Does your faith need strengthening? Are you confused and wondering if Jesus Christ is really "The Way, the Truth, and the Life?" "Fight for Your Faith" is a blog filled with interesting and thought provoking articles to help you find the answers you are seeking. Jesus said, "Seek and ye shall find." In Jeremiah we read, "Ye shall seek Me, and find Me, when ye shall seek for Me with all your heart." These articles and videos will help you in your search for the Truth.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Life is Irreducibly Complex


As we learn more about biological life, it becomes increasingly apparent that its similarity to complex machines is startlingly strong. Yet, because science has been redefined to exclude the possibility of a designer, we are left without any plausible explanation of how life developed.

Michael Behe is a biochemistry professor at Lehigh University who wonderfully illustrates the similarity between mechanical machines and biological life in his book, Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. According to Dr. Behe, even at the smallest biochemical level, life is made up of irreducibly complex machines. Although these machines are made of proteins instead of metal, their complexity is proof that they could only have been produced by an incomprehensibly intelligent designer.

The perfect example of an irreducibly complex machine is the simple mouse trap. This machine consists of at least five parts: the platform, the spring, the hammer, the catch, and the hold-down latch bar. The absence of any one of these components will turn the machine into a piece of useless junk. Furthermore, each of the components has to be designed to a specific size and positioned in a specific place in order for the mouse trap to function. Thus, the simple mousetrap is irreducibly complex … it will not function unless all five pieces are in place. It is this interdependence of the individual parts which makes it so obvious that the simple mousetrap has a designer.

Biological life is also made from irreducibly complex structures, even at the smallest molecular level. For instance, there are millions of organisms, including human bodies, which use a structure called a cilium to either swim or move things around within a creature. Cilia are hair-like structures attached to cells which beat like a whip in order to move foreign particles out of our lungs. Sperm also use cilia to swim. Because these structures are so biologically important and so widespread throughout the animal kingdom, Dr. Behe estimates that TEN THOUSAND technical papers have been published on various aspects of cilia.

Like the mouse trap, cilia require several components in order to operate. In the case of a mousetrap, the components are specifically sized pieces of metal and wood. In the case of cilia, they are specifically shaped proteins. The absolute minimum number of components needed for a cilium to operate are three: proteins forming the hair-like fibers (the rotor), proteins linking the adjacent fibers so that they do not fly apart (links), and proteins which contract to cause its whipping motion (the motor). Without all three of these components - the structure would not function. Thus, cilia are irreducibly complex machines. In reality, cilia contain hundreds of different proteins and all are required for its operation. But even these three specific proteins could never have formed by chance mutations. All three are specifically designed to function together and if any one as missing, the cilia could not operate. Thus, the cilia would become a useless drag line hindering the motion of the organism rather than aiding its survival.

In Dr. Behe’s words, “The amount of scientific research which has been done... leads many people to assume that even if they don’t know how cilia evolved, somebody must know. But the search of professional literature proves them wrong. Nobody knows.”

Nobody knows where cilia came from because cilia are irreducibly complex and can never be explained without a supernatural designer. Yet most biochemists are trained to ignore this possibility when examining biological features. If the correct answer has been eliminated; is it any wonder that ten thousand papers can be written on cilia and not one can explain their origin?

The forgotten massacre: “In a free society some are guilty, but all are responsible.”


Robert Fisk, The Independent, 15 September 2012
The memories remain, of course. But—like the muck piled on the garbage tip amid the concrete hovels—the stench of injustice still pervades the camps where 1,700 Palestinians were butchered 30 years ago next week. No-one was tried and sentenced for a slaughter, which even an Israeli writer at the time compared to the killing of Yugoslavs by Nazi sympathisers in the Second World War. Sabra and Chatila are a memorial to criminals who evaded responsibility, who got away with it.

Khaled Abu Noor was in his teens, a would-be militiaman who had left the camp for the mountains before Israel’s Phalangist allies entered Sabra and Chatila. Did this give him a guilty conscience, that he was not there to fight the rapists and murderers? “What we all feel today is depression,” he said. “We demanded justice, international trials—but there was nothing. Not a single person was held responsible. No-one was put before justice. And so we had to suffer in the 1986 camps war (at the hands of Shia Lebanese) and so the Israelis could slaughter so many Palestinians in the 2008-9 Gaza war. If there had been trials for what happened here 30 years ago, the Gaza killings would not have happened.”

