Something simple that every Christian should know about the Quran

Please read this short but extremely important article: The Qu’ran says the Bible is not corrupt.  This is a great message to share with Muslims who have been told that the Bible has been corrupted.  Using their own “holy book” we can point them back to what should be a common source: The Bible.

The short version: The Quran itself claims that the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel are from Allah and that Allah’s words cannot be changed.

Here’s a sample:

The Muslims repeatedly claim that the Bible has been corrupted and that the Qu’ran is the only trustworthy scripture in existence. This is why Muslims often attack the Bible. But this cannot be acording to the Quran. The Quran says that the books of Moses, the Psalms, and the gospel were all given by God.

Torah – “We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of messengers,” (Sura 2:87).1

Psalms – “We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms,” (4:163).

Gospel – “It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong),” (3:3).

. . .

We see that the Qu’ran states that the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel were all given by God. With this we Christians heartily agree. But, the Muslims claim that the Bible is corrupted and full of contradictions. If that is so, then it would seem they do not believe the Qu’ran since the Qu’ran says that the Word of God cannot be altered:

“Rejected were the messengers before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers,” (6:34).

. . .

This means that at that time the Bible, which was in existence, could not have been corrupted because the Qu’ran states that God’s word cannot be corrupted. The question I have for the Muslims is “When and where was the Bible corrupted, since the Qu’ran says that the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel are from Allah and Allah’s words cannot be changed?”

Update: I should have just linked to this: According to the Qur’an, the Qur’an is false.

–The Old Testament (the Book) and the Gospels (the Injil) were written chronologically prior to the Qur’an.
–The Qur’an claims that the Book and the Injil are the Word of Allah.
–The Word of Allah cannot be changed.
–The manuscripts of the Book and the Injil prior to and in the time of Muhammad and at the time the Qur’an was compiled bear the same message as the Bible we have today.
–The Bible makes theological claims in direct opposition to the theological claims of the Qur’an.
–The Qur’an insists we can and should trust the Bible (which is God’s Word and cannot be changed or corrupted).
–Since the Bible came before the Qur’an, and the Bible is the incorruptible word of God, then anything coming after the Bible which claims to be the Word of God but is different from the Bible, it is therefore false and not of God.
–Therefore, if the Bible is accurate (from 2, 3, and 5) then the Qur’an is false (from 2, 3, 6, and 7).
–Put more briefly: If the Qur’an is true, then the Bible is true, which means the Qur’an is false — and by extension, so is the religion of Islam.

And here’s another great set of resources for sharing the truth with Muslims.

—–

Bonus: Another simple but crucial thing to know about the Quran is that it makes a clear historical error about the death of Jesus. This passage explicitly denies that Jesus died on the cross:

And for claiming that they killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of GOD. In fact, they never killed him, they never crucified him – they were made to think that they did. All factions who are disputing in this matter are full of doubt concerning this issue. They possess no knowledge; they only conjecture. For certain, they never killed him. Instead, GOD raised him to Him; GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.

Quran, Sura 4:157-158

That is a very clear claim that Jesus did not die on the cross, whereas we know from the Bible and even secular history that Jesus did die on the cross. Then one guy came along over 500 years later with a radical new story about how Jesus didn’t die on the cross, though he had zero evidence behind it.  Zero.

When I speak with Muslims I always bring this example up matter-of-factly.  First I clarify with them that this is what the Quran teaches.   They always agree, except one guy who wasn’t familiar with it (I showed him the reference and I think it helped plant some seeds of doubt).

Then I just explain why I hold the view that Jesus died on the cross: Lots of testimonies written close to the event and plenty of secular historians backing it up vs. one guy over 500 years later with an alleged vision from God.  No serious historian would consider the Islamic version to be more credible.

Is it possible that Mohammad was right about Jesus not dying on the cross?  In a hyper-technical sense, I suppose so.  But you’d have to throw every historical event ever up for grabs using that approach.

This isn’t some small issue, either.  It is an essential claim for Christianity and a key error in the Quran.

Roundup

I shared this on Facebook a while back and possibly here, but it is definitely worth a re-post. The humor from the massive understatement of the first line is surpassed by the “but it was worth it, of course” vibe of the second.  Dedicated to all my spider-hating friends and family.

—

Burglars lock homeowner in gun closet with predictably hilarious results – in Texas, of course!

—

Parents, Do You Think Before You Post?  Good reminders about thinking ahead.

Parents, before you post about your small children, imagine a 13-year-old version of them reading over your shoulder. Your child bears the image of God just as you do. Does what you communicate honor them as equal image-bearers? Does it provide short-term gratification for you or honor long-term relationship with them? Does it potentially expose them to ridicule or label them? Does it record a negative sentiment that an adult would recognize as fleeting but an adolescent might not?

—

Our Lawless President: Obama’s IRS Thuggery Certainly Was No Coincidence – Obama has operated like this during his entire career.  In Illinois he won elections by illegally getting divorce records unsealed.  The IRS issues are just the tip of the iceberg. You do not want government to have that much power, because it will inevitably get abused.

