The "L" in TULIP

On Limited Atonement:

The point of Calvinism that "Four Pointers" and/or Arminians have a problem with is the "L". The doctrine of Limited Atonement. In my study of the scriptures, it's not such a hard doctrine to grasp, and in studying further, those who would accuse me of the blasphemy of limiting or lessening the atoning power of Christ are actually the ones guilty of limiting or lessening the power of Christ's atonement. As a preface, I would like to say that I am in no way questioning whether or not Christ's atonement was sufficient to cover all, I am simply suggesting, as many before me have, that it did not cover all. I have been told from the pulpit that I can't believe that the atonement was sufficient for all AND that it was limited to some, and that I'm basically a moron if I think I can. I don't know why I can't believe that, but my guess is that it's because it doesn't fit inside the box that that particular individual created for "five pointers" or "hyper-Calvinists". 

To begin, a foundation must be laid. What is atonement? The word in Hebrew means to pacify or make propitiation, but it has stronger roots. The idea of ransom, or the price of a life. The price of a life, according to Leviticus 24:17 is a life. The punishment for breaking the law was death. The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness (Hebrews 9:22). The law of atonement was a vivid image of this requirement. Sacrifices had to be made regularly to atone for the sins of the people (Leviticus 16). An animal's blood had to be shed regularly because the price of a man's life is a man's life, not an animal's. When Jesus Died, he was the final atonement. The curtain in the temple was torn, and Jesus said Himself that it stands finished. 

I could write pages and pages on atonement, in fact the entire book of Leviticus covers it quite extensively. The question is, did the death of Jesus atone for all mankind? We know that the wages of sin is death, and we know that all have sinned (Romans 3:23) and that there is none righteous (Romans 3:10). Again, I'm not questioning the power of the atonement, only the application. What about those vessels of wrath prepared beforehand for destruction (Romans 9:22)? What about those who are not saved? The wages of sin is death; eternal damnation, and separation from God. Those wages are being paid in hell. That is the fulfillment of the law, the price of a life. If you believe that Christ's blood atoned for the sins of all, why are those who's sins have been atoned for paying the penalty for their sins? Was Christ's atonement not sufficient? Or did Jesus "purchase for God with [His] blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation." (Revelation 5:9)? The point is that death in hell is not merely a punishment for rejecting Christ. It is the wages of your sin. The atonement. If Christ's blood was applied to every human -- to all -- there would be no need to pay for one's sin eternally. Either Christ atoned for his elect, or Christ's atonement was rejected by those who's hearts were hardened (Romans 9:18) in which case they were not covered by his atonement and must pay the wages of sin. Or Christ's atonement covered all but was not sufficient to cover those who have not believed and have been condemned already (John 3:18).