He has a point, of course. While presidents and prime ministers have lined up in Manhattan to mourn the dead of the 2001 international crimes against humanity at the World Trade Centre, not a single Western leader has dared to visit the dank and grubby Sabra and Chatila mass graves, shaded by a few scruffy trees and faded photographs of the dead. Nor, let it be said—in 30 years—has a single Arab leader bothered to visit the last resting place of at least 600 of the 1,700 victims. Arab potentates bleed in their hearts for the Palestinians but an airfare to Beirut might be a bit much these days—and which of them would want to offend the Israelis or the Americans?

It is an irony—but an important one, nonetheless—that the only nation to hold a serious official enquiry into the massacre, albeit flawed, was Israel. The Israeli army sent the killers into the camps and then watched—and did nothing—while the atrocity took place. A certain Israeli Lieutenant Avi Grabowsky gave the most telling evidence of this. The Kahan Commission held the then defence minister Ariel Sharon personally responsible, since he sent the ruthless anti-Palestinian Phalangists into the camps to “flush out terrorists”—“terrorists” who turned out to be as non-existent as Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction 21 years later.

Sharon lost his job but later became prime minister, until broken by a stroke which he survived—but which took from him even the power of speech. Elie Hobeika, the Lebanese Christian militia leader who led his murderers into the camp—after Sharon had told the Phalange that Palestinians had just assassinated their leader, Bashir Gemayel—was murdered years later in east Beirut. His enemies claimed the Syrians killed him, his friends blamed the Israelis; Hobeika, who had “gone across” to the Syrians, had just announced he would “tell all” about the Sabra and Chatila atrocity at a Belgian court, which wished to try Sharon.

Of course, those of us who entered the camps on the third and final day of the massacre—18 September, 1982—have our own memories. I recall the old man in pyjamas lying on his back on the main street with his innocent walking stick beside him, the two women and a baby shot next to a dead horse, the private house in which I sheltered from the killers with my colleague Loren Jenkins of The Washington Post—only to find a dead young woman lying in the courtyard beside us. Some of the women had been raped before their killing. The armies of flies, the smell of decomposition. These things one remembers.

Abu Maher is 65—like Khaled Abu Noor, his family originally fled their homes in Safad in present-day Israel—and stayed in the camp throughout the massacre, at first disbelieving the women and children who urged him to run from his home. “A woman neighbour started screaming and I looked out and saw her shot dead and her daughter tried to run away and the killers chased her, saying “Kill her, kill her, don’t let her go!” She shouted to me and I could do nothing. But she escaped.”

Repeated trips back to the camp, year after year, have built up a narrative of astonishing detail. Investigations by Karsten Tveit of Norwegian radio and myself proved that many men, seen by Abu Maher being marched away alive after the initial massacre, were later handed by the Israelis back to the Phalangist killers—who held them prisoner for days in eastern Beirut and then, when they could not swap them for Christian hostages, executed them at mass graves.

And the arguments in favour of forgetfulness have been cruelly deployed. Why remember a few hundred Palestinians slaughtered when 25,000 have been killed in Syria in 19 months?

Supporters of Israel and critics of the Muslim world have written to me in the last couple of years, abusing me for referring repeatedly to the Sabra and Chatila massacre, as if my own eye-witness account of this atrocity has—like a war criminal—a statute of limitations. Given these reports of mine (compared to my accounts of Turkish oppression) one reader has written to me that “I would conclude that, in this case (Sabra and Chatila), you have an anti-Israeli bias. This is based solely on the disproportionate number of references you make to this atrocity…”

But can one make too many? Dr Bayan al-Hout, widow of the PLO’s former ambassador to Beirut, has written the most authoritative and detailed account of the Sabra and Chatila war crimes—for that is what they were—and concludes that in the years that followed, people feared to recall the event. “Then international groups started talking and enquiring. We must remember that all of us are responsible for what happened. And the victims are still scarred by these events—even those who are unborn will be scarred—and they need love.” In the conclusion to her book, Dr al-Hout asks some difficult—indeed, dangerous—questions: “Were the perpetrators the only ones responsible? Were the people who committed the crimes the only criminals? Were even those who issued the orders solely responsible? Who in truth is responsible?”

