Wikipedia is truth, not everything is a lie. But it can be found out.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I love your arguments. “Paranoid much? Jeez,…” Is evolution a government sponsored “science” i.e. religion for our public schools? Sure it is! So do you think that the government takes it lightly when a man comes against it in the name of science? END QUOTE
How else can I respond to claims of conspiracies everywhere? I can’t disprove a negative, so if you’ve got it in your head that all these grand conspiracies exist everywhere, how could I ever convince you that they’re not? You can always claim I just haven’t discovered the ‘truth’ yet! As for evolution as ‘government sponsored science’, the science that gets taught is the prevailing science of the day. Evolution has been the prevailing science, by a landslide, for many years. It is always open to be challenged, and refuted, in the scientific community, through research, papers and peer review. The government itself has no stake in your passion here, and you wouldn’t have to resort to claiming conspiracy if you had tangible evidence for your theories that stand up to scientific scrutiny. That’s why movements like intelligent design went for local school boards instead of peer review. We have to get this in the back-door, you know. And if Kent was ‘attacked’ because of his stand against evolution, then why aren’t all of his other peers, some of whom have greater influence, being attacked for tax charges? The answer is obvious.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Anybody can see that it didn’t take an intelligent designer to make all we see around us even though our smartest scientists cannot make what we see in this world via nature, the heavens, etc. We really only have science because of a Creator, if no design there wouldn’t be anything to study. All would be by chance and chance has no design, does it? And if so where did it come from? And when you tell me that, I ask you, do you have absolutes? And if not, how can you have science, isn’t that based on absolutes? Here is a very good link on my web site to deal with this, too much to type. END QUOTE
Ekkman, this has been done ad nauseum by better people than you and I. As you’ve probably heard countless times, who made the designer? If some things are so complex that they must be designed, then God is more complex yet. Your solution (whether it is correct or not, which I cannot know) is no different than saying ‘It’s magic’. As my statement in parenthesis implied, I am an agnostic. We can go on for pages about whether or not there’s a creator, but you and I aren’t going to reveal anything that far greater minds haven’t all these years.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Speaking of Bush, he is in a secretive, Satanic society called the Skull and Bones. He was “born again” when one of the members pulled him out of a casket. It could have been Kerry lifting him out, who knows? I can almost sense the “paranoia” in your comments. Calm down and read, study the posts made. Don’t get angry, just focus on the subjects at hand. Compare what you “believe” with the facts. END QUOTE
I’m familiar with the Skull and Bones conspiracies. David Icke is right around the corner to tell you how lizard people from outer space are connected with this, too. That’s what scares me about modern-day conspiracy buffs, one is never enough. One seems to lead to another, and another….and it isn’t healthy.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: John the Baptist has everything to do with the situation. If you had really read it in context and know the scriptures that I am referring to then you couldn’t miss the parallel. Now you are telling me that I took my John the Baptist illustration from Kent??? That is strange. I said that you know us a lot better than we know ourselves. Where did Kent said that? Please furnish a reference to it. Thanks! But if you were just saying it from bible figures then that is all right since Kent is a saint of God as well as any of them are. END QUOTE
I wasn’t referencing Kent as having spoken of John the Baptist specifically, but referencing the continual usage of comparing him or his situation to characters from the Bible and their tribulations. I find it a bit dodgy and convenient. As for Kent being a Saint of God, I’ll just have to let you have that one. I can’t possibly know that, nor do I understand how you possibly could.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Here you had a wonderful opportunity to support some of your “beliefs” in this blog but you flunked out ‘for now’. I await your “proof” to show that Kent is ‘new age’ plus “fundmentalist and paranoid”. I believe that you will be able to show me that he is Fundamentalist but the paranoid doesn’t fit with a Fundamentalist unless to you, they are one and the same. END QUOTE
First of all, re-read my last post. I DISTINCTLY said Kent is NOT new-age, but fundamentalist and paranoid. So don’t continue saying I’m claiming he’s new age. My beliefs? If you think I’m a new-age believer, I’m not. As I stated, I’m an agnostic. I read that book years ago, and it reads much like Kent’s post, where a man and God are just having a good ol’ conversation, and we’re supposed to believe it because he says he did. You also had a wonderful opportunity to tell my how you determine whether a conversation with God written by a Christian is true (and whether you believe in Kent’s version). I think it’s a very dangerous thing to promote the idea that you and God are speaking in literal sentences and having full conversations with each other. I’ve already laid out why I think he’s paranoid, with the many conspiracies and strange claims he makes regarding Creationism, tax laws, 9/11, OKC Bombings, cancer cures, and the like.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Another good answer. 9/11 “Truthers” and “Scientology” have nothing in common from what I know of them. Please furnish parallels. END QUOTE
I lumped 9/11 Truth and Scientology in with Creationism and Intelligent Design. They don’t all share exactly the same characteristics, but there are many parallels.
1. Use of a lack of evidence AS EVIDENCE. Intelligent Design, instead of making a positive case for it’s claim, instead spends it’s time by trying to poke holes in evolution, and then if a gap or lack of understanding is found, all other evidence is out the door and it’s, “See? God did it!” 9/11 Truth uses the same technique. “I don’t believe WTC 7 could fall since it wasn’t hit by a plane, and I don’t understand structural engineering, therefore the Government blew it up. Even though there’s zero positive evidence to support that claim, it’s now used as the default position, so you get, “Well, I don’t believe the official story, so until you convince me, the government did it!”. Scientology doesn’t really apply on this one.
2. Resort to conspiracy. When it’s pointed out that there is no verifiable, objective or scientific evidence to back up their position, then it’s because of conspiracy. For Creationism / Intelligent Design, it’s those lying scientists that are hiding God’s truth, or the government, or atheism. For 9/11 Truth, it’s the government who is not only hiding an unimaginable amount of evidence that would signify demolitions, but also has convinced thousands of people, among multiple agencies, to go along with killing thousands of citizens and covering it up to this very day (all so we could go to war in Iraq, except we forgot to plant WMD’s and now we look like idiots- yeah, great plan). For scientology, the conspiracy is psychiatry (the entire field and all its practitioners), suppressive persons and a galactic event from 75 million years ago. They actually share some of your views on secret societies and government conspiracy.
3. Illusionary expertise. Laypersons making claims regarding areas of expertise that require extensive education and experience in. Instead, cloaking them in just enough ‘technical speak’ to sound knowledgeable for an audience that is clearly not knowledgeable. So you have people like Dr. David Ray Griffin, a professor of Theology, giving his opinions on structural engineering and demolitions, and contradicting experts in those fields with REAL CREDENTIALS. And people actually believe him! The same goes for creationism vs. evolution, where someone like Kent claims a doctorate and is addressing real, educated and experienced scientists with just enough knowledge and catch-phrases to snare and already believing, unsuspecting audience. In Scientology, L Ron Hubbard made many claims to the effectiveness of Scientology over the field of psychiatry, medicine and many other sciences. Yet there are no studies or any peer review to back up those claims. His followers don’t question it, though.
There are three parallels on how I think those bogus belief systems work and prosper.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: It goes back to your “belief” system. The government can do no wrong and if you find out they could, there goes your god. Scary! END QUOTE
You don’t know what you think you do. I’m not a right-wing guy, nor big on the government. I hardly believe that the government ‘can do no wrong’. I didn’t vote for Bush, I think he’s the worst president we’ve ever had, and I thought Kerry was a terrible choice also, but I voted for him because it’s all I had. I’m not for 9/11 Truth because it’s hogwash, pure and simple. Tell them to produce something factual and get back to me. I also think Holocaust-deniers are full of it too, but it’s not because I’m pro-Israel. Hogwash is hogwash, and I don’t mind calling it such.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Sun M Moon is not an American as far as I know. If he were, the laws would apply to him like any other American. I would defend his right to not pay income taxes if he were an American just as I would defend Kent’s right. You also didn’t read my blog very well even though it is in your rebuttal. I said, “…by your definition of theft,”END QUOTE
I didn’t give a definition of theft, did I?
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I believe to understand “reason”, a person has to operating in reason. You need to calm down and read, not only read but read in context with the subject at hand. You don’t seem to be doing that by your comments all through this blog. END QUOTE
You’re no more calm than I, please. I haven’t been rattling off about multiple agencies, all conspiring against me all the time. I think I’m doing pretty well. If I believed what you do, I don’t know how I would function nor live in this country.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: By the Constitution and Bill of Rights, no American should be paying income taxes, they are illegal. Well, it is to those who were endowed with rights by their Creator, not the ones who came out of primordial soup, oceans or whatever. Seriously though, because of the bible this land was based on you have freedoms too even though you deny the one who gave us those freedoms, the Lord Jesus Christ. One of the first things Ron Paul would do if he were President is take the IRS out.
