Twitter Follow Me

Transparency and Freedom

Transparency keeps you from being experimented on without your knowledge, and freedom gives you the power to make that transparency happen.

透明性可讓你避免不知不覺作為百老鼠,在沒有知識的情況下進行試驗,而自由賦予你實現透明性的能力。

You can refuse to be injected with something until it is transparent enough to your liking for you to feel comfortable making a decision on it, AND it is a good enough product to persuade you to use it of your own free will.

您可以拒絕注射某種東西,直到它透明到度足以讓你滿意地做出決定為止,並且它的品質是足夠好的,它是足夠好的產品能說服你隨意使用它。

When something is mandatory, when it is forced on you, it doesn't have to be good enough to win you over and pass your consent. I suspect that is true of almost everything in life. Think about that the next time you want the government to make a law about something.

當某些事情是強制性的時後,當它強強波你的時候,它不需要足以討你的喜悅而獲得您的同意。 我想生活的幾乎都是如此。 下次您想讓政府對某事制定法律的時時,請考慮一下。

Chinese Translation of the article “MEDICAL HORROR: Genetic sequencing of common vaccine finds entire male human genome from aborted human baby”

Following is a very rough translation of the article I mentioned in my last post Vaccines and Public School Are Being Made Harder To Ignore, For The Christian At Least I pretty much just used Google Translate. If you want to help fix any particular paragraph, put the English paragraph along with your preferred translation in a comment. I won't publish the comment but I will see it and change the article.

以下是我在上一篇提到的文章的非常粗略的翻譯只少對於基督徒來說,疫苗和公立學校正變得越來越難以忽視我幾乎只用Google翻譯。 如果要幫助修復任何的段落,請把你要改的英文段落和你修復的中文翻譯一起留言。 我不會破那言,可是我會看到,而拿來改文章。

You can read the original article in English by clicking on the title below:


你可以單擊以下標題來讀英文原文:

MEDICAL HORROR: Genetic sequencing of common vaccine finds entire male human genome from aborted human baby… “a complete individual genome” with abnormal, modified genes… 560 genes linked to cancer
Friday, October 04, 2019 by: Mike Adams

醫學恐怖:普通疫苗的基因測序從墮台的人類嬰兒中發現整個男性人類基因組… “一個完整的個體基因組”,具有異常,修飾的基因……與癌症相關的560個基因
作者:Mike Adams 星期五,10月4號



Vaccines are routinely formulated with aborted human fetal cells known as MRC-5 and WI-38. The CDC openly lists some of the vaccines that use these “human diploid” cells, including Twinrix (Hep A / Hep B), ProQuad (MMRV) and Varivax (Varicella / chicken pox). FDA-published vaccine insert sheets such as this one for Varivax also openly admit to the use of aborted human fetal cell lines such as MRC-5:

疫苗通常與被墮台的人類胎兒細胞一起配製,這些細胞被稱為MRC-5和WI-38。 CDC公開列出了一些使用這些“人類二倍體”細胞的疫苗,包括Twinrix(肝炎 A / 肝炎 B),ProQuad(MMRV)和Varivax(水痘/水痘)。 FDA發布的疫苗插頁(例如這個Varivax的插頁)也公開承認使用墮胎的人類胎兒細胞系(例如MRC-5):

The product also contains residual components of MRC-5 cells including DNA and protein and trace quantities of neomycin and bovine calf serum from MRC-5 culture media.

該產品還含有MRC-5細胞的殘留成分,包括DNA和蛋白質以及來自MRC-5培養基的痕量新黴素和牛犢血清。


Even this GlaxoSmithKline vaccine insert sheet openly discusses the use of aborted human fetal cells in its Priorix-Tetra vaccine (MMRV):

甚至這份葛蘭素史克疫苗插頁也公開討論了墮胎的人類胎兒細胞在其Priorix-Tetra疫苗(MMRV)中的使用:

Each virus strain is separately produced in either chick embryo cells (mumps and measles) or MRC5 human diploid cells (rubella and varicella).

每種病毒株分別在雛雞胚胎細胞(腮腺炎和麻疹)或MRC5人二倍體細胞(風疹和水痘)中產生。

Yet, amazingly, almost no member of the public is aware that aborted human fetal cells are routinely used in vaccines. The lying fake news media insists such talk is a “conspiracy theory,” even as the CDC, FDA and vaccine manufacturers openly declare the ingredient is being used in numerous vaccines. (See Vaccines.news for daily coverage of breaking news on vaccines.)

然而,令人驚訝的是,幾乎沒有公眾知道墮台的人類胎兒細胞通常用於疫苗。 虛假的虛假新聞媒體堅稱,這種說法是“陰謀論”,即使CDC,FDA和疫苗生產商公開宣稱該成分已用於多種疫苗中。 (有關疫苗最新新聞的每日報導,請參閱Vaccines.news。)

Now, a laboratory in Italy has carried out a complete genome sequencing of this MRC-5 cell line that’s deliberately inserted into multiple vaccines. What they’ve found is beyond shocking… it’s horrifying. As explained by Children’s Health Defense:

現在,意大利的一家實驗室已對這被故意插入多種疫苗中的MRC-5細胞系進行了完整的基因組測序。 他們發現的一切令人震驚。 如兒童健康防禦部門所解釋:

The Corvelva team summarized their findings as follows:

Corvelva團隊將其發現總結如下:

1- The fetal cell line was found to belong to a male fetus.

1-發現胎兒細胞係屬於男性胎兒。

2- The cell line presents itself in such a way that it is likely to be very old, thus consistent with the declared line of the 1960s.

2-細胞係可能以很老的方式出現,因此與1960年代宣稱的細胞系一致。

3- The fetal human DNA represented in this vaccine is a complete individual genome, that is, the genomic DNA of all the chromosomes of an individual is present in the vaccine.

3-該疫苗中所代表的胎兒人類DNA是完整的個體基因組,也就是說,疫苗中存在個體所有染色體的基因組DNA。

4- The human genomic DNA contained in this vaccine is clearly, undoubtedly abnormal, presenting important inconsistencies with a typical human genome, that is, with that of a healthy individual.

4-該疫苗中所含的人類基因組DNA無疑是異常的,與典型的人類基因組,即與健康個體的基因組存在重要的不一致之處。

5- 560 genes known to be associated with forms of cancer were tested and all underwent major modifications.

5-測試了已知與癌症形式相關的560個基因,所有基因均進行了重大修飾。

6- There are variations whose consequences are not even known, not yet appearing in the literature, but which still affect genes involved in the induction of human cancer.

6-有些變異的後果甚至是未知的,尚未在文獻中出現,但仍會影響誘導人類癌症的基因。

7- What is also clearly abnormal is the genome excess showing changes in the number of copies and structural variants.

7-顯然也異常的是基因組過量,顯示拷貝數和結構變異的變化。


560 cancer genes, abnormal DNA, genetic “modification” of potentially hazardous genes, yet mandated to be injected into every child

560個癌症基因,異常DNA,潛在危險基因的遺傳“修飾”,但仍被強制注入每個孩子

What’s clear from this genetic sequencing is that the vaccine industry is inoculating children with engineered cancer. As CHD explains, the vaccines are deliberately formulated with cancer-causing genes which have been specifically modified to promote cancer tumors:

從這種基因測序中可以清楚地看出,疫苗行業正在給兒童接種基改癌症的疫苗。正如CHD所解釋的那樣,疫苗是故意與致癌基因一起配製的,這些基因已經過專門修飾以促進癌症。

[I]nside the vaccines that have been administered for decades is the presence of a progressively more genetically modified DNA and uncontrolled quantities has been allowed…

在已經使用了數十年的疫苗中,存在著越來越多的基因修飾的DNA,並且允許不受控制的數量...

…[T]he DNA contained in these vaccines is potentially TUMORIGENIC and that the guidelines to which the supervisory bodies are appealing are NOT ADEQUATE. Moreover, we are publicly denouncing a SERIOUS OMISSION in taking those PRECAUTIONAL measures which, on the other hand, are urgently requested for antacid drugs.