In other words, doesn’t Lebanon bear responsibility with the Phalangist Lebanese, Israel with the Israeli army, the West with its Israeli ally, the Arabs with their American ally? Dr al-Hout ends her investigation with a quotation from Rabbi Abraham Heschel who raged against the Vietnam war. “In a free society,” the Rabbi said, “some are guilty, but all are responsible.”

Friday, September 14, 2012

Remembering 9/11: Extraordinary Stories From the Sidelines


Paul de Vries, Christian Post, Sep. 11, 2012
September 11, 2001 seems like yesterday. So much of what transpired then and in the days immediately following remain absolutely vivid in my mind. As that 9/11 Tuesday played out so painfully, and the scope of its tragedy was felt even more in immediate days thereafter. I faced frequent flash-backs to previous tragedies I had experienced—along with replayings of Scripture selections safely stored in my heart…and persistent prayers. Lord Jesus Christ, what is happening? How can I feel and affirm Your presence in this horrific tragedy? Please help me understand and reach out to the real needs of the people around me. Please, God, help me to receive and share your amazing grace, effectually, now.

My wife Vicki and I were on the way to our offices from a near suburb—hers for business, mine for teaching. The commuter train conductor made an announcement about the attacks, and then turned his radio on loudly for all in our train car to hear. Others joined from other cars. Vicki got off to catch the next train back home. I continued into Manhattan to be available, to see how I might help brothers and sisters, strangers and associates. And Vicki and I were both deeply concerned for the safety of our son Tor (Paul Victor) whose gifted-geek computer consulting office was close to the WTC (World Trade Center).

Getting to the office was a challenge. Out of concern for possible terrorists in the train tunnels, the conductors would not bring the commuter train closer than 125th Street. I quickly found a bus across town to Broadway, but no buses were going south. If there were terrorists on the ground, the city does not want to assist their movement.

A taxicab comes soon, and I ask to be dropped off at a place two blocks from my office. The eerie 9/11 streets zip by the cab windows, and the smoke rises from lower Manhattan. I pay the cabbie and enter the raw world of NYC streets and sidewalks, now densely-populated with pensive people.

Immediately, I see a tall, muscular, handsome African-American man in business attire, standing frozen by himself in the swirl of people on the sidewalk on Broadway, weeping uncontrollably. He and I firmly, silently hug. Minutes transpire; they seem forever. And there are no words.

“Can I help you, my brother?” I then gently inquire. “Yes! please,” he exclaims, his voice cracking. He recounts to me that he was supposed to be at work on the 86th floor by 8:30, but his 12-year-old disobedient daughter had made him very late. Always this daughter had been a nearly perfect “angel,” but that morning she had been a total pain in the anatomy! She could not find the dress she “had to wear,” and then could not find the right shoes to go with the dress. And then she remembered that she had more homework to finish and she could not bear go to school without the completed assignment. He had been yelling at her all the while, and then scolding her all the way down the street as he walked her to school. Now, what to do? He is now safe only because his “angel” had thrown him way off schedule. Does God work through “disobedient” angels? Together we briefly thank the Lord Jesus Christ for his daughter and her divine “disobedience” that morning. Then, at my suggestion, he literally runs through the crowded sidewalks back toward his daughter’s school to apologize to her and thank her for saving his life.

I run too—to my office two blocks away. The safety of our son is weighing heavily on my mind—as well as the welfare of my team, colleagues, students and friends. I guess that the office—a Grand Central Station in its own right—is the best place for me to reach out to others, and for them to reach me—by phone call or by paying a visit. Sure enough, as I unlock the door, the telephone rings. It is our son!