There are others who are not Christians or creationists but are against a corrupt government, I would back them too in that area.
Make sure that you read the page link below and tell me if you really believe those scientists are “religious” people by your definition of religion. But they are rejecting Darwinism, not because of religion but because of science.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50747
Ekkman END QUOTE
Ekkman, I know the ‘evolution is a religion, too’ catch-phrase is really popular, but that’s only so you can feel better about not being able to defeat the science with science. If evolution is a religion, then EVERYTHING is a religion, and the word religion doesn’t mean anything.
btodd
btodd
Said this on July 4th, 2007 at 11:11pm:EKKMAN WROTE: Make sure that you read the page link below and tell me if you really believe those scientists are “religious” people by your definition of religion. But they are rejecting Darwinism, not because of religion but because of science. END QUOTE
I almost missed replying to that specific question, didn’t want you to think I was dodging it, so here goes:
I visited your link. If you want me to link you to a few articles that point out the misleading nature of that list, I can. Aside from what the articles say, how does that list tell me what their religious beliefs are? That was my point, that you don’t seem to see any non-religious movement that has problems with evolution. A list of people with various degrees, most of which have nothing to do with knowledge that even deal in subjects that involve evolution, doesn’t address that question at all. I know nothing about their religious faith. If they do believe what they signed, then I assume they might have written some papers? Some papers that address the scientific points (only) of evolution that they disbelieve?
Here’s another thing. What is your definition of Darwinism? If you take that to mean ‘Godless’, and so does a person of science who is religious, then he will doubt it regardless of the science, because you have put it at odds with his faith. And it doesn’t have to be. Evolution doesn’t speak of the ultimate origin of life, that subject is called abiogenesis, or is covered under religion. The way the word Darwinism is thrown in there in brackets is suspect, as if the word evolution by itself didn’t carry as much sinister literary weight as Darwinism, which I think it’s fair to say the more literal interpretations of Christianity regard as Godless.
btodd
Three Crosses
Said this on July 5th, 2007 at 11:02am:Dear mediator/editor: I do try to spell America correctly in the body of the post, but in my opinion next to God it capital G little me. for example: God bless america, God save us all! Please forgive my post from yesterday it was harsh. I did pray about it however, so you editing it was an answer. Thanks so much and God bless you.
Thegospelevangelist
Said this on July 6th, 2007 at 1:48am:Hello
I think Kent Hovind is great and I dont think he did it but can someone detail what happened and whether he said he was inoccent or guilty.
God bless
David
Three Crosses
Said this on July 6th, 2007 at 3:02pm:It’s a constitutional tax issue the supreme court should probably pick it up.
I haven’t heard his personal stance.
Thanks God bless!
Healthy Skeptic
Said this on July 9th, 2007 at 4:13pm:I am completely humbled by this update. I so need to get my act together. I did not realize anyone else in this world prayed the same way as me. I too write my prayers and many times God responds through my writing. I know it sounds crazy. I was encouraged by you today. Thanks
Ekkman
Said this on July 10th, 2007 at 1:50am:Jul
4btodd
Said this at 9:29pm:
———————————————————————– ———
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: From reading the above, I see that you are a ‘doctor’, ’scientist’, and ‘tax expert’. There are tons of scientists who reject Darwinism, always have and always will. I haven’t ignored the clips, writings showing how corrupt Kent is. Not only have I read them and watched some of them. I actually listened to the other side, Kent’s side, that is. I am sure if you were in his position that you would want all people just listening to “the other side” whether government or experts as some on this site seem to think such as Widipedia and NOT listen to your side also. Tsk! Tsk! END QUOTE
You caught me. I’m not a doctor, scientist or tax expert. In that sense, Kent and I are the same. Which is why I’m not going to defy the knowledge of doctors, scientists or tax experts on a subject I’m barely familiar with. Do you see my point? And if Kent’s stance was that the tax code is illegal, and he has sound reasons to believe it, then why was his defense one of ‘I don’t know who’s charging me, and what I’m being charged with”? Why wasn’t a case presented on the merits you are now espousing?
Question: “Which came first, a college run by people with diplomas or people running them without a college diploma?” My point is that you can get the knowledge at PhD level without ever going to college. By just studying, you could get even more knowledge than a person with a PhD in any particular field. So in that sense, you and Kent are probably not the same. Many evolutionists and they are supposedly “scientists” with leters behind their names won’t debate Kent again since they know they don’t know enough in their field to debate him. One called him the David of creationism vs the Goliaths of evolutionism.
For years, Kent has written the IRS wanting to know what law tells him to file a 1040 with them. They never answered his question. Now they are using the “law” or is it the “anti-law” to put him out, so to speak. They got him based on so-called laws to do with that anti-law.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I am not referring to “a video” but many videos and web sites of those who are against the IRS whether ex-IRS agents, lawyers, business professionals and the list is growing. One of the most popular presidential candidates, Ron Paul, in spite of the media seeking to ignore him will outlaw the Federal Reserve and IRS if elected. Those who study law who are working to outlaw the IRS and many other government organizations. END QUOTE
Good luck to them. I don’t have a stake in such things, if there’s a better system available, then great. I’m glad you said that those who study law are working on it, because that implies that they will cooperate with the law and bring their case through the proper channels. That’s not what happened here.
Todd,Our government is at the point of lawlessness. Many judges sit behind those big wood desks thinking they are gods and do whatever they please. They don’t care about law, especially constitutional law, common law.
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/22457.html
If you really want to see a little clearer the perverted, sick government that we have then read the link above.
Why are you writing in this blog? Is it to just to cause problems since you don’t have answers? You haven’t really answered anything in the blog that I sent you. This post here has little parts of my quotes. Did you read any of the links or watch any of the videos that I sent you backing up my points or did you just delete all of them “out of your mind” as you did in your reply? Then the last post you wrote on the last link that you said that you forgot to mention that one. Then you went on to imply that they weren’t really scientists, so to speak, or the article wasn’t speaking the whole truth since they reject Darwinism now. Was that a correct assumption?
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I will be more than happy to take you up on your dare. There are tons of agencies, people, who know that 9/11 was a conspiracy to destroy America freedoms. There are those who think that giving up freedoms for protection is freedom, it isn’t. There are big wheels in government who believe that the government was behind the attack at 9/11 as well as Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, etc. I am beginning to think that you MUST think that our government is innocent of all crimes since they appear to be your god. The one who will “protect you from cradle to grave”. I would be paranoid too if I thought that and then I am exposed to how corrupt they are. That would be a nightmare. Some of the videos are below. A government who will allow the killing of innocent little babies in the wombs of their mothers will do anything in the negative. END QUOTE
I’ve spent a fair amount of time debating 9/11 Truthers, and they operate on many of the same principles of Creationist arguments. A layperson with little understanding of a complex topic ignores monumental physical and tangible evidence (agreed upon by virtually the entire body of experts)in favor of a default, a priori assumption. For 9/11 Truth, it’s that the government was behind it, without ever producing any arguments or evidence that they did it. Instead, the entire movement is based on trying to knock holes in the information that is physical and tangible in nature, instead in favor of appeals to motive, conspiracy, distrust of the government, and wild theories about one world governments, illuminati, and whatever else sounds good to the ears that week. But the eventual conclusion is, “well, I don’t like the official story, therefore the government did it”. It’s a default position based on the original assumption. We’re almost six years out from the events of 9/11, and the “Truth” movement still has no tangible evidence. It’s still operating on appeals to motive, and YouTube videos with spooky soundtracks. Much like Creationism, we need everything to fit into a quick soundbite and catch-phrase (like ‘teach the controversy’ and such), so people who have very little understanding of the subject matter can feel like they really do, and keep their a priori assumptions.
I thought you “dared” me to debate you on 9/11. Many of the ones who believe, know, that 9/11 was a conspiracy are doctors, scientists, professionals in those areas of expertise. If they operated on the same principles of the creationist arguments then they must be right on the money and I see that would be a really good reason not to want to debate the issue. I agree with this part of the sentence above, ” A layperson with little understanding of a complex topic ignores monumental physical and tangible evidence (agreed upon by virtually the entire body of experts)” These experts that I was just talking about say that there isn’t any way that two planes hitting the twin towers could bring those building down like that in the way they fell and as fast as they fell. They proved it in many ways.
http://newswithviews.com/Monteith/stanley6.htm
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Todd, it appears to me that you are erecting the “strawman” here. I never said that “you” use wikipedia but others that I have been debating have. Sorry you were offended at that statement. It appears that you are the one who is paranoid with about any statement made that contradicts your beliefs or your stand with our fine government. END QUOTE
You’re not debating those others when you type ‘btodd’. That’s me. Bring it up with them. Even if one does use Wikipedia, however, you can actually check the sources. Not everything on Wikipedia is truth, not everything is a lie. But it can be found out.