……這些疫苗中所含的DNA可能具有致癌性,並且監管機構所呼籲的指導方針還不夠。 此外,我們公開譴責採取嚴重預防措施,而另一方面,這些預防措施已經被制酸藥緊急的要求。


Not only is this cancer-ridden genetic code inserted into all these vaccines given to children, but the dose of the cancer-infected DNA is dangerously high. As CHD explains:

不僅將這種充滿癌症的遺傳密碼插入所有給兒童的疫苗中,而且被癌症感染的DNA的劑量也非常高。 如CHD所述:

…[T]he contaminant fetal DNA present in all samples analyzed in varying quantities (thus uncontrolled) is up to 300 times higher than the limit imposed by the EMA for carcinogenic DNA (10 ng/dose, corresponding to DNA contained in approximately 1000 tumor cells, derived from a statistical calculation, while the precautionary limit is 10 pg/dose), a limit that must also be applied to MRC-5 fetal DNA which inevitably contaminates Priorix tetra.

…存在於所有分析樣品中的胎兒DNA污染物的數量不同(因此不受控制),比EMA對致癌DNA的限制高10倍(10 ng /劑量,對應於約1000個腫瘤細胞中所含的DNA), 統計計算,而預防極限為10 pg /劑量),該極限也必須適用於不可避免地污染Priorix tetra的MRC-5胎兒DNA。


“Modifications” of genes associated with cancer tumors

與癌症腫瘤相關的基因的“修飾”

The genome sequencing also found that hundreds of genes linked to cancer tumors have been modified. As explained by the study authors:

基因組測序還發現與癌症腫瘤相關的數百個基因已被修飾。 正如研究作者所解釋的:

…[I]mportant modifications of genes known to be associated with various tumor forms have been identified, for all the 560 verified genes; furthermore, there are variants whose consequences are not known, but which, however, affects genes involved in the induction of human cancer.

……對於所有560個經過驗證的基因,已經確定了已知與各種腫瘤形式相關的基因的重要修飾; 此外,還有一些變種,其後果未知,但是會影響與人類癌症誘導有關的基因。


This indicates that the MRC-5 aborted human fetal cells appear to have been deliberately modified to make them more tumorigenic… i.e. more likely to cause cancer tumors in human recipients of the vaccine injections.

這表明MRC-5墮台的人類胎兒細胞似乎經過了故意修飾,使其更具致癌性,即在疫苗注射的人類接受者中更可能引起癌症。

This would, of course, ensure long-term revenues from the cancer drugs that are also manufactured and sold by the same pharmaceutical giants that manufacture and market vaccines. Repeat business, after all, is a very lucrative business model, and if you can lace vaccines with the genetic blueprints for long-term cancer, you can make sure that a very high percentage of today’s children are eventually diagnosed with cancer, after which they become lucrative customers for Big Pharma’s cancer drugs.

當然,這將確保從製造和銷售疫苗的同一家製藥巨頭也生產和銷售的抗癌藥物中獲得長期收益。 畢竟,重複業務是一種非常有利可圖的業務模式,如果您可以將疫苗與長期癌症的基因藍圖結合在一起,則可以確保當今有很高比例的兒童最終被診斷出患有癌症,之後他們 成為Big Pharma癌症藥物的豐厚客戶。

The genome sequencing of the MRC-5 “human diploid” cells used in vaccines is even described by researchers as, “anomalous” when compared to a healthy human being. From the study’s conclusion:

與健康人相比,研究人員甚至將疫苗中使用的MRC-5“人二倍體”細胞的基因組測序描述為“異常”。 根據研究結論:

The human genomic DNA contained in the Priorix lot vaccine. n. A71CB256A is evidently anomalous, presenting important inconsistencies if compared to a typical human genome, i.e. the one of a healthy human being. There are several unknown variants (not noted in public databases) and some of them are located in genes involved in cancer. What is also apparently anomalous, is the excess of genome that shows changes in the number of copies (CNV) and structural variants (SV), such as translocations, insertions, deletions, duplications and inversions, many of which involve genes.

Priorix批次A71CB256A疫苗中包含的人類基因組DNA。顯然是異常的,與典型的人類基因組(即健康人類之一)相比,存在著重要的不一致之處。 有幾種未知的變體(在公共數據庫中未註明),其中一些位於與癌症有關的基因中。 顯然也異常的是,基因組過多,顯示出拷貝數(CNV)和結構變異體(SV)的變化,例如易位,插入,缺失,重複和倒置,其中許多涉及基因。


This conclusion appears to confirm that MRC-5 cell lines used in vaccines have been genetically modified to make them more likely to cause cancer in vaccine recipients. Subsequently, vaccine mandates are actually forcing children to be injected with cancer genes so that they become future customers of Big Pharma’s for-profit cancer treatment “solutions” which are incredibly toxic to human health.

該結論似乎證實了疫苗中使用的MRC-5細胞系已經過基因修飾,使它們更有可能在疫苗接種者中引起癌症。 隨後,疫苗法規實際上迫使兒童注射癌症基因,以便他們成為Big Pharma營利性癌症治療“解決方案”的未來客戶,該解決方案對人體健康具有極大的毒性。

Human children, in other words, are being injected with the genetically modified DNA of another aborted human child in order to cause cancer on a nationwide scale, all to benefit the bottom line of the pharmaceutical industry that pushes total censorship about any criticism of vaccines or vaccine ingredients.

換句話說,正在給人類兒童注射另一個墮台的人類兒童的基因修飾的DNA,以在全國范圍內引發癌症,這一切都有利於製藥業的底線,從而推動對疫苗或疫苗的任何批評的全面審查 疫苗成分。

“Defective” vaccines that are “potentially dangerous to human health”

“對人體健康潛在危險”的“缺陷”疫苗


The upshot is that these vaccines which are deliberately contaminated with abnormal, cancer-infested human genes are “defective,” according to an analysis by CHD:

根據CHD的一項分析,結果是這些疫苗被故意感染了異常且受癌症侵擾的人類基因污染的疫苗具有“缺陷性”:

As a consequence, this vaccine should be considered defective and potentially dangerous to human health, in particular to the pediatric population which is much more vulnerable to genetic and autoimmune damage.

結果,該疫苗應被認為是有缺陷的,並且可能對人類健康,特別是對更容易受到基因和自身免疫損害的小兒科人群危害。


Watch this shocking video summary… a more detailed long-form video is coming next week

Here’s a summary of these findings, in a short video that will be expanded next week into a full lecture.

觀看這個令人震驚的視頻摘要…下週將有更詳細的長視頻

以下是這些發現的摘要,該視頻將在下週擴展為完整的講座。

https://www.brighteon.com/034ebfcb-5bf8-4bcf-abf2-ee106a2eecba

Vaccines and Public School Are Being Made Harder To Ignore, For The Christian At Least

The news that prompted this article:
提示本文的新聞:

MEDICAL HORROR: Genetic Sequencing of Common Vaccine Finds Entire Male Human Genome From Aborted Human Baby… “A complete individual genome” with abnormal, modified genes… 560 genes linked to cancer [Very rough translation in Chinese here.]

醫學恐怖:普通疫苗的基因測序從墮台的人類嬰兒中發現整個男性人類基因組……“一個完整的個體基因組”,具有異常,修飾的基因……與癌症相關的560個基因 [看粗略翻譯的中文版的原文章這裡]

So ironic. If you are going to take the easy way out and send your kids into the public school system instead of giving them a more eclectic education, if you are going to defer to the present default and just hope to help your children process it by talking about it in the crumbs of time left to you at home, between their smartphone and their homework, then ironically, the natural degradation of society produced by a godless system will eventually bring things to such a head that you have to take them out anyway.

好諷刺。你如果依賴簡便的方法,送孩子們去公里學校系統,而不是給他們一個比較折衷的教育;如果您要遵循當前的默認標準,而希望可以透過談論來幫助你的孩子來處理它,在他們的手機和他們的作業之間留給你的時間殘缺不全的情況下,那,諷刺意味的是,這無神系統導致的社會自然退化最終將把事情帶到了頭,以至於無論如何你還必須將孩子們離開系統。

It's hard enough to make a judgment call that vaccines are dangerous enough to risk your children going without them.