Articles of Faith

-I believe that the Bible is God’s Inspired, Infallible, Eternal, Authoritative, Complete, and Sufficient Word. The 66 books of the Old and New Testament canon are Inerrant in the original Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts and are the believer’s final authority concerning faith and practice. (Matt. 24:35, II Tim. 3:16-17, I Pet. 1:23-25)
-I believe in the One Triune God, Eternal, Self-Existent in the persons of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit; one in essence, but distinct in person and function. I believe that the three persons of the Godhead are Co-equal, possessing all the attributes of God. (I John 5:7)
-I believe in God the Father, who is an Infinite and Perfect Spirit, the Source and Support of all things. He is Perfect, He defines Perfection.
-I believe in Jesus Christ, God’s son, Triune, and Co-Existent in the trinity, who became 100% human by His virgin birth, but remained 100% God. He came to Earth as an infant, was crucified as a man, and arose from death three days later, that to as many as God has given Him, He may give to them eternal life. (John 17:2) I believe that there is one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the Lord Jesus Christ. (I Tim. 2:5)
-I believe in the Holy Spirit, Triune, and Co-Existent in the trinity, who ministers to the saints, convicts, regenerates, indwells, sanctifies, illuminates, and gifts. I believe the Holy Spirit has given gifts to Christians to serve in and through the local church. I believe that of the gifts mentioned in the Bible, sign gifts (miracles, tongues and their interpretation, and prophecy) were temporary and given to the church in its infancy before the completion of the canon of scripture. In this belief, I reject the modern Charismatic movement.
-I believe in the six literal days of creation. (Gen. 1:5,8,13,19,23,31) The universe was created in six literal 24hour day/night cycles, and that on the seventh [24hour] day God rested from the work that He had done. (Gen. 2:2) I reject all forms of evolution, theistic or natural. I believe that man was created in the image and likeness of God, and lived in a perfect spiritual state, but died spiritually when he rebelled, and is living in a totally depraved state, at enmity with God.
-I believe in God’s sovereign Grace, and particular redemption. I believe that He chose His elect before the foundation of the world. (Eph. 1:4) I believe that there is not one who seeks after God. (Rom. 3:11) I believe salvation is final, that it can not be lost. (John 10:28-29)
-I believe in the existence of Angels, spirit beings created by God for His glory and purpose. They are created beings, more powerful than humans, but not all-powerful.
-I believe in Satan who was Lucifer, the highest angel and his following, angelic beings who rebelled against God and were cast out of heaven. They constantly oppose God, and God’s people. (Isa. 14:12-13)
-I believe in the place of eternal punishment and separation from God, designed for Satan and his followers, called hell. (Ps. 9:17) Those people who are not God’s children will spend eternity in hell. I believe in heaven, God’s dwelling, where His elect will spend eternity in fellowship with Him.
-I believe in the spiritual unity of the body of Christ, the church, of which Christ is the head. God has ordained the church, which is comprised of all believers, for the equipping of the saints unto the furtherance of the gospel. They are to observe the two ordinances, baptism and the Lord’s Supper. (Matt. 28:19, I Cor. 11:23-26)

This is something I wrote down about 10 years ago. I borrowed points from several different churches/christian colleges. There is probably a lot I could add, and I may set out to do that some day. 

Happy Accidents

    I’ve heard countless times how ignorant and dangerous religion is. How it suppresses logical and progressive thought. It causes unnecessary conflict. I’m reminded constantly, by current events and the role I play in them as a member of the Armed Forces, of the part religion plays in wars, now and throughout history. But let me tell you what is wrong with this atheistic, “scientific” war on religion. Specifically Christianity, but all religion has been attacked by this idea that it is archaic, prehistoric, ignorant, and harmful. An atheist must admit that the universe came into existence by chance. In fact, many of them now will tell you that based on recent research on the Higgs Boson at King’s College London, the universe shouldn’t exist. Some explain it by stating that we exist because we exist. This is the supposed logic that religion suppresses, by the way. However they choose to explain away how the universe came to be, they can not deny that by definition, if they are indeed correct, the universe came about by accident. And many will gladly admit to this. But they somehow fail to see the disturbing ramifications of this admission. If the universe happened by accident, then there is no reason for the universe to exist. Or they’ll sincerely believe that the explanation “the universe exists because it exists” is clever and intellectual. But if the universe exists by accident, then humanity exists by accident. If you are a “happy accident”, you have no purpose. You are an unintended consequence of chance. After all, there was nothing presiding over your coming into existence capable of showing intent, right? If you are an accident, you have no reason to live. There was no purpose or design in your existence. You exist because you exist, and at some point you will cease to exist. If something has no purpose, it has no value. What use is something that has no reason to exist? What happens when you teach generations of children that humanity is a collection of genetic mistakes that has no reason for existence other than that base animal survival instinct that is our genetic disposition? What happens when you take the worth away from a human being? If you have no reason to exist, why should I hesitate to bring about the cessation of your existence? What are my morals based on? Some majority rule that killing is bad based solely on self preservation? If you remove the purpose, the reason, the intent, the value, you remove the soul. You have intentionally or not created a society that believes that it is ok to destroy life in the sanctity of a mothers womb, or in the classroom, or in the mall, or a movie theater, or a cafeteria, or in gas chambers, or in trenches dug along the side of a road. If you have no reason in your existence, by what right do you exist? Rights are born of reason and reason is born of intelligence. And intelligence only comes from intelligence. You go on and live your happy accident. I’m here for a reason.   