Oh, and when they are playing the “we were idiots / gov’t is too big to know everything about it” card, that is a good time to remind them of how much time Obama spends on golf, vacations and fundraising.

Also see The IRS abuse of power scandal started from the top.  Typical Chicago-style thuggery to intimidate donors.  (“That’s a real nice business you have there.  It would be a shame if my IRS organization had to go audit it.”)

In April 2012, an Obama campaign website named and slurred eight Romney donors. It tarred Mr. VanderSloot as a “wealthy individual” with a “less-than-reputable record.” Other donors were described as having been “on the wrong side of the law.”

This was the Obama version of the phone call—put out to every government investigator (and liberal activist) in the land.

Twelve days later, a man working for a political opposition-research firm called an Idaho courthouse for Mr. VanderSloot’s divorce records. In June, the IRS informed Mr. VanderSloot and his wife of an audit of two years of their taxes. In July, the Department of Labor informed him of an audit of the guest workers on his Idaho cattle ranch. In September, the IRS informed him of a second audit, of one of his businesses. Mr. VanderSloot, who had never been audited before, was subject to three in the four months after Mr. Obama teed him up for such scrutiny.

The last of these audits was only concluded in recent weeks. Not one resulted in a fine or penalty. But Mr. VanderSloot has been waiting more than 20 months for a sizable refund and estimates his legal bills are $80,000. That figure doesn’t account for what the president’s vilification has done to his business and reputation.

A great take down here:

—

Venezuela, out of toilet paper — and more!  But socialism is still the right path for the U.S.!  At least that’s what the media, education system, entertainment industry and Democrats tell me.

—

Great post about John Newton, author of Amazing Grace

—

9 things you should know about human cloning

—

—

They forgot the most obvious one: Real butter tastes better!  I just switched to it recently.  The key is using one with a little olive oil or something similar so it is spreadable.  When in doubt, go with the most natural thing.

Mmmmmm . . . butter.

test

A somewhat schizophrenic message by Jim Wallis

From the giving credit where it is (sort of) due category, see Men and Boys Behaving Badly: Where Are Their Fathers? – Jim Wallis | God’s Politics Blog | Sojourners.

Wallis rightly notes the obvious role of fathers in guiding their boys.  The father of one of the Steubenville rapists even admitted that his absence from his son’s life was a big part of the problem.  Roughly 90% of the men I meet in prison ministry had bad or absent fathers.  So hey, we agree that fathers are extremely important!

But it is the political policies of Wallis et al that encourage fatherlessness.  The “war on poverty” had the opposite effect.  Liberal media and entertainment make fathers appear to be bad or superfluous.

And why don’t Wallis and his organization speak out against oxymoronic “same-sex marriage” that repeats ad nauseum the foundational lie that gender is paramount for couples (e.g., a gay guy must have sex with another guy and not just a butch female) but gender is completely irrelevant when it comes to parenting?  Wallis has just now switched sides to support SSM — conveniently at the tipping point where he benefited by it.

You can’t have it both ways.  Wallis is right about the importance of fathers but a huge part of the problem in how their role is minimized.  Shouldn’t the Left be screaming about what a homophobe he is?

P.S. OK, Wallis is a false teacher, so I knew not to expect coherence from him.

Schadenfreude, sweet schadenfreude

Alternate title: Mugged by reality.

This has been the best week in politics in the last 5 years. I’m not glad that the Obama administration did all these illegal and unethical things. We knew they were doing them (for those who actually research these sort of things, he did them long before running for President). But now the few excesses that have gone public are so egregious that even Socialists like Stewart can’t deny them. If anyone thinks that the scandals are only limited to what we know about Benghazi, the IRS, AP, Fast and Furious, etc., then they are still part of the problem. (Oh, and the fact that they are still on the record for unrestricted, taxpayer-funded baby killing and their wildly anti-family and anti-Christian policies is no coincidence.) The administration is still trying out their Excuse of the Day (yesterday day was, “We’re not corrupt, just incompetent!”). I think they are corrupt and incompetent, but whichever lane they pick we have a solid argument against them.  Don’t give up.

But this isn’t just about Obama and his over-the-top corrupt administration, it is about big government. It is inherently inefficient and can’t be trusted, so you must limit it.  Don’t run against Obama, run against big government and Liberalism.  

P.S. How many of these scandals were President Bush’s fault?!

Increased unemployment, need for food stamps and other ills are design features of Obama’s policies, not bugs

If you don’t know what I mean by referring to Cloward & Piven and still support Obama, you are a big part of the problem. You really need to expand your media horizons and stop trusting the Liberal media.

If you know what I mean by referring to Cloward & Piven and still support Obama, you are a big part of the problem.

Via First-Hand Report on Obama’s Columbia Milieu:

The plan was revolting, but brilliant. Cloward & Piven taught that America could only be destroyed from within. Only by overwhelming the system with debt, welfare, and entitlements could capitalism and the America economy be destroyed. So the plan was to make a majority of Americans dependent on welfare, food stamps, disability, unemployment, and entitlements of all kinds. Then, under the weight of the debt, the system would implode and the economy collapse, bankrupting business owners (i.e. conservative donors). Americans would be brought to their knees, begging for big government to save them. Voila — you’d have a new system — socialism!