已經夠難判斷好疫苗是否夠危險,足以冒著孩子不接種疫苗的風險。

Now with the authorities tying vaccines to public school access your decision will have to include giving up public schooling as well. Are vaccines truly dangerous enough to warrant educating your children a different way if they can't get into public schools without them?

現在,隨著當局將疫苗作為上公立學校的必要條件,你的決定還必須包括是否放棄公立學校。 如果他們沒有疫苗就不能進入公立學校,疫苗是否真的足夠危險足以需要不同的方式教育你的孩子麼?

For most people this is the end of any further consideration of vaccine safety. Public school is so engrained in the public consciousness that people think they would be handicapping their children with a second-rate education if they homeschooled, not to mention they've never done it before, and maybe even never heard of it before. Perhaps they are relieved to find the vaccine decision so seemingly taken out of their hands.

對於大多數人來說,這是疫苗安全性進一步考慮的終點。 公立學校深深地迷住了公眾意識,以至於人們認為,如果他們讓孩子在家上自學的話,這樣會使他們的孩子受到二次教育的困擾,更不用說他們以前從未做過,經歷過,或聽說過這個家教自學的方式。 也許他們鬆了一口氣,以為從手中拿走了疫苗決定。

However, finding out that vaccines are being made with aborted baby tissue should make the decision a no-brainer, for christians at least, and may end up springing a whole generation of children free of both vaccines and the public school system in one blow, since they are so conveniently tied together now.

但是,如果發現正在用流產的嬰兒組織製成的疫苗,至少應該對基督徒來說,這個決定不費吹灰之力,並且可能最終導致一整代的孩子都可以一目了然地擺脫疫苗和公立學校的系統中,因為它們現在是如此方便地捆綁在一起。

But for the christian who finds himself tempted to compromise even with baby murder so that he doesn't have to leave his comfort zone, there is now one further consideration, that he will be injecting his children with “cancer-ridden genetic code”:

但是對於那些發現自己即使在嬰兒謀殺中也很願意妥協,從而不必離開舒適區的基督徒來說,現在還有多一個考慮,他將為他的孩子注入“癌症纏身的遺傳密碼”:

MEDICAL HORROR: Genetic Sequencing of Common Vaccine Finds Entire Male Human Genome From Aborted Human Baby… “A complete individual genome” with abnormal, modified genes… 560 genes linked to cancer

醫學恐怖:普通疫苗的基因測序從墮台的人類嬰兒中發現整個男性人類基因組……“一個完整的個體基因組”,具有異常,修飾的基因……與癌症相關的560個基因

Never heard of homeschooling? Here is how one busy father did it: 從未聽說過自學嗎?這是一個忙碌的父親的做法:

Robinson Curriculum

More news that prompted this article:
更多提示本文的新聞:


* In An Era Of Mandated Vaccination, Pediatricians Don’t Always Vaccinate Their Own Children According To CDC Guidelines

* Forced Vaccination

Edward Snowden's book Permanent Record came out last week.

You can also get it for free here or here.

Book blurb:

“Edward Snowden, the man who risked everything to expose the US government’s system of mass surveillance, reveals for the first time the story of his life, including how he helped to build that system and what motivated him to try to bring it down.

In 2013, twenty-nine-year-old Edward Snowden shocked the world when he broke with the American intelligence establishment and revealed that the United States government was secretly pursuing the means to collect every single phone call, text message, and email. The result would be an unprecedented system of mass surveillance with the ability to pry into the private lives of every person on earth. Six years later, Snowden reveals for the very first time how he helped to build this system and why he was moved to expose it.

Spanning the bucolic Beltway suburbs of his childhood and the clandestine CIA and NSA postings of his adulthood,Permanent Recordis the extraordinary account of a bright young man who grew up online—a man who became a spy, a whistleblower, and, in exile, the Internet’s conscience. Written with wit, grace, passion, and an unflinching candor, Permanent Record is a crucial memoir of our digital age and destined to be a classic.”

Learn English with the Gospel of John movie
用約翰福音的影片學英文

This first video is the Gospel of John movie with English subtitles. 這是有英文字幕的約翰福音影片。



This second video is part 1 of the same movie with Chinese subtitles (you have to turn on the Chinese subtitles in the settings.) You can find part 2-20 on Youtube. 這有中文字幕的約翰福音影片的第1部(要安CC選中文字幕)。Youtube 有2到20部。

To learn English 為了學英文:

Open the Chinese version in one browser tab, and the English version in another tab. Listen to one sentence in the Chinese version, then hit pause and listen to the same sentence in the version with English subtitles.可以用一個瀏覽器分頁打開有中文字幕的影片。用第二個分頁看有英文字幕的影片。聽中文版的第一句,或幾句,就換英文版跟著說。

This is my favorite Jesus movie because it's word-for-word what is in the Bible. Very powerful. 這是我最喜歡的耶穌影片,因為是一句一句跟從聖經所寫的,就很有力量。

A Cappella “Lamb of God” and “Awesome God” with lyrics

Artist: Keith Lancaster & The Acappella Company
Album: Awesome God: A Cappella Worship Christian & Gospel

Lyrics:
Your only Son, no sin to hide
But You have sent Him from your side
To walk upon this guilty sod
And to become the Lamb of God

Chorus:
O Lamb of God (Lamb of God)
Sweet Lamb of God (Sweet Lamb of God)
I love the Holy Lamb of God (Holy Lamb of God)
O wash me in His precious blood (wash me in His precious blood)
My Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God

Your gift of love they crucified
They laughed and scorned Him as He died
The humble King they named a fraud
And sacrificed the Lamb of God

Repeat Chorus

I was so lost I should have died
But You have brought me to Your side
To be led by Your staff and rod
And to be called the Lamb of God

Repeat Chorus (x2)

O wash me in His precious blood (wash me in His precious blood)
My Jesus Christ the Lamb of God

Scriptural Reference:
"The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said 'Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!'" John 1:29


Artist: Keith Lancaster & The Acappella Company
Album: Awesome God: A Cappella Worship Christian & Gospel

Lyrics:
Bass:
God is an awesome God
He reigns from heaven above
With wisdom power and love
Our God is an awesome God

Soprano, Alto, and Tenor (come in one round at a time, with each part continuing):
Our God is awesome
He reigns from heaven
With power and wisdom
Our God is an awesome God

Chorus (with four parts in background):
Our God is an awesome God
He reigns from heaven above
With wisdom power and love
Our God is an awesome God

Now when He rolled up His sleeves He wasn't putting on the ritz
Our God is an awesome God
There's thunder in his foot steps and lightning in His fists
Our God is an awesome God
And the Lord wasn't jokin' when He kicked 'em out of Eden
It wasn't for no reason that He shed His blood
His return is very soon and so ya'll better be believin'
Our God is an awesome God

Stepout (with four parts in background):
Yes we know that He's awesome
And He reigns with power and wisdom

Repeat Stepout

Now when the sky was starless in the void of the night
Our God is an awesome God
He spoke unto the darkness and created the light
Our God is an awesome God
The judgment and wrath He poured out on Sodom
His mercy and grace He gave us at the cross
I hope that we have not to quickly forgotten that
Our God is an awesome God

Repeat Stepout (x2)

Repeat Chorus (in unison)

Repeat Stepout (x2)

Our God is an awesome God
Our God is an awesome God
Our God is an awesome God

Scriptural Reference:
"Do not be terrified by them, for the Lord your God, who is among you, is a great and awesome God." Deuteronomy 7:21

Bill Nye/Ken Ham Debate Review: Tying Up Really Loose Ends

Have You Considered This Evidence?
"Tying Up Really Loose Ends" - The Bill Nye/Ken Ham Debate Review by Jeff Miller

I've been using the high school level Truth Be Told textbook with Bible students to address the creation versus evolution issue. But I found something even better to read with college level friends. And if you know of something that tops even that, please let me know in the comments.

Click here to jump straight to the whole article, so interesting you will read all the way to the end. Or keep scrolling to read the first few paragraphs.