So I can’t use illustrations or types or pictures from other blogs??? That’s sad! I agree with your next statements, it is basically a computer encyclopedia with truth and error in it. They try to assemble facts but they have their biases as everyone does. In reality, it is according to what bias we are biased with.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I love your arguments. “Paranoid much? Jeez,…” Is evolution a government sponsored “science” i.e. religion for our public schools? Sure it is! So do you think that the government takes it lightly when a man comes against it in the name of science? END QUOTE
How else can I respond to claims of conspiracies everywhere? I can’t disprove a negative, so if you’ve got it in your head that all these grand conspiracies exist everywhere, how could I ever convince you that they’re not? You can always claim I just haven’t discovered the ‘truth’ yet!
Todd, I cut this out of a post that I wrote to Samphire. You might tell me that I can’t use quotes that I made to Samphire since I am talking to you but I will anyway. I said,
“Samphire,
“I am glad that you said that science “doesn’t prove anything; it can only falsify”. I can see that with the help of creation scientists, they are “falsifying their “proofs” of man coming from the monkey. All of their “evidence” for monkey men have been “proven” wrong, I mean “falsified”. If only they knew that they couldn’t “prove” anything they would quit trying since they will never “prove” something that never happened. The missing links will forever remain missing since they were never there to be found. You cannot find something that was never there.”
Todd, I am sharing the above quote with you since you told me that you can’t disprove a negative just as Samphire told me that science can’t “prove” a positive, that is from their viewpoint. In other words, it can only falisify something. I would think falisfiying something is proving something but I could be “false” in that assumption. That would seem to line up with many who are into evolution that nothing can be proven or disproven, no absolutes, you know?
As for evolution as ‘government sponsored science’, the science that gets taught is the prevailing science of the day. Evolution has been the prevailing science, by a landslide, for many years. It is always open to be challenged, and refuted, in the scientific community, through research, papers and peer review. The government itself has no stake in your passion here, and you wouldn’t have to resort to claiming conspiracy if you had tangible evidence for your theories that stand up to scientific scrutiny.
Todd, evolution doesn’t stand up to true science, that is why many are leaving Darwinism, it can’t stand up to the facts, to real evidence. It most certainly is government sponsored. Are you saying that those who work in our government know science, hence make it the tax-payers’ religion, I mean science?
That’s why movements like intelligent design went for local school boards instead of peer review. We have to get this in the back-door, you know. And if Kent was ‘attacked’ because of his stand against evolution, then why aren’t all of his other peers, some of whom have greater influence, being attacked for tax charges? The answer is obvious.
I sent a few links to others who are not paying income taxes, it is against the Constitution. It is part of the Communist Manifesto, I think it was plank 2.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Anybody can see that it didn’t take an intelligent designer to make all we see around us even though our smartest scientists cannot make what we see in this world via nature, the heavens, etc. We really only have science because of a Creator, if no design there wouldn’t be anything to study. All would be by chance and chance has no design, does it? And if so where did it come from? And when you tell me that, I ask you, do you have absolutes? And if not, how can you have science, isn’t that based on absolutes? Here is a very good link on my web site to deal with this, too much to type. END QUOTE
Ekkman, this has been done ad nauseum by better people than you and I. As you’ve probably heard countless times, who made the designer? If some things are so complex that they must be designed, then God is more complex yet. Your solution (whether it is correct or not, which I cannot know) is no different than saying ‘It’s magic’. As my statement in parenthesis implied, I am an agnostic. We can go on for pages about whether or not there’s a creator, but you and I aren’t going to reveal anything that far greater minds haven’t all these years.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Speaking of Bush, he is in a secretive, Satanic society called the Skull and Bones. He was “born again” when one of the members pulled him out of a casket. It could have been Kerry lifting him out, who knows? I can almost sense the “paranoia” in your comments. Calm down and read, study the posts made. Don’t get angry, just focus on the subjects at hand. Compare what you “believe” with the facts. END QUOTE
I’m familiar with the Skull and Bones conspiracies. David Icke is right around the corner to tell you how lizard people from outer space are connected with this, too. That’s what scares me about modern-day conspiracy buffs, one is never enough. One seems to lead to another, and another….and it isn’t healthy.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: John the Baptist has everything to do with the situation. If you had really read it in context and know the scriptures that I am referring to then you couldn’t miss the parallel. Now you are telling me that I took my John the Baptist illustration from Kent??? That is strange. I said that you know us a lot better than we know ourselves. Where did Kent said that? Please furnish a reference to it. Thanks! But if you were just saying it from bible figures then that is all right since Kent is a saint of God as well as any of them are. END QUOTE
I wasn’t referencing Kent as having spoken of John the Baptist specifically, but referencing the continual usage of comparing him or his situation to characters from the Bible and their tribulations. I find it a bit dodgy and convenient. As for Kent being a Saint of God, I’ll just have to let you have that one. I can’t possibly know that, nor do I understand how you possibly could.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Here you had a wonderful opportunity to support some of your “beliefs” in this blog but you flunked out ‘for now’. I await your “proof” to show that Kent is ‘new age’ plus “fundmentalist and paranoid”. I believe that you will be able to show me that he is Fundamentalist but the paranoid doesn’t fit with a Fundamentalist unless to you, they are one and the same. END QUOTE
First of all, re-read my last post. I DISTINCTLY said Kent is NOT new-age, but fundamentalist and paranoid. So don’t continue saying I’m claiming he’s new age. My beliefs? If you think I’m a new-age believer, I’m not. As I stated, I’m an agnostic. I read that book years ago, and it reads much like Kent’s post, where a man and God are just having a good ol’ conversation, and we’re supposed to believe it because he says he did. You also had a wonderful opportunity to tell my how you determine whether a conversation with God written by a Christian is true (and whether you believe in Kent’s version). I think it’s a very dangerous thing to promote the idea that you and God are speaking in literal sentences and having full conversations with each other. I’ve already laid out why I think he’s paranoid, with the many conspiracies and strange claims he makes regarding Creationism, tax laws, 9/11, OKC Bombings, cancer cures, and the like.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Another good answer. 9/11 “Truthers” and “Scientology” have nothing in common from what I know of them. Please furnish parallels. END QUOTE
I lumped 9/11 Truth and Scientology in with Creationism and Intelligent Design. They don’t all share exactly the same characteristics, but there are many parallels.
1. Use of a lack of evidence AS EVIDENCE. Intelligent Design, instead of making a positive case for it’s claim, instead spends it’s time by trying to poke holes in evolution, and then if a gap or lack of understanding is found, all other evidence is out the door and it’s, “See? God did it!” 9/11 Truth uses the same technique. “I don’t believe WTC 7 could fall since it wasn’t hit by a plane, and I don’t understand structural engineering, therefore the Government blew it up. Even though there’s zero positive evidence to support that claim, it’s now used as the default position, so you get, “Well, I don’t believe the official story, so until you convince me, the government did it!”. Scientology doesn’t really apply on this one.
2. Resort to conspiracy. When it’s pointed out that there is no verifiable, objective or scientific evidence to back up their position, then it’s because of conspiracy. For Creationism / Intelligent Design, it’s those lying scientists that are hiding God’s truth, or the government, or atheism. For 9/11 Truth, it’s the government who is not only hiding an unimaginable amount of evidence that would signify demolitions, but also has convinced thousands of people, among multiple agencies, to go along with killing thousands of citizens and covering it up to this very day (all so we could go to war in Iraq, except we forgot to plant WMD’s and now we look like idiots- yeah, great plan). For scientology, the conspiracy is psychiatry (the entire field and all its practitioners), suppressive persons and a galactic event from 75 million years ago. They actually share some of your views on secret societies and government conspiracy.
3. Illusionary expertise. Laypersons making claims regarding areas of expertise that require extensive education and experience in. Instead, cloaking them in just enough ‘technical speak’ to sound knowledgeable for an audience that is clearly not knowledgeable. So you have people like Dr. David Ray Griffin, a professor of Theology, giving his opinions on structural engineering and demolitions, and contradicting experts in those fields with REAL CREDENTIALS. And people actually believe him!
The same goes for creationism vs. evolution, where someone like Kent claims a doctorate and is addressing real, educated and experienced scientists with just enough knowledge and catch-phrases to snare and already believing, unsuspecting audience. In Scientology, L Ron Hubbard made many claims to the effectiveness of Scientology over the field of psychiatry, medicine and many other sciences. Yet there are no studies or any peer review to back up those claims. His followers don’t question it, though.