This is not a conspiracy theory.  All the information is readily available in many sources, but the Liberal media refuses to report on it.  Obama and Hillary were both deeply influenced by these strategies.  It isn’t that they are surprised that their policies aren’t working, they know they won’t work.  At least they won’t work to solve the problems people care about, like unemployment.  They will work to destroy the country and pave the way for full-blown Socialism.

I would love to put polygraphs on the false teaching theological Liberals and see if they are ignorant of Cloward & Piven, which would be pretty bad, or if they know of the plan and approve of it, which would be even worse.  

Book recommendation: Cold-Case Christianity

Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels by J. Warner Wallace was even better than expected.  I figured it would be a good refresher on some basic apologetics, but he offered a lot fresh angles and was very interesting to read.

A few highlights  . . .

He noticed how John’s Gospel never refers to Jesus’ mother by name, and then points out how that would be logical given that Jesus asked John to take her as his mother.  He wrote the Gospel a few decades later, so it might have been odd for him to call her by her first name.

The differences between the Gospel writers made so much sense when the texts were analyzed forensically.   For example:

Mark used specific titles to describe Peter, gave him priority in the narrative, uniquely included information related to Peter, and copied Peter’s preaching outline when structuring his own gospel. These circumstantial facts support the claims of the early church fathers who identified Peter as the source of Mark’s information. By hanging on every word, we were able to construct a reasonable circumstantial case for the gospel of Mark as an eyewitness account. When combined with the testimony of the early church, this evidence becomes even more powerful.

He does a great job of annihilating the conspiracy theory angle of skeptics.

Don’t get me wrong, successful conspiracies occur every day. But they typically involve a small number of incredibly close-knit participants who are in constant contact with one another for a very short period of time without any outside pressure. That wasn’t the case for the disciples. These men and women either were involved in the greatest conspiracy of all time or were simply eyewitnesses who were telling the truth. The more I learned about conspiracies, the more the latter seemed to be the most reasonable conclusion.

As a VP of Internal Audit, one of the roles of my team is to investigate thefts and other issues, so I found the interrogation and evidence-gathering parts to be fascinating.  I have a 70 yr. old investigator who is amazing at what he does.  He is a committed Christian and will enjoy this book!

Pay no attention to the men behind the curtain

See Evolutionist: Let’s Admit it, We Don’t Fully Understand How Evolution Works – We live in interesting times, where the average person — saturating in a lifetime of Darwinist propaganda in education, media and entertainment — is still defending an evolutionary model that the professionals know is false.  Oh, the professionals haven’t given up on their godless worldview, but they know that their paradigms have been shattered and they are desperately trying to find another explanation that leaves out a creator.

On this 60th anniversary of the discovery of the DNA double helix, Ball reviews a few of the recent findings that have rebuked the evolution narrative that random mutations created the biological world. Unfortunately Ball fails to take his own advice and ends up doing precisely what he advises other evolutionists against—whitewashing the science.

For instance, evolutionists have had to resort to the explanation that rather than mutations tweaking the DNA’s protein-coding genes to create or improve protein functions, those mutations must have sometimes tweaked regulatory networks that control the expression of said genes. What Ball doesn’t mention is that this new epicycle relies on the prior existence of those regulatory networks and the protein-coding genes they control.

In other words, we now must believe that evolution first constructed the incredible genes and regulatory networks (for which there is no scientific explanation, but that’s another story) which then enabled evolution to proceed.

Such serendipity is unlikely, to put it kindly, but Ball presents it with a straight face . . .

I almost feel sorry for them.  Every day they go to work and get mocked by God when they see how His design is even more exquisite than they realized the day before.  But they trudge on with their blind faith science-of-the-gaps.  Suppressing the truth in unrighteousness must be exhausting.

Romans 1:18–20 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Read it all, then be sure to read Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design and Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design, both by Stephen C. Meyer.

The importance of discernment and clear thinking

Ann Coulter makes some excellent points in Beware of Liberals Who Come in Evangelicals’ Clothing:

Any Evangelical promoting the McCain-Rubio amnesty plan has the moral framework of Planned Parenthood. Like the abortion lobby, they have boundless compassion for the people they can see, but none for those they can’t see.

One Evangelical after another told the Times that they no longer believe Americans should have control over who immigrates here on the basis of having met illegal aliens in their pews. The millions harmed by illegal immigration are left out of the equation. They don’t go to church here.

Similarly, the pro-choice crowd is brimming with compassion for girls who have gotten pregnant by accident. They’re in high school, their whole lives are ahead of them, it’s one mistake! The babies don’t count because they’re out of sight.

The Rev. David Uth, head pastor of First Baptist Orlando, said that based on “the stories out there in the pews” from illegals who “have made friends and who have become close with people here,” there was momentum in his church to “do something to address their needs.”

Mr. Uth and his parishioners will never hear stories from the thousands of Americans killed every year by illegal aliens. They won’t be sitting in the pews with those murdered and maimed in Boston last month by a conspiracy of immigrants.