Bill Nye/Ken Ham Debate Review: Tying Up Really Loose Ends

by  Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: Many have inquired about our thoughts on the Bill Nye/Ken Ham debate that took place on February 4th in Petersburg, Kentucky. Of course, we strongly disagree with Bill Nye’s contention that evolution is a viable model of origins, and wholeheartedly agree with Ken Ham’s proposition that Creation is a viable model of origins. However, we were disappointed in creationist Ken Ham’s decision to allow so many of Bill Nye’s questions and comments to go unanswered, thus leaving the impression that Nye’s points have merit or are unanswerable. In light of so many evidences, undeniable truths, and critical responses that were not brought to light that evening, I asked A.P. staff scientist, Dr. Jeff Miller, to prepare a response to Bill Nye’s assertions. These three men of science are certainly qualified to discuss these matters: Ham received a bachelor’s degree in applied science from the Queensland Institute of Technology in Australia and a diploma of education from the University of Queensland. Nye received a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Cornell University. Dr. Miller holds a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Auburn University.]

In the debate on February 4, 2014, which is said to have been viewed by over three million people Tuesday night, and another two million plus on Wednesday (“Over Three Million Tuned In...,” 2014), Answers in Genesis creationist Ken Ham squared off against Bill Nye (known to many of us as “The Science Guy”). Nye challenged Ham with several questions which he believed to be pertinent to the Creation/evolution controversy (Nye and Ham, 2014). The debate topic centered on whether or not Creation is a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era. Without dragging the reader through a play-by-play analysis of the entire debate, we believe several of Nye’s questions and comments that were not addressed in the debate are worthy of attention. [NOTE: Ironically, although Ken Ham did not respond to several of Nye’s points, the Answers in Genesis Web site is replete with solid responses to the bulk of Nye’s arguments, as the references in this article will attest.]

Nye’s Defense of Naturalistic Evolution

First, we wish to highlight the fact that Nye inadvertently revealed some of the weaknesses and even impenetrable barriers that prohibit the naturalistic evolutionary model from being true. Keep in mind that, regardless of the legitimacy of any attacks on the Creation model, if naturalism contradicts the evidence, then the evidence remains in support of some form of supernaturalism. In truth, however, the evidence supports the Creation model.

Evolution is a Historical Science

While Ham did not adequately address many of Nye’s points, Nye was eloquently treated to a lesson on the difference between observational and historical science, proving that naturalistic evolution and origin studies fall under the historical science category. Nye was unable to refute this claim. Nobody has ever observed macroevolution (i.e., inter-kind evolution), abiogenesis (i.e., life from non-life), the spontaneous generation of natural laws (i.e., scientific laws that write themselves), a cause-less effect, or the spontaneous generation or eternality of matter—all of which are necessary under the evolutionary model. This lack of observation proves that evolution does not fall under the definition of science, as stated by the National Academy of Sciences: “The statements of science must invoke only natural things and processes. The statements of science are those that emerge from the application of human intelligence to data obtained from observation and experiment” (Teaching About Evolution…, 1998, p. 42, emp. added). Evolutionists are notorious for reasoning that the Creation model should not be taught in schools since it cannot be observed and, therefore, is not “science,” based on the naturalistic definition of the term. The fact that naturalistic evolution is also unobservable highlights that evolutionary theory is “faith-based” in the sense that direct evidence is lacking for several of its fundamental tenets. Instead of refuting that argument, Nye’s response was, “Mr. Ham, I learned something. Thank you.” Our response: if you do not have an adequate response to that argument, and if Creation does not belong in the science classroom because many of its fundamental tenets were not observed, then evolution does not belong in the classroom either.

In truth, whichever model is the best inference from the evidence should be the one used in the classroom, even if all of its tenets were not necessarily “observed”: Creation or evolution (or some other model). There is, however, a fundamental difference between Creation and evolution. The evidence actually stands against naturalism, since we know from science, for example, that abiogenesis and the origin of matter/energy from nothing (or the eternality of matter) cannot happen naturally. Those phenomena are required by naturalism. One cannot be a naturalist and yet believe in unnatural things like such phenomena without contradicting himself. The component logical fallacy called contradictory premises (or a logical paradox) occurs when one establishes “a premise in such a way that it contradicts another, earlier premise” (Wheeler, 2014). For example:

  • Premise One—Evolution is a naturalistic origin model.
  • Premise Two—Evolution requires abiogenesis and other unnatural phenomena.

If evolution is purely naturalistic, can it involve unnatural phenomena and still be consistent?

On the other hand, though the creation of the Universe and the Flood cannot be observed today, the evidence points to their historical reality indirectly. In the same way forensic scientists can enter a scene, gather evidence, and determine what happened, when it happened, how it happened, who did it, and many times, why he did it—all without actually witnessing the event—humans can examine the evidence and conclude that the Universe was created. Bottom line: it is clear, regardless of the model you choose, that something happened in the beginning that was unnatural, or as Nye insinuated, “magical.” How is Creation far-fetched, as the naturalists believe, in comparison to a model that espouses magic—with no magician?

Flawed Evolutionary Dating Techniques

Conflicting Dates from a Fossilized Forest

When the research of geologist Andrew Snelling was discussed as proof that uniformitarian dating techniques are fundamentally flawed, Nye was not able to offer an adequate response. In the research, fossilized wood from deep within the Earth under Australia was carbon dated to be about 37,500 years old, while the basalt rock encompassing the wood was dated using the K-Ar method to be some 47.5 million years old (2000), though both the rock and the wood should have been the same age. [NOTE: Carbon dating is used to date organic materials, while the K-Ar method and others are used to date inorganic materials (rocks).] Nye’s attempt to explain the problem using plate tectonics was quickly refuted by Ham when he pointed out that the basalt was not above the forest, but was encompassing the forest. Nye did not respond. Snelling’s research stands as evidence against the validity of evolutionary dating techniques which Nye could not refute. The Creation model has no problem with this research, since it does not rely on uniformitarian dating techniques. [NOTE: Uniformitarianism is the evolutionary assumption that “events of the geologic past can be explained by phenomena observable today” (McGraw-Hill Dictionary..., 2003, p. 2224). Creationists believe that catastrophism is a better model for interpreting the geologic column. Catastrophism is the idea that most “features in the Earth were produced by occurrence of sudden, short-lived, worldwide events” (McGraw-Hill..., p. 342).]

Assumptions and Evolution

Nye claimed that we can know with certainty the age of the Universe based on the present. The problem with that argument for the naturalist is that since no one was there at the beginning to observe what happened or when it happened, no naturalist can actually know, as Nye claimed. Instead, assumptions have to be made by the naturalist in order to try to surmise what may have happened—namely that conditions today were also present in the past (i.e., uniformitarianism). That is quite a presumptuous assumption to be sure. Creationists argue that assumptions such as uniformitarianism and those of radiometric dating techniques are faulty and disprove the validity of those techniques (e.g., Miller, 2013a; Morris, 2011, pp. 48-71). In response, Nye said:

When people make assumptions based on radiometric dating; when they make assumptions about the expanding Universe; when they make assumptions about the rate at which genes change in populations of bacteria in laboratory growth media; they’re making assumptions based on previous experience. They’re not coming out of whole cloth.

First, we find it ironic that Nye so strongly supports evolutionary assumptions, arguing that they are valid because they are based on “previous experience.” Nobody has ever observed macroevolution, abiogenesis, the spontaneous generation of natural laws, a cause-less effect, or the spontaneous generation or eternality of matter, and yet these absurd notions are assumed under the evolutionary model. In the debate, Nye even verbally admitted that the evolutionary model has no explanation for how consciousness could come from matter. He said, “Don’t know. This is a great mystery.” In truth, of course he cannot know, because the evidence from nature says that it cannot happen naturally. His evolutionary model prohibits it (Miller, 2012b), and yet he ignores that evidence. Concerning the origin of matter, he also admitted, “This is the great mystery. You’ve hit the nail on the head…. What was before the Big Bang? This is what drives us. This is what we wanna know!” Again, the naturalistic model prohibits the eternality or spontaneous generation of matter (Miller, 2013b), though one of them had to happen under the naturalistic model. So of course it’s “a great mystery” how it could happen. In truth, it cannot happen naturally. Nature has spoken, and yet Nye and his colleagues reject the evidence in favor of their closed-minded bias towards naturalism.