Those real, educated and experienced scientists are being blown out of the water by unreal, uneducated, and unexperienced scientists like Kent Hovind who debate them. Just watching those debates makes ou wonder how any thinking person can stay on the side of the evolutionists. But in reality, it isn’t a mind problem, it is a spiritual problem, they refuse to admit they are sinners in need of a Saviour. They are not stupid, they are blinded. Go up to a very smart blind person, show him a flower that the Lord has created. You might be amazed at their “stupidity” when they can’t see the unique design and beauty of the flower. When in reality a lot of scientists are not stupid, just blind. Satan has blinded their minds to the truth.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: It goes back to your “belief” system. The government can do no wrong and if you find out they could, there goes your god. Scary! END QUOTE
You don’t know what you think you do. I’m not a right-wing guy, nor big on the government. I hardly believe that the government ‘can do no wrong’. I didn’t vote for Bush, I think he’s the worst president we’ve ever had, and I thought Kerry was a terrible choice also, but I voted for him because it’s all I had. I’m not for 9/11 Truth because it’s hogwash, pure and simple. Tell them to produce something factual and get back to me. I also think Holocaust-deniers are full of it too, but it’s not because I’m pro-Israel. Hogwash is hogwash, and I don’t mind calling it such.
I didn’t know that you knew what I think I know.?
I agree with you on your statement that Bush is the worst president we have ever had. I will add to that, it will get worse in regards to presidents and governments if God’s people don’t repent and get right with him. He is our only hope!
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Sun M Moon is not an American as far as I know. If he were, the laws would apply to him like any other American. I would defend his right to not pay income taxes if he were an American just as I would defend Kent’s right. You also didn’t read my blog very well even though it is in your rebuttal. I said, “…by your definition of theft,”END QUOTE
I didn’t give a definition of theft, did I?
You said that Kent stole from the government, didn’t you? You were telling her how he did those evil things to our wonderful government and how he made his wife do it too. Not an exact quote. If you want me to go back in the blogs and find it then let me know. I am still waiting on the proof regarding your new age comments that you haven’t furnished me with yet and the one that you said in this blog, that you will show me how that article regarding all those scientists can be shown incorrect or something to that effect.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I believe to understand “reason”, a person has to operating in reason. You need to calm down and read, not only read but read in context with the subject at hand. You don’t seem to be doing that by your comments all through this blog. END QUOTE
You’re no more calm than I, please. I haven’t been rattling off about multiple agencies, all conspiring against me all the time. I think I’m doing pretty well. If I believed what you do, I don’t know how I would function nor live in this country.
So you mean “rattling off about multiple agencies” means I am not calm? Good logic?!
You probably wouldn’t be living without the Lord Jesus Christ. He told us to be on the watch, the last days will be the worst man has ever gone though. Seeking to convince yourself that everything is fine isn’t going to help you in the long run, you will be unprepared in other ways since you will be going through the evil days that are ahead.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: By the Constitution and Bill of Rights, no American should be paying income taxes, they are illegal. Well, it is to those who were endowed with rights by their Creator, not the ones who came out of primordial soup, oceans or whatever. Seriously though, because of the bible this land was based on you have freedoms too even though you deny the one who gave us those freedoms, the Lord Jesus Christ. One of the first things Ron Paul would do if he were President is take the IRS out.
There are others who are not Christians or creationists but are against a corrupt government, I would back them too in that area.
Make sure that you read the page link below and tell me if you really believe those scientists are “religious” people by your definition of religion. But they are rejecting Darwinism, not because of religion but because of science.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50747
Ekkman END QUOTE
Ekkman, I know the ‘evolution is a religion, too’ catch-phrase is really popular, but that’s only so you can feel better about not being able to defeat the science with science. If evolution is a religion, then EVERYTHING is a religion, and the word religion doesn’t mean anything.
btodd
Todd, Glad? to see that you realize that evolution is a religion. It takes all kinds of faith to believe in it, that is why many real scientists are turning away from it, they don’t have that much faith anymore, which in reality is blind faith.
I don’t know anyone trying to defeat science with science unless you are talking about evolutionists. The best scientists that we have ever had were creationists. Check the link below.
http://creationsafaris.com/wgcs_toc.htm
One dictionary definition of “religion” is the worship or God or gods. In that sense, everything is a religion. Since we all have God or gods. God is the being who created everything, gods are the “beings,things” that we worship, live for, such as sex, money, popularity, looks, statues of Mary, Peter, whomever or whatever else besides the one true God. Hey Todd, let’s deal with one subject at a time so we can make our posts a lot shorter.
Ekkman
Ekkman
Said this on July 10th, 2007 at 1:57am:4btodd
Said this at 11:11pm:
———————————————————————– ———
EKKMAN WROTE: Make sure that you read the page link below and tell me if you really believe those scientists are “religious” people by your definition of religion. But they are rejecting Darwinism, not because of religion but because of science. END QUOTE
I almost missed replying to that specific question, didn’t want you to think I was dodging it, so here goes:
I visited your link. If you want me to link you to a few articles that point out the misleading nature of that list, I can. Aside from what the articles say, how does that list tell me what their religious beliefs are? That was my point, that you don’t seem to see any non-religious movement that has problems with evolution. A list of people with various degrees, most of which have nothing to do with knowledge that even deal in subjects that involve evolution, doesn’t address that question at all. I know nothing about their religious faith. If they do believe what they signed, then I assume they might have written some papers? Some papers that address the scientific points (only) of evolution that they disbelieve?
Todd, Please send me the few articles that supposedly show the misleading nature of the list. Since we are on this, below is a link regarding that the link I sent you was based on. This would be more open-minded to you, I guess.
http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/
Here’s another thing. What is your definition of Darwinism? If you take that to mean ‘Godless’, and so does a person of science who is religious, then he will doubt it regardless of the science, because you have put it at odds with his faith. And it doesn’t have to be. Evolution doesn’t speak of the ultimate origin of life, that subject is called abiogenesis, or is covered under religion. The way the word Darwinism is thrown in there in brackets is suspect, as if the word evolution by itself didn’t carry as much sinister literary weight as Darwinism, which I think it’s fair to say the more literal interpretations of Christianity regard as Godless.
btodd
The easiest and quickest way to answer that question is defining Darwinism as macro-evolution. It never happened and never will happen. Even though it can be defined in other ways, I guess.
We were talking about doctors, scientists, and tax experts earlier. Did you know that the only degree that Darwin had was in theology? Some people on here seem to like Wikipedia so I thought I would link their page on Darwin since they seem to think highly of this “preacher” who evolved in an agnostic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin’s_views_on_religion
“Those who have been intoxicated with power… can
never willingly abandon it.”
– Edmund Burke
I thought that quote was interesting since it fits our government. They must be forced to abandon their power by “We, the people”.
The Lord Jesus Christ is a prayer away. Call upon him today and experience what true life is about,freedom from sin and having peace, love, power, deliverance, healing, encouragement.
“But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:” John 1:12
Ekkman
btodd
Said this on July 11th, 2007 at 6:35pm:QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Question: “Which came first, a college run by people with diplomas or people running them without a college diploma?” My point is that you can get the knowledge at PhD level without ever going to college. By just studying, you could get even more knowledge than a person with a PhD in any particular field. END QUOTE
That is completely absurd. Studying on your own leaves no system of checks-and-balances, so you get people who are impossible to address (like Kent), because there’s no way to show them where they are wrong. They literally have no standard, except to hold to their own faulty understanding. If it’s faulty, and mixed with faith, then it will persist forever as the delusion that it is. You go on to mention that many evolutionists won’t debate Kent, and you’re right. To do so would be foolish, because Kent has no standards, except to hold to whatever his interpretation of the Bible says. It is impossible to address him on a professional level, because he’s not a professional. To prop him up on a stage merely lowers the standards of science and reason, and gives those fanatical believers who don’t understand science a way to feel victorious.
I would like to hear how seriously you would take a man who claims to be a heart surgeon, without going to medical school and internship, because he ’studied alot on his own’. I assume that you would have no problem having a serious surgery performed by someone who got his PhD by correspondence from an unaccredited school that is no larger than my house? Please address this, it will show me how much you really believe what you just said.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Why are you writing in this blog? Is it to just to cause problems since you don’t have answers? END QUOTE
I posted here originally to at least present a critical view of Kent Hovind’s delusions. I’m still here because more than one of you has addressed me and I’m too stupid to just let it go, so I’m still stuck here debating.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: You haven’t really answered anything in the blog that I sent you. This post here has little parts of my quotes. Did you read any of the links or watch any of the videos that I sent you backing up my points or did you just delete all of them “out of your mind” as you did in your reply? Then the last post you wrote on the last link that you said that you forgot to mention that one. Then you went on to imply that they weren’t really scientists, so to speak, or the article wasn’t speaking the whole truth since they reject Darwinism now. Was that a correct assumption? END QUOTE
I confess that I don’t go chasing all of your links. I’ve already seen enough from you to know that you pretty much believe in every conspiracy out there right now. There is simply no way to reach you with reason. The only fortunate thing is that your Fundamentalist Christian beliefs will probably preclude you from being a Holocaust-denier, or I fear you would fall for that one, too. You seem to have no method for critically examining claims, instead opting for paranoia and conspiracy every time, and whatever aligns with your foregone conclusion about the Bible’s literal truth. Here is just a sample of the beliefs you’ve exposed me to, either by direct words or links:
* The US government is behind 9/11, OKC bombing, Waco, Ruby Ridge, USS Cole, and is also hiding a cure for cancer to make money.