They won’t hear from hospitals and school systems in border states forced into bankruptcy because they have to provide free services to illegals. They won’t chat with farmers and ranchers whose livestock and property are stolen or destroyed by illegal aliens.

It is sad to see people make un-principled decisions just because they feel sorry for someone they know.  I’ve seen countless people switch positions to directly oppose the Bible just because they know someone who is gay and they want them to be “happy.”  Or they become pro-choice because they feel sorry for a pregnant teen.  Or they oppose immigration laws because they know an illegal alien.  It is such a sad case of abandoning critical thinking skills and not thinking about the other victims and about what God says.  As Christians we should be mature, clear thinkers and not let emotions lead us to take immoral positions on these issues.

Did the Apostles Lie So They Could Die as Martyrs?

Short answer: No.

Medium answer: Read the rest of this post.

Long answer: Read Cold Case Christianity by J. Warner Wallace, former homicide detective

As a skeptic, I believed that the story of the Resurrection was either a late distortion (a legend) created by Christians well after the fact, or a conspiratorial lie on the part of the original Apostles. It wasn’t until I started working homicides (and homicidal conspiracies in particular) that I decided an Apostolic conspiracy was unreasonable. I’ve written a chapter in Cold Case Christianity describing the five necessary elements of successful conspiracies, and none of these elements were present for the Apostles. But even more importantly, the Apostles lacked the proper motivation to lie about the Resurrection.

My case work as a homicide detective taught me something important: There are only three motives behind any murder (or any crime, or sin, for that matter). All crimes are motivated by financial greed, sexual lust (relational desire), or the pursuit of power.

If the Apostles committed the crime of fraud on an unsuspecting world, they were motivated by one of these three intentions. Most people will agree that none of the Apostles gained anything financially or sexually from their testimony, but some skeptics have argued the Apostles may have been motivated by the pursuit of power. Didn’t these men become leaders in the Church on the basis of their claims? Couldn’t this pursuit of leadership status have motivated them to lie? Wasn’t it a goal of early martyrs to die for their faith anyway?

The Apostles Knew the Difference Between Ministry and Martyrdom
The Book of Acts and the letters of Paul provide us with a glimpse into the lives of the Apostles. The Apostles were clearly pursued and mistreated, and the New Testament narratives and letters describe their repeated efforts to avoid capture. The Apostles continually evaded capture in an effort to continue their personal ministries as eyewitnesses. The New Testament accounts describe men who were bold enough to maintain their ministry, but clever enough to avoid apprehension for as long as possible.

The Apostles Knew the Difference Between a Consequence and a Goal
These early eyewitnesses were fully aware of the fact that their testimony would put them in jeopardy, but they understood this to be the consequence of their role as eyewitnesses rather than the goal. That’s why they attempted to avoid death as long as possible. While it may be true that later generations of believers wanted to emulate the Apostles through an act of martyrdom, this was not the case for the Apostles themselves.

The Apostles Knew the Difference Between Fame and Infamy
It’s one thing to be famous, but another to be famously despised. Some of us have attained widespread fame based on something noble (like Mother Teresa). Some of us have attained widespread fame because of something sinister (like Jerry Sandusky). The apostles were roundly despised by their Jewish culture as a consequence of their leadership within the fledgling Christian community. If they were lying about their testimony to gain the respect and admiration of the culture they were trying to convert, they were taking the wrong approach. The Apostles only succeeded in gaining the infamy that eventually cost them their lives. This was obvious to them from the onset; they knew their testimony would leave them powerless to stop their own brutal martyrdom.

As I examine the motives and consequences related to the testimony of the Apostles, I still find their martyrdom to be one of the most powerful evidences related to the veracity of their testimony.

Think about it for a minute: Twelve designated eyewitnesses travelled the known world to testify to the Resurrection. Not a single one of them recanted their testimony. Not a single one of them lived longer because of their testimony. Not a single one benefitted financially or relationally. These folks were either crazy or committed, certifiably nuts or certain about their observations.

The anti-science pro-abortion lobby visits MSNBC

Via MSNBC Talking Head Calls Babies “Things That Might Turn Into Humans” – a pro-abortion “expert” made the following anti-science claims:

Oh, no. That might be bad. I seemed to have popped open the fertilized egg. We’ll put that back together. But the very idea that this would constitute a person, right? And that some set of constitutional rights should come to this.  Look, I get that that is a particular kind of faith claim. It’s not associated with science. But the reality is that if this turns into a person, right, there are economic consequences, right? The cost to raise a child, $10,000 a year up to $20,000 a year. When you’re talking about what it actually costs to have this thing turn into a human, why not allow women to make the best choices that we can with as many resources and options instead of trying to come in and regulate this process?

The video didn’t show the response of the MSNBC hosts, but I doubt they told her how spectacularly she wrong she was on the scientific facts.