These are significant questions that evolution cannot answer and that cannot be brushed aside as he attempted to do. They must be answered by the naturalist before naturalistic evolution can even be a possibility—before it should even be allowed to be taught. Without a legitimate explanation, evolution is no different from a fictional story. Life had to come from non-life naturally in the evolutionary model, and matter had to come from somewhere, and yet the evolutionist ignores those problems as though they are irrelevant and assumes there’s a naturalistic explanation for them without any evidence substantiating that assumption.

In truth, all “previous experience” in science says that none of those things (i.e., macroevolution, abiogenesis, the spontaneous generation of natural laws, a cause-less effect, or the spontaneous generation or eternality of matter) can happen. The questions that Nye and his colleagues consider “a mystery” are not really mysteries. Science has spoken on those matters and concluded that they are impossible under the naturalistic model. There are scientific laws which prove that truth (see Miller, 2013c). Accepting those things as possible flies in the face of the scientific evidence and is tantamount to a blind faith in evolution. Evolution is a fideistic religion that ignores the evidence. It has no foundation, since the evidence contradicts its foundational premises. The Creation model, on the other hand, has no problem with the evidence. The Creation model harmonizes with the evidence on all counts and only disagrees with the evolutionary interpretation of the evidence.

That said, we have no problem with the idea that present observations can be useful today and even useful in some ways for the past—but within careful limits. If it is true that, for example, the nuclear decay rates are not a simple constant, but instead are variable, depending upon environmental conditions which could have been significantly different in the past due to catastrophic events like the Flood, then it would be naïve and erroneous to make age estimates of any rock without considering the possibility of such fluctuations.
“[M]aking assumptions based on previous experience” would be incorrect since that “previous experience” did not include the Flood.

In his book, The Young Earth, Creation geologist John Morris documents modern research which casts serious doubt on several of the assumptions of evolutionary dating techniques, especially the assumption of constant nuclear decay rates (2011; see also DeYoung, 2005). For example, research by a team of scientists (known as RATE) that was presented at the International Conference on Creationism in 2003, indicates that the nuclear decay rates have not always been constant (Humphreys, et al., 2003). The RATE team had several zircon crystals dated by expert evolutionists using the uranium-lead evolutionary dating technique and found them to be 1.5 billion years old, assuming a constant decay rate. A by-product of the breakdown of uranium into lead is helium. Content analysis of the crystals revealed that large amounts of helium were found to be present. However, if the crystals were as old as the dating techniques suggested, there should have been no trace of helium left, since helium atoms are known to be tiny, light, unreactive, and able to easily escape from the spaces within the crystal structure. The presence of helium and carbon-14 showed that the rocks were actually much younger (4,000 to 14,000 years old) than the dating techniques alleged. Since these zircons were taken from the Precambrian basement granite in the Earth, an implication of the find is that the whole Earth could be no older than 4,000 to 14,000 years old. The results of the crystal dating indicate that 1.5 billion years’ worth of radioactive decay, based on the uniformitarian constant decay rate assumption, occurred in only a few thousand years. How could such a thing be possible? How can the two dating techniques be reconciled? By understanding that the rate of decay of uranium into lead must have been different—much higher—in the past. This research simply cannot be ignored by any serious, honest scientist. If the Creation model is true, then modern, historical science should be reconsidered and completely revised.

Concerning the creationist stance that nuclear decay rates were different in the past, Nye further said:

So this idea, that you can separate the natural laws of the past from the natural laws that we have now, I think, is at the heart of our disagreement. I don’t, I don’t see how we’re ever going to agree with that if you insist that natural laws have changed. It’s, for lack of a better word, it’s magical. And I have appreciated magic since I was a kid, but it’s not really what we want in conventional, mainstream science…. I encourage you to explain to us why, why we should accept your word for it that natural law changed just 4,000 years ago. Completely. And there’s no record of it.

First keep in mind that three significant assumptions that underlie dating techniques were mentioned by Ham to Nye, and Nye completely ignored two of them (i.e., that radiometric dating techniques assume a specimen was originally completely composed of a parent element, which would yield incorrect dates if daughter elements were present in a specimen from its creation. Such initial conditions would be predicted in the Creation model. The other assumption he ignored was that the specimen was completely isolated throughout its lifetime, and therefore unaffected by outside phenomena—a closed system. See Miller, 2013a for a discussion on these dating technique assumptions.). We believe they were left completely unanswered because they would be impossible for him to refute.

Second, it should be firmly understood that we would not argue that the natural laws of the past have changed. That, in fact, is a requirement of the evolutionary model, not the Creation model. The Law of Biogenesis, for example, would have to be “changed” in the past in order for naturalistic evolution to get started since all evidence indicates that life comes only from life in nature (Miller, 2012b). The Laws of Thermodynamics would have to be “changed” in the past in order to account for the origin of matter and energy, since all of the scientific evidence indicates that energy cannot be eternal and/or cannot spontaneously generate (Miller, 2013b). The Law of Causality would have to be “changed” in the past in order to account for the Universe not having a cause (Miller, 2011b). It seems that we should be challenging Mr. Nye instead: “I encourage you to explain to us why, why we should accept your word for it that natural law changed billions of years ago. Completely. And there’s no record of it. It’s, for lack of a better word, magical.”

The creationist does not argue that the laws of nature changed in the past regarding decay rates, but rather, that decay is subject to a more complex law or equation than the one being assumed today. If nuclear decay rates fluctuate based on conditions resulting from certain catastrophic events, then if all of those conditions were met today, we would argue that the same results would still occur today. In other words, the “law” for decay rates is still the same today, but is merely misunderstood and needs to be modified to be more robust. It should be able to account for the unusual effects of catastrophic activity before applying it to the past. [NOTE: While the creationist does not argue that scientific laws have ever “changed,” he would argue that laws have been temporarily suspended in the past during God’s supernatural activities (Miller, 2003). The evolutionists, however, are in the unenviable position of having to explain, not only how a law could come into existence, but how it could be re-written without a Writer.]

Energy from the Sun for Evolution

The audience asked Nye the question, “How do you balance the Theory of Evolution with the Second Law of Thermodynamics?...

News Commentary: American Apocalypse - The Government’s Plot To Destabilize the Nation Is Working. Article by John W. Whitehead.

I don't agree with the last sentence of that article. If anything it should read something like “Let the one foot in another country begin.” Did the early Christians join a revolution? No, they scattered, taking the gospel with them. (Acts 8:4)

Want scattering not to be such a hardship? Take baby steps before you have to. Are you retired? Even better. Research how you can volunteer to help teach Bible classes, taking students through a Bible course for instance, in other mission fields around the world for a few months at a time. Enlarge your comfort zone. It'll help stave off dementia. And you might even find that your retirement check goes further in another country.

Want to brush up on your Bible knowledge? Check out http://thebible.net/video/ and WVBS. Even more ambitious? Go to Bible school. That'll really sharpen your brain.

Revolution just gives the government a chance to try out its most horrifying weapons. Keeping enough of your savings out of the country and feeling free to move to wherever freedom is, lets you vote with your feet.

Video: Were the Pyramids Built Before the Flood?

Please! Watch this video first...



... and read what I wrote about it here, before you watch this next video and come to a conclusion on it.

Also, I don't like the 7:35-8:40 segment of the video below. I think it is a distraction from his otherwise tight logic.



Be sure to keep watching after the credits.

Related Posts:
Video: The Genealogy of Jesus Christ (According to Eusebius)
Video: The Curse of Jeconiah

Sunday night, May 19

A sister's father-in-law passed away last week, and six of the brethren in Hualian came down to see the family, and stay the night with us afterward.


Jared and Tracy, and my mom next to her, Brother and Sister Wang (Mei-zhu we call her, but she's not in the picture), and her sister, Sister Mei-Luan, and Sister Liu Ah Yi (Auntie Liu we call her.)


There's Sister Mei-zhu, Brother Wang's wife. Liu Ah Yi is cooking spaghetti for breakfast and Mei-zhu did the sauce.