Falling Trees and Forests

     The question has been asked for years, "If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?".  In my experience, the most common answer to the question is "of course it does!". I usually answer without hesitation to the contrary. Now before we get into this, I feel compelled to warn you that the question, as innocent as it may seem, is quite loaded. Maybe that is common knowledge, and maybe that is the point. Either way, let's examine the scenario.
     First, to correctly answer the question, we must define "sound". So what is sound? My answer is crudely simplistic, but to the point. Sound is moving air. But for the sake of validation, shall we say, lets see what Miriam Webster says.

a :  a particular auditory impression :  tone

b :  the sensation perceived by the sense of hearing

c :  mechanical radiant energy that is transmitted by longitudinal pressure waves in a material medium (as air) and is the objective cause of hearing

We have two possible definitions here. We have the physical energy, and we have the auditory perception of that energy. 
     The reason I answer "no" to the question in question is because sound is not sound until it is perceived. The tree that falls in the forest most certainly moves air. There is definitely a transmission of mechanical energy radiated outward in the form of longitudinal pressure waves in a fluid medium. But this moving air is not the objective cause of hearing if there is nothing within it's vicinity capable of auditory perception. Until they are perceived, they are merely "sound waves"--moving air.
     So if the question were "If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it produce sound waves?", the answer would be yes. But  pressure waves transmitted at various uniform frequencies through a fluid medium are simply that. Moving air. Until that pressure wave is perceived by auditory processors and translated by the Broca's Area of the Cerebral Cortex of a brain into audible sound, it is simply nothing more than a breeze--a light, gentle, natural movement of air of any velocity. 
     At this point you may have made the frustrating discovery that this entire case hinges on how the question is asked. Semantics. For instance, how much of a difference does that indefinite article "a" make in the question (...make a sound...)? But you see, dear reader, I covered this base in a warning in my first paragraph. 
      While I feel that I have thoroughly answered this age old question, I feel that its being an age old question means that it will never be answered. Hopefully this article (if it did not enlighten you) at least entertained you.

Time: Perceived Reality

    Time is a concept that can be defined in different ways. It is one of the few relative concepts that exists. At this point, anyone holding to any type of relativistic beliefs is probably becoming a little offended. I have argued a great deal in the past concerning the foolishness of relativism. But that is not my intention here. Time is broadly relative. In fact, I submit that time as measured through chronology is a figment of imagination. A perceived reality. An idea that exists because it is an idea--that is it exists because we believe it exists. A unit of measure invented to accommodate feeble human minds. 
    Chronological time (as measured by Terrestrial day/night cycles) only exists as such on this planet, and is dependent on different variables such as distance from the star, direction and speed of rotation, atmospheric composition, etc. Time with these particular parameters doesn't necessarily exist anywhere else in the universe. Our apparent progression throughout the aeons is governed by our perception of those Terrestrial variables. How we exist in "time" has been determined by how we view our environment. Take away our means of measuring time, and we no longer perceive time. It ceases to exist because we cease to perceive it.
    Time as measured by entropy (aging, deterioration, decay, etc.) is also governed by the environment. As far as we know, deterioration occurs, and will always occur. It has become  scientific law and therefore can not be viewed relatively in the same way that the previously discussed "time" can be viewed. However, the rate of decay is based on a multitude of variables. Terrestrially, variables ranging from Solar radiation to the occurrence of various elements within our environment effect the rate of decay, if not decay itself (Causality). Probability tells us that there could exist a place in the universe in which none of the variables that cause "time" exist.
    And these are the musings of a bored mind... I hope this was as amusing to you as it was to me.
   