Pro-life reasoning is simple and accurate: It is a scientific fact (and basic common sense) that a new human being is created at fertilization.  It is simple moral reasoning that it is wrong to take the life of an innocent human being without proper justification, and that is what happens during 99% of abortions.  The situations surrounding abortions are psychologically complex (pressures on the mother to abort, economic concerns, etc.) but morally simple (you don’t kill unwanted humans outside the womb for those reasons, so you shouldn’t kill them inside the womb for those reasons).  Their size, level of development, location and degree of dependency are not reasons to ignore their right to life.

“Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

“A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

Note that we didn’t use religious reasoning there, though I’d be glad to share with her what God has to say in his revealed word!

She plays the typical pro-abortion word games of de-humanizing the unborn by claiming they aren’t persons, as if there was a meaningful distinction between human beings and persons and the distninction meant that the mother could have one killed but not the other.

per·son  [pur-suhn] noun

1. a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.

2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.

My guess is that if you asked her if “people of faith” were anti-science she’d probably agree.  But who is really opposed to basic science and logic?

Dear atheist commenter pretending to be a pro-evolution Christian,

I have some friendly advice for you that will save you future embarrassment.

It isn’t enough to change your screen name from TheOneTrueForce (which you used to leave some rambling atheistic comments) to Scientific Christian (which you used to deceptively pose as a pro-Darwinian evolution Christian).

And it isn’t enough to type in a different email address.

You also need to post the fake comments from a different IP address.

Otherwise I can still tell it is you.

And once I point out that I know you are lying, you shouldn’t double-down and pretend that I was mistaken.

You might also do some reflection and ask yourself why, if your worldview is correct, that you feel compelled to lie to advance it.

That is all.

Practical and important ways to show love to your family. Even when you are dead.

I recently suggested that the two best ways to love your family and save a ton of money are to keep yourself fit and work on your marriage.

There are a couple other simple ways you can show love to your family, especially in a time of grief: Have your will, medical directives and financial records in order and ensure you have money or insurance for your funeral and burial.

As Pastor D.L. Foster asked:

If you were to die today, would your family, loved ones go into debt attempting to funeralize and bury you? Would they have to get on TV and beg strangers for money? Would they have to delay grieving because they have no money to handle the business of your death? If yes, why haven’t you gotten an insurance plan so that they can grieve without the extra heavy burden of money issues?

It doesn’t take that much to get organized.  If you won’t be leaving enough cash for a funeral, then get some insurance.  You can get a simple will done online.  Same thing for power of attorney forms and medical directives.  Make a list of your accounts, insurance policies, etc. then put it with any notes you want for your loved ones.  Then put a reminder on your calendar to update it once a year.  Don’t hold to silly superstitions. Your are going to die whether or not you prepare.

Will you be there to get kudos from your family for helping them out?  No, but getting credit isn’t what love is about.  With just a few hours time you will have made the life of your loved ones much, much easier.

Oh, and be sure to repent and believe in Jesus if you haven’t already.  He is the only way to salvation, and eternity is a mighty long time.

How would the Corinthians respond to Paul if they applied pro-gay reasoning?

People who hold to pro-gay theology* (i.e., God doesn’t consider it a sin and that he approves of “same-sex marriage”) use all sorts of fallacious arguments to make their case.  In this post I am taking the pro-gay theological reasoning out for a test drive, so to speak, to see how it applies to other passages.  After all, if their principles are sound they should work in other situations as well.

You may be familiar with Leviticus 18:22 (Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable) and some of the improper interpretations of it. But I wondered how their reasoning would apply to a verse in the same passage, such as Leviticus 18:8 –Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonor your father. After all, the context of Leviticus 18 is abundantly clear because it starts and ends with the same admonitions: Don’t be like the pagan Canaanites and do the detestable things listed in the middle of the text, or you will be vomited out of the land like they were.  These were obviously not ceremonial laws just for the Israelites.

You can use any verse from Leviticus 18 to make the same points (bestiality, child sacrifice, etc.).  I chose this one because it happened to be addressed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 5.  Especially note how Paul chides the Corinthians for being proud and boastful about this a man sleeping with his father’s wife.  Read it once, then read it again and replace the descriptions of incest with homosexual behavior.  That is how I view the pro-gay theology community (especially the heterosexuals): Proud and boastful for ignoring God’s Word.

1 Corinthians 5 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father’s wife. And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.

Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.

I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.”

Now let’s apply the various lines of pro-gay theological reasoning to Leviticus 18:8 and 1 Corinthians 5 and see how well they work. I realize that not all pro-gay theologians hold all these views.  I tried to convey their reasoning as accurately as possible.  Using their logic, we could conclude that:

• Jesus didn’t specifically say not to have sexual relations with your father’s wife, so it couldn’t have been very important and probably wasn’t even a sin (the argument from silence).  We should err on the side of saying it isn’t a sin.  We ignore the fact that Jesus, as God, authored the Old Testament and that He fully supported it.
• The man was born that way (i.e., with the desire to have sex with females).  It was his natural desire and function.
• He and his father’s wife love each other!  Who are you to say that is wrong?  Gene Robinson, a Bishop in the Episcopal church, left his wife and kids so he could be with his gay lover.  Pro-gay theologians usually affirm and applaud this behavior.  Living up to marriage commitments made before God isn’t nearly as important as indulging your sexual preferences.
• How do you know he and his father’s wife didn’t pray about it?  Maybe God gave them a personal revelation permitting them to have sex and/or get married.  That would make it acceptable.
• Maybe the couple says that Jesus told them it was OK.  Who are you to argue with Jesus?
• Leviticus 18:8 was a ceremonial law.  It was only for the Jews.  It obviously doesn’t apply to Gentiles.  If you eat shellfish then you obviously are a hypocrite if you don’t condone incest.
• The Bible never actually uses the word incest.
• There are only a few verses saying not to have sexual relations with your father’s wife [probably less than there are describing homosexual behavior as sinful].Therefore, how can we be sure about it?  And they are kinda obscure as well.
• The man or the father’s wife was a temple prostitute or this was part of some pagan temple worship, and that is what made it wrong [even though the text doesn't even hint at that].
• Paul was an ignorant prude.  He didn’t understand sexual behavior or have the advantage of all the knowledge we do.  [This assumes that the Holy Spirit wasn't inspiring his writings, of course].
• You are just using the “ick” factor and saying “Eeewww” because a man having sex with his father’s wife seems gross to you.  There is really nothing wrong with it, though – you were just made differently.
• Judge not, lest ye be judged.  Paul must be sinning here because he is clearly making moral judgments.  [Please ignore the fact that I'm judging Paul for judging and that I've taken Matthew 7:1-5 out of context].
• You are just an incest-o-phobe.  You need therapy for your irrational hatred.  In fact, speech like that should be prohibited because it will incite violence against those who practice incest.
• You just don’t love the man and his father’s wife!  If you did, you’d want them to be happy.  Hater!  Hate speech!
• Other parts of the Bible portray God acting in ways that don’t appear to be in line with his moral laws, so they obviously aren’t really from him.  Therefore, Leviticus 18:8 may not be his Word either.  When in doubt, we should ignore Scripture, because God’s revelation to my heart trumps anything in the Bible.
• Some parts of the Bible aren’t clear to us [even though this part is] so we can ignore it.

If that sounds like an unsound line of reasoning that’s because it is an unsound line of reasoning. These principles don’t work on the passages they are designed to dismiss, and they completely self-destruct when applied to other passages.  Pro-gay theology is flawed, sinful and destructive and should be abandoned by any Christians who hold those views.

Once again, note that:

• 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the strongest possible terms.
• 100% of the verses referencing God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
• 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
• 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

Remember, if homosexual behavior is a sin – and the Bible clearly identifies it as such – then affirming and encouraging that behavior is also a sin and providing the orthodox Biblical view is the loving thing to do.  God is perfectly holy, but He is also perfectly gracious and merciful and will forgive those who repent and believe in Jesus.  Hear the Good News:

Romans 5:8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Comments are welcome, but please stick to the topic.  We aren’t debating secular views, we aren’t demonizing anyone (pro-gay or orthodox) and we don’t need straw-man arguments (“You just don’t love them,” etc.).

Love LGBTQ people, be friends with them and pray for them.  If they need to develop a friendship with you so they can see what normal relationships should look like, then do so.  But don’t encourage them to participate in sinful behavior.  If you do, then you are loving yourself, not them.

And remember, God catches his fish and then He cleans them.  You don’t have to convert their sexuality before sharing the Good News that God adopts, completely forgives and eternally blesses everyone who repents and trusts in Jesus.

—

* There are the three commons ways pro-gay theologians make errors, namely by believing that:

1. The Bible is either not the Word of God, or most parts of it aren’t.
2. The Bible is the Word of God, but it doesn’t really say homosexual behavior is wrong.
3. The Bible is the Word of God and does clearly and emphatically describe gay behavior as sinful.  However, the Holy Spirit has given additional revelations such that this behavior is now acceptable and the “new” sin is saying that homosexual behavior is sinful.

Roundup

This is disappointing but not surprising: Great news: Congress unanimously repeals transparency requirement on stock transactions for … Congress – if you do this, you go to jail.  If Congress does it — and they have done it a lot — they get rich.

—

Even If It Saves Just One Life: Abortion Regulation NOW

Kermit Gosnell is charged with multiple counts of murder and his motley crue of poorly-trained, unprofessional staff has testified to the number of large, live infants he brutally murdered with the snip of scissors in his clinic. The time has come to have a national conversation about sensible abortion control.

Said the President after Sandy Hook:

“No law or set of laws can keep our children completely safe. But if there’s even one thing we can do, if there’s just one life we can save, we’ve got an obligation to try.”

I agree. We need sensible abortion control. Think of how many classrooms of children lost their lives at the hands of Gosnell. The difference between Gosnell and some other abortionists is that Gosnell was caught. Gosnell didn’t use an AR-15 to snuff out the lives of these live infants. He assaulted them with scissors. Too many to count. There is a photo of one child (via the grand jury testimony) stuffed into a shoebox like a pet hamster. His little legs were too big so they hung out over the sides. Just one life.