* We are all on our way to a one-world government, which is the motivating factor behind all the things the government does.
* George Bush is part of a Satan-worshipping secret society, as are many of the world’s influential leaders.
* The earth is 6000 years old (and therefore the majority of science is completely wrong).
* The Illuminati / Trilateral Commission / Bildebergers.
* Evolution is a religion.
* Creationism is science.
* There is no law requiring one to pay taxes.
* Dinosaurs lived alongside humans.
* Kent and Jo Hovind are being persecuted unjustly by the government for their anti-evolution stance.
That’s just a sample; I’m sure I’ve left out a ton more. I literally have no way to reach you, because I don’t spout conspiracies.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I thought you “dared” me to debate you on 9/11. Many of the ones who believe, know, that 9/11 was a conspiracy are doctors, scientists, professionals in those areas of expertise. END QUOTE
Wonderful! Please link me to some arguments by demolitions experts and structural engineers that support your position about the buildings. I look forward to reading the papers they’ve submitted on the subject and how they researched and tested it. Then I can see how they did under peer-review, and make an informed decision. I’m excited because 9/11 Truthers so far have only thrown out appeals to sinister motives and grand conspiracies, and put them to spooky music on YouTube. It will be very refreshing to see actual positive, scientific evidence for their demolitions claims.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I agree with this part of the sentence above, ” A layperson with little understanding of a complex topic ignores monumental physical and tangible evidence (agreed upon by virtually the entire body of experts)” These experts that I was just talking about say that there isn’t any way that two planes hitting the twin towers could bring those building down like that in the way they fell and as fast as they fell. They proved it in many ways.
http://newswithviews.com/Monteith/stanley6.htm END QUOTE
Once again, you linked me to a hodge-podge of conspiracies about several subjects. I want to take on issue at a time, and since the most central issue is how the buildings fell, then I would like to see the evidence for your position. Is Mr. Monteith qualified in the fields of structural engineering and/or demolitions? Where did he graduate? What degree did he receive in those fields? What real-world experience does he have in those areas? If not, what good does it do to have him speculate about things he has no expertise in?
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Todd, evolution doesn’t stand up to true science, that is why many are leaving Darwinism, it can’t stand up to the facts, to real evidence. It most certainly is government sponsored. Are you saying that those who work in our government know science, hence make it the tax-payers’ religion, I mean science? END QUOTE
No, you’re simply claiming something that isn’t true. If evolution didn’t stand up to true science, it wouldn’t be accepted, period. As the evidence mounts, there comes a point in which it is impossible to deny. Many, many theories in science have been overturned in this manner. The requirement is evidence, and even if science is slow to accept it, it is inevitable when the evidence exists. If you have a position, present evidence FOR IT. As I stated earlier, your arguments consist of trying to knock holes in evolution and then claim that the only other answer is “Goddidit”. Science is based on positive evidence. Produce some, and science will take you much more seriously. How did God do it? What are your predictions and how did your experiments show them to be true? What methods did you employ to try and falsify those predictions? That’s how it works. What would you do with a science class, simply start the semester with “Goddidit” and then take naps until next semester?
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Those real, educated and experienced scientists are being blown out of the water by unreal, uneducated, and unexperienced scientists like Kent Hovind who debate them. END QUOTE
Keep telling yourself that. And science will keep laughing at you with good reason. What experiments has Kent done? What methods did he use? What are the real-world applications of his science? We wouldn’t have gotten very far in the fields of medicine and biology by saying “goddidit”. Let Kent show some evidence for Creationism. The theory of evolution didn’t simply poke fun at Creationism and then claim Evolution is true because Creationism isn’t. So by all means, Creationists, step up to the plate. If you want scientific credibility, then start doing science for once.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Just watching those debates makes ou wonder how any thinking person can stay on the side of the evolutionists. But in reality, it isn’t a mind problem, it is a spiritual problem, they refuse to admit they are sinners in need of a Saviour. They are not stupid, they are blinded. Go up to a very smart blind person, show him a flower that the Lord has created. You might be amazed at their “stupidity” when they can’t see the unique design and beauty of the flower. When in reality a lot of scientists are not stupid, just blind. Satan has blinded their minds to the truth. END QUOTE
Yes yes, and faith has blinded you and Creationists from the truth. They simply refuse to admit that they need the ability to reason. You might be amazed at their stupidity when they claim that the earth is 6000 years old, but they’re not really stupid, just blinded by faith. Faith has blinded their eyes to reason.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: I didn’t know that you knew what I think I know.? END QUOTE
Don’t try to dance around it. You tried to paint me as an overzealous right-wing fanatic who can’t bear to doubt our government. I called you out on it with that statement, because you’re dead wrong.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: You said that Kent stole from the government, didn’t you? You were telling her how he did those evil things to our wonderful government and how he made his wife do it too. Not an exact quote. If you want me to go back in the blogs and find it then let me know. I am still waiting on the proof regarding your new age comments that you haven’t furnished me with yet and the one that you said in this blog, that you will show me how that article regarding all those scientists can be shown incorrect or something to that effect. END QUOTE
I don’t think I said Kent stole from the government at all. And I highly doubt that I used the word ‘evil’, because that’s the word you and Kent are big on. Remember, those ‘evil, wicked people’ who held him accountable for his crimes? And I’ve stated twice now that I don’t think Kent is new age. Specifically! I did make a comparison between his ‘conversation with God’ and the book of the same name, because in each one, the writer is transcribing what is supposed to be a literal conversation with God, in casual sentences just like you and I might talk. And you won’t answer the question…..do you believe what Kent posted was real? How would you go about determining such? By faith?
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: So you mean “rattling off about multiple agencies” means I am not calm? Good logic?! END QUOTE
Yes, if everywhere you look, you see a conspiracy, then I have no problem in saying that you are not calm. Paranoia isn’t calm.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: You probably wouldn’t be living without the Lord Jesus Christ. He told us to be on the watch, the last days will be the worst man has ever gone though. Seeking to convince yourself that everything is fine isn’t going to help you in the long run, you will be unprepared in other ways since you will be going through the evil days that are ahead. END QUOTE
Yes, and ever since he said that, people have believed that their present time was part of those last days. But they were all wrong, yet Ekkman is right about it. Or maybe I don’t understand how many days count as the last days? I mean if it’s the last gazillion days, then I suppose you could be right.
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: One dictionary definition of “religion” is the worship or God or gods. In that sense, everything is a religion. Since we all have God or gods. God is the being who created everything, gods are the “beings,things” that we worship, live for, such as sex, money, popularity, looks, statues of Mary, Peter, whomever or whatever else besides the one true God. Hey Todd, let’s deal with one subject at a time so we can make our posts a lot shorter.