   "Time and space are not conditions in which we live, but modes by which we think." ~Albert Einstein

BAN DIHYDROGEN MONOXIDE - THE INVISIBLE KILLER!

NOTE: I am not the author of this article, and can not take credit for it. This article actually means a lot to me because it makes a point (intentionally or not) that deals with one of my biggest pet peeves. I have read it several times, and enjoy it more and more the more I read it. Enjoy!

Dihydrogen monoxide is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of people every year.
What are the dangers of Dihydrogen Monoxide?
Most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHMO, but the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide do not end there. Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes severe tissue damage. Symptoms of DHMO ingestion can include excessive sweating and urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte imbalance. For those who have become dependent, DHMO withdrawal means certain death.
Dihydrogen Monoxide Facts
Dihydrogen monoxide:

• is also known as hydric acid, and is the major component of acid rain.
• contributes to the Greenhouse Effect.
• may cause severe burns.
• contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape.
• accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals.
• may cause electrical failures and decreased effectiveness of automobile brakes.
• has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients.

Dihydrogen Monoxide Alerts
Contamination is reaching epidemic proportions!
Quantities of dihydrogen monoxide have been found in almost every stream, lake, and reservoir in America today. But the pollution is global, and the contaminant has even been found in Antarctic ice. In the midwest alone DHMO has caused millions of dollars of property damage.
Dihydrogen Monoxide Uses
Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used:

• as an industrial solvent and coolant.
• in nuclear power plants.
• in the production of styrofoam.
• as a fire retardant.
• in many forms of cruel animal research.
• in the distribution of pesticides. Even after washing, produce remains contaminated by this chemical.
• as an additive in certain junk-foods and other food products.

Stop the horror - Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide
Companies dump waste DHMO into rivers and the ocean, and nothing can be done to stop them because this practice is still legal. The impact on wildlife is extreme, and we cannot afford to ignore it any longer!
THE HORROR MUST BE STOPPED!
The American government has refused to ban the production, distribution, or use of this damaging chemical due to its importance to the economic health of this nation. In fact, the navy and other military organizations are conducting experiments with DHMO, and designing multi-billion dollar devices to control and utilize it during warfare situations. Hundreds of military research facilities receive tons of it through a highly sophisticated underground distribution network. Many store large quantities for later use.
IT'S NOT TOO LATE!
Act NOW to prevent further contamination. Find out more about this dangerous chemical. What you don't know CAN hurt you and others throughout the world.
"Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide" written by the Coalition to Ban DHMO © 1988

Mind on the loose!

Tonight I find my mind quite occupied, intrigued, amused, and amazed. It has been quite busy, jumping from "Contractile Polymers" and "Carbon Nanotube" to the anatomy of black holes. I'm not sure how my mind goes from material science to astrophysics...but this is how my mind works. And neither subject in my mind is related. Black holes amuse me more than anything. Or at least all the different theories held by astrophysicists who have more degrees than I'll ever hope to, and more years of experience in their field of work than I've been alive. I probably have no right to laugh at the ideas they concoct. My mind is in no way superior to theirs. But some of the ideas floating around in the scientific community are quite amusing. As far as material science and physics in general--the tangible and observable--I see endless possibilities. I see a future filled with incredible and amazing technology. Take carbon nanotube for instance. It is being used to make synthetic muscles capable of generating 30 times the force per unit area 4,ooo times as fast as a natural muscle. And it maintains these properties at both extremely low temperatures (-320F - the boiling point of liquid nitrogen) and extremely high temperatures (2,800F - the melting point of iron). I see mind-blowing potential. (Maybe this is why my mind enjoys it so much...) My mind has been toying with concepts like energy conversion, properties of light and sound, Newtonian Physics... Its addicting. I need to know more! I wan't to learn and apply. I am working on an associates degree in applied science. That is the field of work I want to be in someday. I have a analytical mind. It likes to break things down and see how they work. And it is [blindly?] enthusiastic...for it has chosen the universe to be its playground.