Remember, the real issue in the Gosnell case isn’t that he killed babies 30 seconds too late and ran a filthy clinic.  Abortionists kill babies for a living, so why would anyone ever be surprised that they would bend the rules on timing, cleanliness, caring for women, etc.?

The real issue is the political and media blackout.  Deep down they know that he isn’t that unusual, so they can’t draw attention to the morally insignificant time between legal abortions and infanticide.

And they definitely don’t people to know that President Obama and Planned Parenthood are unequivocally on record for the right of abortionists to kill babies who survive abortions.  

Also remember not to let them preach to you about gun control until they address this topic and the media,  political and church silence.  If they really cared about children they would do something about this instead of consciously ignoring it.

And remember that according to the Left, all of these things and more are obviously racist, but Kermit Gosnell giving preferential treatment to white women when he killed their babies is not.  Check.

• Questioning the president’s jobs figures
• Preferring white meat over dark at Thanksgiving
• Calling the biggest retail sale day ‘Black Friday’
• Criticizing the judgement of Susan Rice over her repeated dissemination of a false story about Benghazi
• The word ‘urban’
• Laying off employees due to the financial burdens of Obamacare
• Long voter lines
• Noting that President Obama said ‘voting is the best revenge’
• Urging Mitt Romney to not bow to Saudi leaders and asserting you built your own business
• Advertising that voter fraud is a felony
• ‘Kitchen cabinet’
• Saying the president is ‘angry’
• Calling community organizers ‘community organizers’
• Mentioning that you have ‘five boys’ when referencing your five sons in the presence of the president

—

Speaking of the media hiding stories, have you heard about Connecticut ‘Married’ Homosexuals George Harasz and Douglas Wirth Face Trial for Allegedly Raping their Own Adopted Boys?  Didn’t think so.

—

Professor Calls Republicans Stupid & Racist – among other things.  Too bad for him that a student caught it all on camera.  I hope this gets other professors to think twice before being so transparently biases.  I watched some of it.  He’s quite the Liberal mouthpiece.  I would love to see retired conservatives audit classes like this and set theses guys straight.  Or at least ensure they have some adult supervision.

Remember, people pay tens of thousands of dollars per year to get indoctrinated like this.  You do not need his “information” to be a productive member of society or to keep a real job.

—

—

And the theological liberals abuse the word love, as the quote below hints.  It isn’t loving to lie about what God said in his word, to offer a beer to an alcoholic, to encourage someone with same-sex attraction to act on those impulses, or to encourage a scared mother to kill her child.

—

—

—

—

—

—

Planned Parenthood’s charming founder.

Rob Bell, Goldfish Lady and “hearing from God”

Did you read about the woman who claims she found a ‘sign from God’ on Goldfish cracker?  It is another in a long and sad line of people allegedly finding signs of God, Jesus, Mary, etc. in all sorts of things.  And you can totally trust them, because in a world of trillions of items you’d never find something similar looking by accident, right?  And of course we know exactly what Jesus really looked like, so we can identify his image in grilled cheese sandwiches.

It’s a fishy story, but the woman telling it believes it’s pure gold. The Florida resident says the markings she found on a Goldfish cracker are a direct message affirming her Christian faith.

“I believe that it’s a sign, a sign from God,” Patti Burke told WKMG. “He is still in our life every day, and he wants to show that to his people.”

It’s not quite manna, but in Burke’s eyes it’s a manifestation of her faith.

The cracker in question has two markings, or imperfections, on its surface. Burke says the first marking is of a cross with a circle around it. The second marking, near the head of the fish, represents a golden crown.

“When I picked this one up, I knew he was special,” she said. “Something I’ve never seen before out of all the Goldfish I’ve eaten.”

I would love to know how much she reads the Bible. If she did she’d have all the assurance she needs of what God is really like and she’d realize that when He communicates to people He doesn’t do it via ambiguous messages in Goldfish crackers (did I really have to type that?!). She is obviously not well grounded in her faith and is “saved and confused” at best.

She is an extreme case, of course, and brings much mockery to the faith. So does her pastor who supported her publicly. But there is a lot of sloppy “God talk” that is just as fact-free as her foolishness, it just isn’t as obvious. The “God told me _____” phrase — unless followed by scripture, in context — is often tied to some sort of mischief. I read of one woman who opened an abortion clinic after seeing a “sign from God” on a bathroom wall. Seriously.

And while her situation is more extreme, is it really much different than what Rob Bell, the United Church of Christ or other false teachers claim when they say that “God is still speaking” and giving them new revelations?  (Uh, even though they didn’t believe him the first time and He just happens to be giving these revelations only to theological Liberals in the West, and even then He only does it roughly 15 minutes after the Pagans have figured it out.)

A big part of the problem is that there are too many Bible Cheerleaders who like all sorts of Facebook statuses about God, Jesus, the Bible, etc. but they don’t actually read the book.

Dear Christians, please-please-please read your Bibles carefully and think before you talk or type.  With effort I’ve gotten better at it over the years and I say fewer stupid things now.  Really, the system works.

—

P.S. This portion of the main link wasn’t relevant to the post, but you can have fun making up punch lines.