Brother and Sister Qiu dropped in to see everyone. Once again I take a photo of everybody just as they've got that first bite of food in the mouth. My relatives can commiserate.

Glad to know the gospel meeting flyers I passed out a few months ago had SOME effect!

I was getting ready to leave the market, fishing out the key to my scooter, when a man walked by and said, "YOU'RE far from home!” We got talking about my scooter and scooter prices in general and how long I'd been in Taiwan and how my dad was a preacher and I was embarrassed thinking I ought to know him, and told him I was so sorry, but who was he? and he said, “You passed out a flyer.” He still had our number and address. I said, “Well, drop in and check out our services sometime!” It turns out he goes to the Lin Yang Tang denomination. I told him we try to do only what's in the Bible. Found out he'd been immersed. I told him that was very good. But we didn't have time to talk more.

86 year-old lady at the secondhand store

One thing I like about Taiwan is all the older people out and about and doing things. So many times I wish I had my smartphone camera mounted on my scooter so I could tap the screen at things I see in front of me.

On market street this morning, this 86-year old lady arrived at the secondhand clothing store with her walker/chair and pink clip-on fan. She most likely walked from wherever her house is.



The chair has nice roller wheels and handlebar brakes, with storage under the seat. The lady added a pink battery-operated clip-on fan, and her umbrella is hanging from one handlebar.

Any suggestions as to what I should tag posts about Taiwan's awesome oldsters? Please let me know in the comments.

What happened on Monday


My brother Jared helps teach Bible in Mandarin Chinese

Jared helping to teach Bible in Taiwanese

Jared and Brother Wang baptizing one of the gentlemen.





Folding up the baptistry.


Lunch on Sunday with three generations of the Qiu family :)

Did he ask me if I wanted another 4,425 satellites blocking my sunshine?

Please, the smog is bad enough in Kaohsiung.

Elon Musk posts photo of rocket stacked with 60 satellites that will launch tomorrow in SpaceX bid to beam high-speed internet to the world

The company recently filed plans with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to launch 4,425 satellites into orbit above the Earth - three times as many that are currently in operation.


And what about the rare people who have intense nerve pain anywhere there is good cellphone reception? Will there be no more pockets of dead space for them to move to?

“Musk compared the project to 'rebuilding the internet in space', as it would reduce reliance on the existing network of undersea fibre-optic cables which criss-cross the planet.”


It wasn't blocking the sun down there.

Now it's only one more step to using satellites to block the sun on purpose:

Scientists will copy effects of a huge volcano eruption to fight global warming in £2.3m study

“As part of a £2.3million ($3million) experiment partly-funded by Microsoft’s Bill Gates, a team from Harvard University will spray tiny chalk particles into the atmosphere 12 miles above the Earth to reflect some of the Sun’s rays back into space.”


That was saved under my "there-it-is" tag. Fans of the “Searching for Bobby Fischer” movie will understand.

And now this just yesterday:

Cambridge scientists are building a new research centre to develop radical ways to ‘save the Earth’

“Among such schemes being considered are the spraying of salt into clouds in order to make them reflect more warming sunlight back into space.”


Remember the 5-year Agricultural Plans when the government (I forget which one) thought central planning could feed everybody and they all starved?

Have you seen the movie Idiocracy?

Video: “How Long Were the Israelites in Egypt?”

Some videos make such an impression you remember them often through the years.

Nathan Hoffman has done four videos I think are brilliant, two of which cleared up Bible mysteries for me.

For instance, a few years ago I asked a visiting preacher how Moses' mother could be Levi's daughter Jochebed if the Israelites were in Egypt for 400 years. I forget how I got this number but wouldn't she have to have been at least 250 years old before she bore Moses? And they weren't living that long at that point. Jochebed's great-great-grandfather Abraham died at 175 and it was already a big deal for him to have Isaac at 100. Her uncle Joseph died at 110.

I remember the preacher was in a hurry and simply said that it might have been a different Jochebed, which was not Biblically possible because the Bible says exactly whose aunt she is, which makes her Levi's daughter (see Exodus 6).

To try and fudge that is like saying it wasn't literal 24-hour days in Genesis but millions of years, when the Bible takes the trouble to specifically define each day of the creation week as one evening and one morning.

Nathan Hoffman did a video “How Long Were the Israelites in Egypt?” that has a very Biblically satisfying explanation as to how Moses' mother was definitely Levi's daughter Jochebed. As he demonstrates, there's no getting around the math of the ages of Moses' father, grandfather, and great-grandfather which the Bible took a lot of trouble to put clearly on record as well.



And please remember, the Bible missing a phrase in certain copies and not other copies is normal and not an issue of accuracy and reliability.

Just because SOME of the copies of the old Bible manuscripts are missing the last few verses of Mark doesn't mean the Bible isn't reliable, it just means they used scrolls back then and the ends often frayed off.

And when some of the copies have a whole Bible passage missing between two identical words, it just means that sometimes when the copyist turned his head to dip his quill in the ink pot and then turned back to resume copying, he resumed at the wrong same word a few lines further down.

Does It Matter What the Other Hand Is Doing?


If this is true, then why do people still sign up for the military?

I always assumed that if a German christian soldier had found out about the concentration camps back in the 1940's, the proper thing to do would be to resign from the military, go awol, emigrate, flee the country, do whatever you had to do, to not be part of an apparatus that was committing atrocities.

Questions about the morality of serving in the military aside, it's like, government, as long as you're being open, transparent and aboveboard, I'll participate, but any time you venture into corruption and atrocities, expect a loss of propping up.

We'll even keep paying taxes since the Bible said to, but it didn't say we had to be the arms and legs of corruption. If Walmart was doing it, I wouldn't say, well I'm not working in the torture department of this corporation, I'm just a lowly cashier.

If you had the means, it's not even a mortal sin to change one's nationality. It certainly isn't advocating revolution and bloodshed (so easily co-opted) to fix problems.

I'd like to ask good people in the military, if you had a very comfortable lifestyle as an electrician or a plumber, if money to feed your family was not an issue, would you still on principle leave your job to serve in the military? Would you feel like, this is where God wants me to be to do the most good?

This is where I feel homeschooling didn't go far enough. 40 years ago, having a good foundation in the basics, reading, writing and arithmetic, seemed to put you ahead of what was coming out of the public schools, but it's not enough to stay afloat with homeless under bridges and the economy bubbled and popped at every turn to put people on the military plantation. Now your children need to learn to be electricians and plumbers, and makers of "tiny houses" (the Apostle Paul was a tentmaker too!), on the side, to have more choices in choosing an ethical career that doesn't conflict with Biblical duties.

One person told me that in Acts 10, there is no record of Cornelius, the Roman centurion, leaving the military when he became a Christian. Is that a sign that God would want a German christian young man to sign up for the military in the 1940's (assuming he somehow knew about concentration camps at that time)? Setting aside the question of leaving, surely Cornelius's example is not commanding us to sign up if we're not yet in.

God commanded us to pay taxes, I'm assuming he nowhere commanded us to either join or leave the military.

Who would work for Walmart if it had the same exit policies as the military?

You can resign from Walmart without threat of prison if its policies conflict with morality.

If you resign from entities like the military and the mafia, on the other hand, you almost have to go awol or be prepared for persecution.

Hmm, I wonder which scenario God and common sense would have me pursue.

Sermon 2019.05.05

Here is a rough idea of what my dad taught this Sunday for those who are curious. I liked it.

He was speaking in Chinese, so this was me jotting English furiously on the fly. Started seven minutes into the sermon and sometimes I couldn't keep up, so missing verses and sentences here and there, not just where I managed to scribble the word “missing”. Totally my own interpretation of what he was saying, so any mistakes are mine:

***

If your friends are rejecting God's word, they're not your friends.

Hypocrites praise God, with their hearts far from him. This is often the case with religious leaders. The Pharisees arranged the cross.

Abide in his word, then you'll know the truth. John 17:17 Thy word is truth. Reject the Word, reject truth.

If you are teaching that which contradicts the truth then you're teaching false doctrine. Some people think can they can update Christianity's ceremonies because “It's only a ceremony.”