Ekkman END QUOTE
That’s one of the most prized tactics used by Creationists. Just redefine words to mean what you want them to mean so you can pretend to have a point. Nobody ‘worships’ evolution, it’s a scientific theory. Don’t try to bring us down to your level because you refuse to do science. Finally, yes, let’s narrow this down. I don’t mind debating on the 9/11 thing so much, but I really don’t think this is the place to do so, and having been in them several times, I know that what each of us regards as credible evidence are so opposite, we’ll end up feeling like we’re talking to bricks. Further, I’ll try to accommodate you and others for a bit longer, but I’m not going to spend weeks on CSE Blogs debating people whom I have no chance of reaching. So if there’s a point for us to finish on, you choose it. I came here to present a different side to the story for those who are either on the fence or just haven’t bothered to look. I don’t plan on staying just to antagonize you people, that isn’t admirable in the slightest.
btodd
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Gentlemen, unfortunately we must limit the C-E (creation v. evolution) Debate. We know that Dr. Hovind did some 100 debates against leading evolutionists. He kept winning. http://shopping.drdino.com/view_item.php?id=629DVD What scientists believe and what the science shows are sometimes at odds. (Remember Galileo, an example of scientists being wrong for over 1,000 years!) Atheism is a religion in its contention that a Supreme Being(s) does not exist, of course. That makes evolution, in denying God's role, religious. And it most certainly is NOT based on science. Otherwise they'd be the first to want textbooks with evolutionary pseudo-science corrected. They don't. (See Dr. Hovind's Seminar #4, "Lies in the Textbooks" http://shopping.drdino.com/view_item.php?id=443 ) Most evolutionists put their religion ahead of science. P.A. ]
btodd
Said this on July 12th, 2007 at 5:47pm:QUOTE BY THE EDITOR: What scientists believe and what the science shows are sometimes at odds. (Remember Galileo, an example of scientists being wrong for over 1,000 years!) END QUOTE
And how did those wrong ideas get corrected, sir? By science. THAT’S why there is never a closed book on the facts (unlike religion), because new information can show previously held theories to be wrong. That’s how science works! Eventually, the evidence becomes so substantial that denial is not possible. If Intelligent Design or Creationism can ever produce some positive evidence for their claims, then they can join the world of science, too.. Until then, you can call it whatever you want, but it isn’t science in the slightest. I will repeat: Evolution didn’t get accepted simply by claiming that Creationism is false. But that’s the tactic you want to be used, as if showing gaps in understanding about evolution makes your view correct by default. How scientific of you!
QUOTE BY THE EDITOR: Atheism is a religion in its contention that a Supreme Being(s) does not exist, of course. END QUOTE
That would be strong atheism, and you’ll hardly ever run into one who makes that claim. Most atheists (if you actually listened) are atheists because they see no evidence for a God. So they are without belief, but it doesn’t mean that new evidence couldn’t convince them. Keep redefining words, though, it will work on those who don’t wish to look any deeper.
QUOTE BY THE EDITOR: That makes evolution, in denying God’s role, religious. END QUOTE
Evolution says NOTHING about God. Evolution shows how life has evolved from lesser forms into more complex ones. You are equating Evolution with Abiogenesis, and you are either being less than truthful, or you simply don’t understand what you’re saying. There are millions of Christians that believe in Evolution. EVOLUTION AND BELIEF IN GOD ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE! They’re only mutually exclusive if you take the Bible LITERALLY. That’s why I resent your particular brand of Christianity, you wish to impose a false dichotomy on the rest of Christians who might be able to attain a reasonable faith.
END QUOTE: And it most certainly is NOT based on science. Otherwise they’d be the first to want textbooks with evolutionary pseudo-science corrected. They don’t. (See Dr. Hovind’s Seminar #4, “Lies in the Textbooks” http://shopping.drdino.com/view_item.php?id=443 ) Most evolutionists put their religion ahead of science. P.A. ] END QUOTE
You would have us believe that science is religion, and religion is science. Good luck with your re-defining of words.
btodd
[EDITOR'S NOTE: In showing evolution to be religious, I am standing against "science, falsely so-called" but not at all against real science. I love science. And like Galileo, I stand against the consensus of unscientific scientists who are wallowing in their vain traditions and peer-pressure/peer-review hollow beliefs that they just must be right. Pasteur - mocked by scientists. Einstein - also insulted for challenging quantum mechanics with his relativity notions. The consensus of scientists is often wrong. It is up to us scientifically thinking persons to correct them once again regarding the religion of evolution - a non-testable-repeatable belief system that defies science and that hides from our Maker. P.A.
1 Timothy 6:20 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called." ]
Three Crosses
Said this on July 13th, 2007 at 10:18am:To btodd:
Evolution simply calls it’s god “process”. All of the unexplained “processes” which allow magical things to happen, fins to wings, bannana to bird, or anything rather than die. It requires conscious thought. That is why evolution is a religion.
With love Three Crosses
P.s. To Paul I’m trying to keep it short
P.s.s. To btodd you played semantics all through your post and then you accused Paul of it.
btodd
Said this on July 13th, 2007 at 8:41pm:THREE CROSSES WROTE:
Evolution simply calls it’s god “process”. All of the unexplained “processes” which allow magical things to happen, fins to wings, bannana to bird, or anything rather than die. It requires conscious thought. That is why evolution is a religion.
With love Three Crosses
P.s. To Paul I’m trying to keep it short
P.s.s. To btodd you played semantics all through your post and then you accused Paul of it. END QUOTE
I find it very ironic that you used the phrase ‘allows magical things to happen’ regarding evolution, when a giant magic trick is your ultimate conclusion.
Evolution calls it’s ‘God’ process? Are you simply trying to goad me, or are you really that wrong? A God is a supernatural being. Evolution is a scientific theory. No matter how many times you repeat “evolution is a religion” or anything similar, you will still be completely and embarrassingly wrong, and simply reinforce the point that Creationism has no positive arguments to make in support of its own position.
Should I start calling Christianity a cult? How about I just keep repeating that, no matter how many times you explain the difference between a religion and a cult? Then I can argue against cults and pretend it’s an argument against Christianity. Won’t that be fun and educational?
Finally, what semantics? Seriously, point out any semantical statement I made.
btodd
Three Crosses
Said this on July 14th, 2007 at 8:31pm:First to Paul: I know this looks like debate on evolution but it isn’t. I would say it’s theology and semantics (maybe a little debate).
//////////////////////////////
To btodd: Arguing semantics is when you fight over and change word meanings in any given language. Good examples would be:
“And how did those wrong ideas get corrected, sir? By science. THAT’S why there is never a closed book on the facts (unlike religion), because new information can show previously held theories to be wrong. That’s how science works! Eventually, the evidence becomes so substantial that denial is not possible. If Intelligent Design or Creationism can ever produce some positive evidence for their claims, then they can join the world of science, too.. Until then, you can call it whatever you want, but it isn’t science in the slightest. I will repeat: Evolution didn’t get accepted simply by claiming that Creationism is false. But that’s the tactic you want to be used, as if showing gaps in understanding about evolution makes your view correct by default. How scientific of you!”
All through your argument, you argue that the religion of evolution somehow means “science” and “facts”. When it is just a religion. If you are interested in history and facts you will find evolution was only excepted because; priests from different religions started blending it in to their Bibles and teachings. They were terrifed that “science falsely so called” (evolution) would prove them wrong. The scientists laughed it off and still do. Evolution has never joined the world of science it is a religion. But hey semantics is a science so “How scientific of you!”
Another good example is this:
“That would be strong atheism, and you’ll hardly ever run into one who makes that claim. Most atheists (if you actually listened) are atheists because they see no evidence for a God. So they are without belief, but it doesn’t mean that new evidence couldn’t convince them. Keep redefining words, though, it will work on those who don’t wish to look any deeper.”
Atheism means “the denial of the existance of God”! This is not the same as the meaning you have tagged onto it, which is “ignorance”(not having been educated or shown evidences). The evidences for God, are usually the ones you claim for the reigion of evolution.
Oh here’s some more good examples:
“Evolution says NOTHING about God. Evolution shows how life has evolved from lesser forms into more complex ones. You are equating Evolution with Abiogenesis, and you are either being less than truthful, or you simply don’t understand what you’re saying. There are millions of Christians that believe in Evolution. EVOLUTION AND BELIEF IN GOD ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE! They’re only mutually exclusive if you take the Bible LITERALLY. That’s why I resent your particular brand of Christianity, you wish to impose a false dichotomy on the rest of Christians who might be able to attain a reasonable faith.”
Here you once again change the religion of evolution into something else. I guess you simply “don’t understand what you’re saying”. Man is not becoming more complex, he is breaking down! Evolution says alot about God, it shows us there doesn’t appear to be any other reasonable explanation.
You changed out the meaning of the word saved for Christian. You should have claimed billions, the catholics claim evolution is a fact. If you don’t believe the Bible literally there is not any reason to be a Christian. I resent that you add the word reasonable to faith to try and change the meaning of faith. The last part of your statement contradicts the rest of your statement. If there is no evidence then faith would not be reasonable. So you are “being less than truthful and redefining words”
I’ll try to speed this last part up a little
your statement:
“I find it very ironic that you used the phrase ‘allows magical things to happen’ regarding evolution, when a giant magic trick is your ultimate conclusion.
Evolution calls it’s ‘God’ process? Are you simply trying to goad me, or are you really that wrong? A God is a supernatural being. Evolution is a scientific theory. No matter how many times you repeat “evolution is a religion” or anything similar, you will still be completely and embarrassingly wrong, and simply reinforce the point that Creationism has no positive arguments to make in support of its own position.
Should I start calling Christianity a cult? How about I just keep repeating that, no matter how many times you explain the difference between a religion and a cult? Then I can argue against cults and pretend it’s an argument against Christianity. Won’t that be fun and educational?”