Burke admittedly has been working from a large sample size, consuming between two and three pounds of the crackers per week. She says she eats the small crackers individually, examining each one for the optimal amount of savory coating.

P.S.

Roundup

Two good iPhone apps recommended by my 83 yr. old father — Appygraph (send cards via text, with your pictures pasted in) and Heart Rate (you put your finger on the camera lens and it takes your pulse).  Apparently he’s the go-to guy for high tech.  And my 78 yr. old mom had him text a picture of something to her in a store.  Glad to see they are up on the latest things!

—

‘Revealing Heaven:’ Episcopal Pastor Details Hundreds of Near-Death Experiences, Backs Rob Bell – I know the author and have done prison ministry with him. I’m very disappointed at the direction he has taken. Rob Bell?! Ugh. I can’t see how he missed the obvious, namely that these things are demonic. Who would want to reassure people that everything is swell and they are definitely going to Heaven and don’t need to repent and believe?

—

The Post Resurrection Behavior of Jesus Eliminates the Possibility of an Imposter – a good refutation of a false theory about the resurrection.

—

The Atlanta Public School cheating scandal was immense in its breadth and duration, not to mention its recklessness.  This shouldn’t be a surprise, though.  Unionized bureaucrats and teachers rarely have the interests of the children at heart.  It is one more reason the “No Child Left Behind” and all other Federal initiatives are doomed to cause more problems than they solve.  Education funding and incentives should be as local as possible.  Federal initiatives are a waste that just lead to more corruption like this.

Fulton County prosecutors announced that a grand jury had indicted the Atlanta Public Schools’ ex-superintendent and nearly three dozen other former administrators, teachers, principals and other educators of charges arising from a standardized test cheating scandal that rocked the system.

Former Superintendent Beverly Hall faces charges including conspiracy, making false statements and theft because prosecutors said some of the bonuses she received were tied to falsified scores. Hall retired just days before the findings of a state probe were released in mid-2011. A nationally known educator who was named Superintendent of the Year in 2009, Hall has long denied knowing about the cheating or ordering it.

During a news conference Friday, Howard highlighted the case of Juwanna and another student, saying they demonstrated “the plight of many children” in the Atlanta school system.

Their stories were among many that investigators heard in hundreds of interviews with school administrators, staff, parents and students during a 21-month-long investigation.

—

Hmm. Turns out Karl Marx was just as smelly and personally useless as his modern-day acolytes!  The NY Times is honest about what Marx is like but doesn’t seem to get the current correlation:

The Karl Marx depicted in Jonathan Sperber’s absorbing, meticulously researched biography will be unnervingly familiar to anyone who has had even the most fleeting acquaintance with radical politics. Here is a man never more passionate than when attacking his own side, saddled with perennial money problems and still reliant on his parents for cash, constantly plotting new, world-changing ventures yet having trouble with both deadlines and personal hygiene, living in rooms that some might call bohemian, others plain “slummy,” and who can be maddeningly inconsistent when not lapsing into elaborate flights of theory and unintelligible abstraction.

Still, it comes as a shock to realize that the ultimate leftist, the father of Communism itself, fits a recognizable pattern.

—

Global warming: Still a hoax.  And the notion that it was man-caused was a bigger hoax.

—

Socialized Medicine: Money for Fake Boobs as Patients Starve – The title says it all, but it left out the part about gender-reassignment surgery (i.e., self-mutilation) being covered as well:

Why are capitalist countries wealthy and socialist countries poor? Because the free market allocates resources more wisely than bureaucrats. This is how healthcare resources are allocated under Britain’s regime of socialized medicine:

Britain’s National Health Service, the NHS, recently spent £4,800 — about $7,200 — on enormous breast implants for an aspiring model while nearly 1,200 patients starved to death in hospitals over the past four years. Critics say the deaths were caused by neglect due to understaffing.

The NHS provided Josie Cunningham with 36DD implants in January after she told her doctor that being flat-chested was causing emotional distress.

It gets worse:

In addition to the breast implants, the NHS has also spent £25,000 — about $37,000 — on a sex-change operation for a 19-year-old male diagnosed with “gender identity disorder.”

—

Wow, check out the anti-gay hate speech from all of these . . . Democrats?!?!  Not shocking at all, really.  And not hate speech, of course.  They just said whatever would optimize their votes, just like most Republicans do.  But their words at the were true, even if they didn’t believe them.  They have no substantive reasons for their change other than public opinion.

—

Child’s complaints of sexual abuse by gay couple were ignored by social workers – political correctness yields many victims.

—

University Compares Pro-Life Students to White Supremacists – But of course!  Abortions kill blacks at a rate 3 times that of whites, and the taxpayer-funded abortion portion of the Democrats’ platform will increase that, so of course the pro-choicers are like white supremacists or worse.  Oh, wait, what’s that? They said the pro-lifers were like the supremacists?!?!  Wow.

—

Abortion kills unwanted innocent but human beings.  It is a scientific fact and basic common sense that a new human being is created at fertilization.  So if someone calls you anti-abortion, don’t get defensive.  Embrace it!  Would you apologize for being anti-slavery?