God is not picky, to label him that would be an insult, but he is not lax or slack. The Old Testament is intricate, every detail fraught with meaning.

The strange fire was closer, but God said treat me as holy. If change an iota, then you're not setting something apart as holy. Like saying, "I can improve on the ship's captain's instructions."

Romans 3:4 - Let God be found true though every man be found a liar. God is right even if the entire world says something different. Naturally not everyone disagrees with God. But when you consider all the false religions and all the false Christianity out there, they make up a majority disagreeing with God.

... [missed]...

Even if an angel tells you something different, don't go with him to hell.

John 17:17 1. The word is truth. 2. It sanctifies us.

Reject the word, and you are rejecting sanctification. We are his special sanctified ones.

Glad he gave us the New Testament, not commands in list-form, but examples of real christians and their problems.

You and I also have problems. But can't say, “Well we all have problems, so we're all going to heaven.”

If we had to completely understand the Bible then nobody would be going to heaven. A genius can study the Bible for a lifetime, and still not know everything, but everybody can understand enough to start obeying.

“This part is not important.” What part of God's Word is not important? When he speaks he doesn't waste a word. I often waste words, God no.

Romans 1:2 - My brethren perish for lack of knowledge. [“Lack of education ... Bam! Elimination.” - "The Fox and the Hound" cartoon song, sorry couldn't resist.]

God can be patient with a lack of knowledge but not if we outright reject him saying, “If I accept that, it means my mom is in hell, so I can't accept that.” We reject him when we say our friends are more important, our life is more important.

Really the permanent is more important. We must be faithful unto death because the spiritual is more important than the temporal.

... [missed] ...

If we rely on God's word we can stand in the day of judgment.

Sometimes people are wrong because they don't understand. Diligently study to get God's approval.

Some don't know because they don't care, that's why they don't come to church, that's why they don't study at home. But God says if we are willing to know we will know.

Every age in the Bible had its preachers who were not starting new denominations but taking people back to the original Word... Ezra, Nehemiah ... One phrase repeated over and over, “As it is written.. ” They restored everything to “as it is written.” They discovered 100-year lapses.

But most people don't care and don't study. Or they study and they don't like it, and think they can change it to be more entertaining. God's way is too simple. It needs guitars.

But God has his purpose, Matthew 15 and 17, Deuteronomy 4 and 12. Don't add, subtract, change.

So study and learn and God will have patience. Nobody has complete knowledge but there is an ignorance that will send you to hell.

I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! (Galatians 1:6-9)

Even if an angel... Joseph Smith, who founded the Mormon religion, said an angel gave it to him. He made many propheies that didn't come true. The Bible says if a prophet prophesied and it didn't come true, you needn't fear that prophet. He even got the death penalty in the Old Testament. Told a Mormon that once and it just went in one ear and out the other. That is why people will be in hell.

I'm not the judge. Maybe God will make exceptions because he knows extenuating circumstances, maybe he knows the person couldn't understand. But God did tell me who I can fellowship. We are to love our enemies but we can't call them brethren.

“Let's have a council to decide how to make worship more interesting. Let's have a council to decide how to baptize, by pouring, sprinkling or immersing. What do you mean, 'We need to go to the Bible', that implies if I don't get in the water I'm going to hell and I don't like that.”

We sing that song, “Jesus, Jesus, I rely on Jesus,” [Chinese version]... not if you're relying on your feelings. You only care what you like, not what God likes.

Faith means: I trust that God is right, and I trust that his standard is right.

How does he guide us? By a voice in the ear? Or a feeling? How do you know if it's from God or Satan?

If it's contrary to God's Word, even if an angel directly tells you anything different, or a vision, contrary to what you have already received, don't accept it, rely on Jesus, but what did he give us to rely on? His objective Word.

“He guides me by feeling,” is subjective. His objective word guides us.

How do we know truth, objective and confirmed? By the miracles. That's why we can rely on his Word.

1. No contradictions with past revelation. 2. Must have miracles confirming it. 3. The miracles don't have to be repeated. 4. Witnesses to the miracles is enough.

Next week we will look at the attitude of unbelief and the verses that address that directly.

Truth has no contradictions. No wonder smart people reject Christianity when they see all the contradictions being taught in “Christendom”.

Jesus prayed that we would all be one, so that the world could believe. His prayer was answered. We are all to believe as one. All true Christians do believe as one even though we have no headquarters. Look at those meeting in Singapore and Taichung and Hualien, all one, but it is the truth making us one.

1 Corinthians 10:13 - No temptation has overtaken us but what we can bear. He restricts every temptation from exceeding your strength. If Satan had free reign the church would not exist. So don't give up. Some people smarter than me wonder why I can't see certain things. But like Paul, I may not have arrived, but I press on.

Breaking Covenant With God

When you became a Christian you made a covenant with God. If he doesn't exist, then obviously neither does your covenant with him.

But if you only have a guess as to whether he exists or not, if you only have some interesting theories as to how he doesn't exist, is that enough evidence to break your covenant with him? Would you break covenant with a real person on that much evidence? Or would that person be justified in calling you a faithless man with no word of honor?

Here is someone that if he exists, you are breaking covenant with. If you find out in the end that he exists, are you going to be able to look him in the face with your reasons for why you thought he didn't exist?

The rest of my photos from April 2019









This little fellow was so cute. No matter what direction I tried to shoot him from, he always carefully turned his body to keep those antennae between us.

A Baptism in Hualian

My brother Jared and his wife Tracy live in Hualian and love working with Preacher Wang and his wife and the church in the nursing homes there.

我弟弟和他的老婆住在花蓮,很喜歡跟王弟兄王姐妹及教友,一直去老人之家幫忙。



On Monday, my brother immersed someone into Christ.
星期一,我的弟弟幫一個人受浸歸入基督了


Further teaching afterward.
此後的更多教導

Sister Wang (pronounced Wong), the preacher's wife, wrote:

The new brother, Huang Tian Jin*, had been living in the nursing home for a few days. He attended our assembly a few times, and today at 7 AM Brother Jared taught him about the plan of salvation. He understood and was willing to be immersed, so Brother Jared immersed him. Thank the Lord we could have a part in this work of service. God bless.

傳道人的太太,王姐妹,寫:

新的弟兄名叫黃天金 剛住進老人之家養護科幾天。來參加聚會幾次 今天早上七點白傑瑞弟兄專程教導他得救的方法 他明白也願意接受耶穌當救主 白傑瑞弟兄幫他受浸了。感謝神 我們能參與這事奉工作 願神祝福




Brother and Sister Wang on the left. My brother and his wife on the right. The new brother in the middle.傳道人和他的老婆在左邊,我弟弟和弟媳在右邊,新弟兄在中間。


Brother and Sister Wang
王弟兄姐妹

Brother Wang and his wife have a real heart for the elderly in nursing homes. Almost every day of the week, unless some thing comes up, they are at the nursing home around 6 in the morning, helping to spoonfeed those who need it, and Sister Wang helps blowdry the residents' hair after showers. Sometimes they are able to have additional Bible studies, while on Thursday mornings they have a set Bible class with the residents.

王弟兄合他老婆很關心老人。幾乎每天早上約6點去老人之家幫忙餵飯或吹頭髮,有機會就幫人查經;星期四早上有固定的查經課。

Brother Wang preaches 3 times on Sundays, and for years it used to be 4 times until two nursing homes were merged this year:

星期天的時候王弟兄都準備三個課程講道(已經好幾年來要那天講道四次,不過今年有兩個養老院合併了)。

* The 7 AM worship service at the nursing home. (They have to get there at 6 AM and wheel about 40 people in their wheelchairs from their various rooms on various floors. The preacher and his wife and the preacher's tireless brother and his wife and son and daughter, and my brother and his wife, and sometimes other members would also be available to help with this.)
7 AM 老人家的敬拜 (還要提早6:00到接每一個要參加的老人,約40位左右,從各樓各房間推輪椅到聚會場。王弟兄姐妹,王弟兄的不倦的弟弟合他的老婆合兒子女兒,我的弟弟合弟媳,而有的時候其他,都幫忙。)

* The 9:00 AM Bible class lesson at the church building.
教堂的9:00的查經課

* The 10:00 AM worship service at the church building.
教堂的 10:00 敬拜的課

(And there used to be an afternoon 3:00 worship service at another nursing home which ended this year when two nursing homes merged.)
(有兩個養老院合併,所以3點的敬拜就沒有。)



These are all the people who attended the 7 AM nursing home worship service this last Sunday, about 40 of them in wheelchairs who were wheeled to the meeting place. About half of them are brethren; good down-to-earth Taiwanese people about to pass into eternity who have been reconciled to God.
上個星期天 7:00 老人之家的敬拜,約有40位做輪椅的,都要被推到敬拜場。一半是弟兄,跟神和好的台灣人。

The Hualian church has a 3-day summer camp each year. One of those days is spent in the nursing home for Bible lessons and activities with the elderly. Adults and children are both welcome. If you are interested contact Brother Wang at 0919923720.