Here’s my point first look up “ironic”
‘allows magical things to happen’ That’s evolution, a giant magic trick is your ultimate conclusion.
Evolution calls it’s ‘God’ process? A God is a supernatural being. Evolution is a supernatural being. “evolution is a religion”, you are still be completely and embarrassingly wrong, and simply reinforce the point that evolution has no positive arguments to make in support of its own position.
Should I start calling evolution a cult? How about I just keep repeating that, no matter how many times you explain the difference between a religion and a cult? Then I can argue against cults and pretend it’s an argument against evolution. Won’t that be fun and educational?
I’m sorry, I would have tried to be more polite than you were, but turning your statements about our perspective religions back to you was just alot easier. If you don’t mind a little critique a dictionary comes in handy!
And by the way, Paul never said creationism was science. He only pointed out your religion wasn’t either!
With love Three Crosses
p.s. may God grant you clarity of sight.
btodd
Said this on July 15th, 2007 at 11:21am:THREE CROSSES, let’s simplify here. I stated that you guys are trying to re-define words to help you make arguments. I corrected your definitions.
You come back, and change the definitions, once again, to what you want them to mean so you can claim that evolution and creationism are on level playing fields (which is ridiculous).
I specifically stated that evolution is a scientific theory, not a religion. You claim that I’m playing semantical games by doing such. So please, grab your local dictionary, or search the web definitions, and provide me with a definition that labels evolution a religion. If I’M the one who is changing definitions, you should be able to provide me with examples of evolution being defined as a religion. Please cite your source when you do so.
The same goes for atheism. I pointed out the two different types of atheism, strong atheism (which is more rare, and actually asserts that God does not exist), and weak atheism (which means a lack of belief in God due to lack of evidence). My search through the definitions shows me to be correct, as atheism is defined (they don’t typically define ’strong’ or ‘weak’, but instead present both views under the general heading of ATHEISM).
Further, as I have pointed out, Evolution does not equal Atheism. There are millions of Catholics who believe in Evolution, and they are NOT ATHEISTS. So to make that connection is patently false.
The theory that life came from non-life (an oversimplifacation, but I’m trying to help you here) is ABIOGENESIS. Please stop confusing that with evolution, which only addresses how life has evolved from lesser forms to more complex ones.
btodd
[EDITOR'S NOTE: "Take Our Quiz: Is Evolution a Religion?"
http://www.creationism.org/articles/EvolutionQuiz.htm
Babel is reversing around us. Babel divided our early ancestors. Everyone, until recently, still remembered this event: http://www.creationism.org/flood/FrazerFolkloreOT_5.htm But now humankind is coming back together. This is happening in government, in economics, and ... in religions. It is true that many Catholics (and Mormons, Shintoists, Jews, and wayward Protestants, etc.) believe evolution. But it subtly* changes their understanding of our ancient history. God is shunted to the side. It purports that we are going up automatically, rather than down in sin. It is subtly (*Gen. 3:1) building a common foundation for all the non-Bible believing religious systems. It is an anti-history; a false foundation. It is a step of re-coalescence into a false (anti-)history (a history that never happened, but it will be believed to have happened in men's minds) so that the anti-Christ can then arrive as the "answer" for that false belief system. (Christ came as the answer to our true history of the Fall and our need for salvation. Conversely, the anti-Christ will come as the great answer to this now growing anti-history.) By the Tribulation there will only be two main religions: Bible believers and everyone else as they follow the Anti-Christ (built on this prepared anti-history) to their future destruction. P.A. ]
Soundman
Said this on July 15th, 2007 at 11:24pm:I have been praying for Kent Hovind and consider his conviction of not paying taxes to be suspect considering his ministry is a religious non profit organization that is supposedly not subject to taxes.
His conversation with God is an amusing take on the personal relationship Dr Hovind has with the God who created heaven and earth and to whom we will all stand. Some of us will be glad to be before him, others will not be so glad.
More importantly, If and stress the word IF Kent Hovind has been breaking the law (I have had no suspicions or reasons to suspect that) Then I have absolutely no doubt that God will personally punish him. And, I don’t think God’s sentence would be only a ten year sentence. God has a way of dealing with those who bring embarrassment to his name on a somewhat more permanent basis.
It seems to me that he has simply joined a long list of men who have had to face imprisonment for the sake of freedom, (religious or political.)
I do believe it is way too early to throw rocks at him. The very real possibility is that his imprisonment is the work of those who hate him, his work and his god.
What I have know of Kent Hovind suggests that he would obey a righteous law as a religious duty and disobey an unrighteous law as a patriot.
But, that’s just my opinion.
Three Crosses
Said this on July 16th, 2007 at 10:58am:To btodd:
You really missed the point of my post didn’t you. I’m sorry you think your religion is more important that mine. Your religion only offers death, hatred, racism, and genocide. It offers no salvation only justification for the horrible things people do to one another.
It’s not science no matter how many times you repeat it. Just like your definitions, you do an online search for anyone who agrees with what you think a word should mean “or search the web definitions”.
You didn’t read my post very closely! All catholics BELIEVE YOUR RELIGION if they don’t they are heretics to the catholic church. Catholics call the elected pope god.
My dictionary is the “Webster’s Dictionary and Thesaurus of the English language” I’ve only read about 8 different definitions for religion. They all cover your belief and devotion to your religion.
may God grant you clarity of sight
P.S. I’m sorry if I belittled your process I know how you feel about him.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Dear Mediator: It’s not debate but it is evolution. Isn’t a “double standard” interesting they won’t make anything alright in front of the judgement seat of Christ!
If you have time what do you think of “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” (II John 1:10+11)
With Love three crosses
[EDITOR'S NOTE: There are sinners and there are saints (who still sin). But one could argue that there is a third category.
Genesis 3:15 "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."
Satan has a seed? This prophecy appears to not only foretell the Messiah, but also ... that her seed and the serpent's seed will hurt each other.
Matthew 23:33 "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"
Matthew 23 is where Jesus takes the false teachers of His day to task. He calls them a "brood of vipers" or "generation or vipers." (Also see Matthew 3:7, where John the Baptist states similarly.)
One who misleads others spiritually makes himself or herself a teacher over others. They impact lives. They are not "partly good" if the fruit is bad. We are warned of what to look for. Don't look for gifts, they can be mimicked. Moses had Aaron throw down his rod (Exodus 7:10-12), and then so did the Pharaoh's magicians. Are there televangelists who get folks "slain in the spirit"? - So what. What are the fruits!? Again, don't look for signs, and miracles, and wonders. Jesus told us what to look for. Don't look for gifts. Look for the fruits!
Matthew 7:15-18 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit."
The Bible says almost nothing about the history of the "seed of the serpent" but it appears to be a theme down through time. Do not wish them "Godspeed" nor encourage their truly anti-evangelism efforts. P.A. ]
btodd
Said this on July 16th, 2007 at 3:16pm:QUOTE BY THREE CROSSES: To btodd:
You really missed the point of my post didn’t you. I’m sorry you think your religion is more important that mine. Your religion only offers death, hatred, racism, and genocide. It offers no salvation only justification for the horrible things people do to one another. END QUOTE
What’s the matter, you realized that you couldn’t back up your claim? I can. Since you’re convinced that evolution is responsible for death, hatred, racism and genocide, I guess you skipped reading the Old Testament. All of those things are in there, coming from the religion you endorse so vehemently.
LOL, you couldn’t find any definitions that fit what you were saying, so that equates to me ‘missing the point of your post’. Good one!
QUOTE BY THREE CROSSES: It’s not science no matter how many times you repeat it. Just like your definitions, you do an online search for anyone who agrees with what you think a word should mean “or search the web definitions”. END QUOTE
You shouldn’t even be allowed to use the word ’science’. Check the standard definitions, I’m not asking you to accept one from some anti-Christian site or something. Check any source you want.
QUOTE BY THREE CROSSES: You didn’t read my post very closely! All catholics BELIEVE YOUR RELIGION if they don’t they are heretics to the catholic church. Catholics call the elected pope god. END QUOTE
Yes, I realize that your narrow version of Christianity is the only true path.
QUOTE BY THREE CROSSES: My dictionary is the “Webster’s Dictionary and Thesaurus of the English language” I’ve only read about 8 different definitions for religion. They all cover your belief and devotion to your religion. END QUOTE
Wait a second, you said evolution is a religion. I asked you to find a source that agrees with that definition of evolution. Now you are claiming that you read the definition for ‘religion’ instead, and interpreted it to include evolution. How honest of you! Did the definition list evolution as a synonym?
Did you look up atheism, too? Or did you just skip all of that, and proceed in a different direction to avoid being dead wrong in front of everyone?
Yes, that’s exactly what you did. Much like End Times earlier, who refuses to admit either being wrong or dishonest about his direct quote of me. He’ll be missed!