花蓮教會每年辦三天的夏令營。其中一天我們一直在老人之家,有聖經課,還有機會跟老人互動。大人小孩都歡迎。有興趣的話通知王弟兄 0919923720


*The Chinese name Huang Tien Jin is the surname Yellow with the given name Heavenly Gold.

Fish Skin Soup

I'm starting a new category of post for my aunts, uncles, cousins and relatives to see a bit of what I see in Taiwan.

This year I discovered fish skin soup when a sister in the church got some for my mom.

Kaohsiung is a seaport with an abundance of seafood, but growing up we never particularly sought it out because of all the fish bones, which we didn't know how to spit out as dexterously as the Asians, though we happily ate it when served.

Fish skin soup has no bones, and at 50 NT ($1.60) per bowl it's a great breakfast deal. Finish it off with a quarter of a pineapple and you will also stay regular ^o^


It must be fresh, if he's deboning it!
Grey gas tanks for cooking in the background.


Carefully ladling it into the takeout containers.


Complete with clams, and julienned ginger.

I think it's that cheap because these fish soup places are usually just tables and chairs under a roof with no door. I'm thankful to God for something so wholesome and delicious so cheap, though I wish I knew what to do about the risk of mercury. Read a news article saying the rich get mercury from fish while the poor get toxic chemicals from air-pollution and living closer to landfills. Kaohsiung's already got the air pollution!

The day I wrote that last post, I had just spent 3 days learning to read 1 Samuel 17 (David and Goliath) in 3 different Chinese versions. I don't believe in writing a new character 20 times in a row like a schoolchild in a copy book, but I do have to look up the story behind its hieroglyphics on hanziyuan.net, and be able to write it without looking and be satisfied with my calligraphy at least once.

I had just finished all three versions and was speed reading through the texts one last time, not having to look things up anymore but having fun jotting down any word I suspected I couldn't write from memory yet.

That still slowed me down a bit to notice things I'd never felt before in the story.

And it occured to me that David at some point finally decided, “This is not happening.”

When he arrived at the front line to find his brothers, he had this crucial cultural background, his head would have been full of the stories of the past (all that time composing things on his harp while out with the sheep).

It says David RAN to the front line to find his brothers. He probably thought it was his lucky day to be there when something finally looked happening. Like most young men who aren't preoccupied with their own mortality he would probably would have been more excited than not at the shouting as the battle lines were being drawn up.

And then Goliath walks out, and David hears what he says, and he sees the melee it's producing, and his course of action is practically handed to him by what everybody's saying, but I feel like he got mad. Yes, he heard all the other stuff about a wife and no more taxes, and yes he was lucky to have the experience under his belt that enabled him to do something about his anger, but it feels like Goliath's insult to God is what stuck under his skin.

And if he was even a little bit mad, it would have been an anger that burns away fear, that makes it a relief to speak up, but at the same time he's not enraged beyond thought, he's actually a little cool-headed asking the people around him a couple of times to make sure what the situation is. When his older brother accuses him, he has the swiftness of mind to defend himself immediately, “I didn't come up here for no reason,” as one version puts it. (Dad did send me here.)

But I think he mainly got mad, and decided it wasn't going go on anymore, because when he's telling Saul about rescuing the lamb from the lion or bear it felt like he would have been thinking, “Oh no you don't. Not on my watch.”

And for the first time in reading that story my heart started to pound as he took off the armor and picked up five smooth stones.

News Link: Fractional Reserves and the Fed

A tough read, but if you put even three-quarters of your mind to it, awesome! So what does it have to do with my daily life? Almost every single day I think about it because I have to do the grocery shopping for my family, and every time I see something I would dearly love to eat, and notice that it is now 4x the price it used to be, in my mind I lay that squarely at the door of whoever is printing up the money supply, but whenever I sigh and say, "Inflation :P" to the clerk, I have not met one person who does anything but stare at me blankly. Anyway, I remember when durian cost 30-something (TWD, not USD, LOL) a jin and how one year I refused to buy it when it went up to 40-something a jin, and today it is 139 a jin. Yes, the Fed is responsible for me not having durian to eat, and so am I for not finding a way to step outside that game.

So why read the article? What can I do about it? So that (1) when I hear about the State of Texas thinking about making it's own gold-backed currency, I realize what a huge deal that would be ... so that (2) I don't contribute to the morass of ignorance that might kill a deal like that ... so that (3) did I ever find a way to use an alternate form of currency in my daily life with impunity, I would do my part to step outside the game, the game beauracrats play with what I think of as my money but in reality is a pile of fiat money, paper that can lose half its power with a flip of the switch on the printing press.

But I wouldn't even be thinking those things or be ready for those things, if I didn't know what that article was talking about.

So yes, I feel a deep CONNECTION to this article, right in the area of my stomach, every time I see durian no less.

Postscript (2019.04.19):

Actually it wasn't the durian that got to me first.

For years, every time I passed little old grandmas pushing recycle carts on the road picking up scraps to sell I'd think about inflation, about how they were the ones that inflating the money supply was hurting the most when they needed their pennies to go the farthest.

And ordinary people, unable to afford non-junk food and non-poisoned food. Because that's all organic food is, food that hasn't had a dropper bottle of poison held over it. Call a spade a spade. There's poisoned food and then there's non-poisoned food.

Managed to start commenting over on the sidebar, not just linking to articles. But I'll still link with no comment if the only other choice is not linking at all.

A couple months ago a friend mentioned to me how he thought that all God's changes in law made it seem like he was experimenting on us like lab rats.

I wrote him afterward (edited for typos and readability):

“I don't think all the changes in God's instructions through history are God experimenting with us. I think it is like a parent guiding a child through different exercises in math, for instance.

For instance, God knew when he let the first people live into their 900's that he would have to reduce their lifespan [...] after Noah's flood because they had only used their long lives for evil.

But he still let mankind go through that experience and find out for themselves, otherwise we would be telling God, “God, how do you know we can't handle longer lifespans?”

Now he can say, “I DID give you longer lives at the beginning so you would understand why I gave you shorter lives later.” Because mankind really likes to find out the hard way (or you could say the concrete or experiential way) what is right and wrong. “Don't tell me, show me.” God: “OK, I'm showing you.”

So anytime you think God could be experimenting, please leave room for the possibility that he already knew the outcome, he is just working through the steps anyway for [the sake of] our knowledge, not his.”

He sent this back:



Number 2 I felt was unfair of Epicurus, and wrote back:

“Is he able but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.”

Every parent puts things into 2 groups:

Group 1: Things you have to let your child learn to take care of on his own or he will [grow up] weak. (Children who learn not to care when idots mock them - good. Children who were protected so much that when they grow up and go to college, they don't know how to wash their clothes or feed themselves - bad. Or children who can't deal with anybody who has a different opinion from them - bad.)

Group 2: Things you have to step in and protect your child from because to let your child try to learn to deal with it would put him at too high a risk of death.

Every parent has to decide what level of suffering/challenge they will let their children go through for the sake of their future health and independence, and what suffering/challenge would be too dangerous to allow.

Nobody calls parents [malevolent] for making their children face painful but healthy challenges.

What if everything we consider Group 2 [things too dangerous to let us learn to deal with], God considers Group 1 [things we have to learn to deal with anyway]?