Anyway, re-defining words isn’t going to work, as you see.
btodd
Three Crosses
Said this on July 16th, 2007 at 8:34pm:Dear Paul: Thank you for the in depth answer it really gives me something to think about and it was very different from any other answer I had received. God bless!!
////////////////////////////
To btodd: You’re right changing definitions doesn’t seem to work. That’s why I didn’t. I did quote the definition for atheism. That’s why it was in quotes. Putting words in my mouth is an interesting way to argue a point. I didn’t say I was convinced of anything, I just told you what your religion offers. Who would think the history of humankind would have death, hatred, racism and genocide. You seem to be saying “science is a religion” and not testable, demonstratable, observable, and repeatable. Webster’s definition of religion “something that has a powerful hold on a person’s way of thinking”. Geno has another one on your side of the argument listed under (Thanking You for Your Prayers).
/btodd said “Yes, I realize that your narrow version of Christianity is the only true path.”
Dear sir I did not write the “catechism of the catholic church” THE CATHOLICS DID! I guess you want to rant and rave because they agree with you.
/You also said: “Wait a second, you said evolution is a religion.”
Exactly!!!! ding! ding! ding! It requires a whole lot of faith to believe that 13+ billion years ago nothing poofed into everything.
Are you trying to say evolution only means change? If you are we may agree with each other, but then again do you evolve a flat tire?
Btodd I’m not here to fight with you. I just personally don’t like your religion. I don’t know you, but I do hope you wake up to the world around you.
With love three crosses
Ekkman
Said this on July 18th, 2007 at 9:33pm:Jul
11btodd
Said this at 6:35pm:
——————————————————————————–
QUOTE BY EKKMAN: Question: “Which came first, a college run by people with diplomas or people running them without a college diploma?” My point is that you can get the knowledge at PhD level without ever going to college. By just studying, you could get even more knowledge than a person with a PhD in any particular field. END QUOTE
“That is completely absurd. Studying on your own leaves no system of checks-and-balances,”
Todd,
You go on and on and on talking about how silly my question was but you didn’t answer it. Where did the “checks and balances” come from, for the first professor or professors? Did they just give each other degrees or what? So you are telling me since you implied that it was a stupid question. So the first college professor got his degree even though there wasn’t any college to get it or if the college came first who taught the man what he needed to know to get his degree?
Please remember you are talking to a guy who is probably not anywhere close to your level of expertise or so it appears by your statement to me above. Did the very first professor study “on his own” in the same way that you are implying that Kent studied on his own? Or would you agree that the first professor probably discussed with others of like intelligence and they learned from each other as Kent has not only in school but with other scientists?
Ekkman
Ekkman
Said this on July 19th, 2007 at 1:31am:11btodd
Said this at 6:35pm:
I confess that I don’t go chasing all of your links. I’ve already seen enough from you to know that you pretty much believe in every conspiracy out there right now. There is simply no way to reach you with reason. The only fortunate thing is that your Fundamentalist Christian beliefs will probably preclude you from being a Holocaust-denier, or I fear you would fall for that one, too. You seem to have no method for critically examining claims, instead opting for paranoia and conspiracy every time, and whatever aligns with your foregone conclusion about the Bible’s literal truth. Here is just a sample of the beliefs you’ve exposed me to, either by direct words or links:
* The US government is behind 9/11, OKC bombing, Waco, Ruby Ridge, USS Cole, and is also hiding a cure for cancer to make money.
Ekkman said,
True but if I supplied proof, links by people that even you would approve of then you probably wouldn’t go to the links like you told me in your last post to me.
* We are all on our way to a one-world government, which is the motivating factor behind all the things the government does.
Ekkman said,
Mostly true but not “all” the things they do but many of them.
* George Bush is part of a Satan-worshipping secret society, as are many of the world’s influential leaders.
Ekkman said,
The skull and Bones is a Satanic Society. If you did a little research you would see this is true. I could supply different links but you have already shown me that you don’t read them. They are a waste of time for you or so it seems.
* The earth is 6000 years old (and therefore the majority of science is completely wrong).
Ekkman said,
The majority of science has been wrong on many things in the past and will be wrong on things in the present and in the future. Science is learning. Many scientists don’t agree with each other. That is one reason that 700 scientists signed the petition saying that they don’t agree with Darwinism. Talking about Darwinism, you didn’t mention what you thought of my definition that you wanted from me. I gave it.
* The Illuminati / Trilateral Commission / Bildebergers.
Ekkman said, Once again different politicians have admitted that they are in some of the groups mentioned above.
* Evolution is a religion.
Ekkman said,
Evolution is a religion and there are many scientists in that religion but are getting out.
* Creationism is science.
Ekkman said,
Creationist is a religion but the scientists in Creationism use the bible as a guide line when they study science text books as well as nature to understand the things around us.Ekkman said,
Kent Hovind never said that nor did anyone on this blog that I know of. You are on here slamming a man whom it appears that you know very little about from the above comment. Kent continually said that he pays all the taxes he owes. There are many taxes that we all pay that are legal taxes, the income tax is not one of them. That subject has been covered in depth on these blogs. Please read a little deeper before you make comments like that.
http://www.wethepeoplecongress.org/
* Dinosaurs lived alongside humans.
Ekkman said,
True, but you stick your head in the sand for all the proof that has been supplied already so what can I say.” You don’t read the links but I will give you a few in this post until you tell me that you will not read them.>/b>
http://www.seeking-god.co.uk/id17.htm
* Kent and Jo Hovind are being persecuted unjustly by the government for their anti-evolution stance.
Ekkman said,
I have already talked about this. Look at the link below and tell me why Kent is being treated the way he is using your logic. Also explain the one about Sun M. Moon, the one who supplies light to our government now but he was a big time “income tax evader” and he was only in pen for a few months. Using your logic, he “stole” a lot more than Kent ever did.
Please read the article below and tell me if it is just written by a religious fanatic who doesn’t know what he is talking about.
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/22457.html
Maybe you will agree that they are “justified” in what they are doing. You can also give me your opinion on the link below. If you are dogmatically certain that you are not going to read any of the links then let me know and I won’t send any more of them.
http://freehovind.com/info-hovind’s_legal_battles
To see a little deeper into Kent’s legal battles.
Under “info” on the http://www.Freehovind.com/info page
Ekkman
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Always CLOSE any HTML tags (bold, italic) that you open, please. P.A. ]
Kristina
Said this on July 29th, 2007 at 12:21pm:Beloved Brother Hovind,
My heart has grieved so much these past months thinking about how easily you were taken down, and all actually for not rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesars… how I wish you were still on the road, and that the Gov’t had it’s full share of your proceeds from the Lord’s work and people. It has been instructive to me. It makes me want to be sure I get persecuted for serving Christ, not for standing against a Shadow Gov’t and being a citizen of the true USA…
I see by what has happened to you that it is later than we think in this nation, we are now fully the united states, not the United States of America… your treatment puts that on display in the brightest way… although that is temporal at best. As I see the violence that has been done to you and your wife – as easily as swatting at a fly – my heart aches for you all, and for all true believers at what it portends.
My prayers for you include thankfulness at how the Lord is working this for good, for salvation of lost souls and to see what else He has in store dear brother. This I know, you are surely His beloved son and He will be with your precious wife as He is with you.
I want you to know our hearts and home are open to you and yours. Our love and prayers go with you. Keep posting so we can follow. We need you as much now as we ever did.
In His love for you and ours,
Kristina Floyd
Padenreilly
Said this on September 18th, 2007 at 7:12pm:The Atheists are having a field day with one of God’s great preachers in the clink. I’m Suprised that they are not making Kent Hovinds arrest into an Atheist Holiday. The humanists already have April fools day, why do they need another one! I sent a letter to Dr. Hovind with that comment (as well as a cartoon that I made), he wrote back saying he loved it and told me to post what I said in this blog. I hope he gets out of jail and back into the mission field, we need more harvesters for the field! By the way If you want to see my cartoon you can go to my website.
Paul Kirshner
Said this on November 11th, 2009 at 1:47pm:Hi – I don’t comment on many blogs but had to on yours. It’s really nice! I really like how you write – very to the point. Thanks for having this site. I don’t have time to read all the information you have right now, I found this site when looking for something else on Bing, but I’ve bookmarked your homepage and will visit again soon to see the latest articles. I always enjoy reading on the internet about religious topics. Do you suggest any particular biblical commentaries? I’m looking for one to start reading, I just finished one and need a new one to read. I have a site with scripture and related art on it. Please visit it – it as at http://www.GotTB.com. Do you have a favorite Bible passage or story? I would not even know where to being the processing of picking just one. God’s Peace!