Tor had to be in the WTC that Tuesday, 9/11, and elsewhere on Monday, but at 3:00 AM Monday morning he had heard a literal voice from the Lord telling him to switch his appointments for the two days. He had seriously doubted, but obeyed, nevertheless. He did his business in the WTC on Monday, 9/10, and was many miles away on the morning of 9/11. We talk for a while. When we hang up, I shout some grateful praises to the Lord for His voice and His grace. Faithfully, we have taught our children to hear and to obey the Lord’s voice—not knowing that it could save their lives!

Soon I learn that earlier in that tragic morning a personal friend, a godly man—an air-conditioning-heating engineer—had scheduled an expert team meeting at 8:30 AM in a room high in one of the WTC towers, to plan air-quality improvements. He and the other engineers were coming from other buildings. However, at 7:15 he had an inexplicable “horrible feeling” about the meeting, and he called everyone to postpone it for another day.

As many as 30,000 people who “should have been” in the WTC that morning did not come—detained by a whole host of unusual factors.

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

The March of Folly


By Uri Avnery, Antiwar.com, September 9, 2012
Nothing could be scarier than the thought that this duo—Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak—is in a position to start a war, the dimensions and outcome of which are incalculable.

It’s scary not only because of their ideological fixations and mental outlook, but also because of the level of their intelligence.

The last month gave us a small sample. By itself it was but a passing episode. But as an illustration of their decision-making abilities, it was frightening enough.

The routine conference of the Movement of Non-Aligned Nations was to take place in Tehran. One hundred twenty states promised to attend, many of them represented by their presidents or prime ministers.

This was bad news for the Israeli government, which has devoted much of its energies during the last three years to the strenuous effort to isolate Iran—while Iran was devoted to a no less strenuous effort to isolate Israel.

If the location of the conference was not bad enough, the United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, announced that he would attend, too. And as if this was still not bad enough, the new president of Egypt, Mohamed Mursi, also promised to come.

Netanyahu was faced with a problem: how to react?

If a wise expert had been consulted, he might have asked: Why react at all?

The Non-Aligned Movement is an empty shell. It was created (or “founded”) 51 years ago, at the height of the Cold War, by Nehru of India, Tito of Yugoslavia, Sukarno of Indonesia, and Abd-al-Nasser of Egypt. One hundred twenty nations joined. They wanted to steer a course between the American and the Soviet blocs.

Since then, circumstances have changed completely. The Soviets have disappeared, and the US is also not what it was. Tito, Nehru, Nasser, and Sukarno are all dead. The Non-Aligned have no real function anymore. But it is much easier to set up an international organization than to disband it. Its secretariat provides jobs, its conferences provide photo opportunities, and world leaders like to travel and schmooze.

If Netanyahu had kept quiet, chances are that the world media would have ignored the nonevent altogether. CNN and al-Jazeera might have devoted a full three minutes to it, out of courtesy, and that would have been that.

But for Netanyahu, keeping quiet is not an option. So he did something exceedingly foolish: he told Ban Ki-moon not to go to Tehran. More precisely, he ordered him not to go.

The aforementioned wise expert—if he existed—would have told Netanyahu “Don’t!” The Non-Aligned make up more than 60% of the U.N.’s membership. Ban wants to be re-elected in due course, and he is not going to insult 120 voters, much as you wouldn’t want to insult 80 members of the Knesset. His predecessors have attended all former conferences. He cannot refuse now—especially not after you publicly ordered him around.

Then there was Mursi. What to do about him?

If another wise expert, this time on Egypt, had been asked, he would have given much the same advice: let it be.

Egypt wants to resume its role as the leader of the Arab world and as an actor on the international stage. The new president, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, certainly would not want to be seen giving in to Israeli pressure.

So, as the Hebrew saying goes, better to swallow a frog—even two frogs—than to do something foolish.

But Netanyahu couldn’t possibly follow such advice. It would be contrary to his nature. So he and his assistants proclaimed loudly—very loudly—that the 120 attending countries are supporting Iran’s effort to annihilate Israel, and that Ban and Mursi are promoting a second Holocaust.

Instead of isolating Iran, Netanyahu helped Iran isolate Israel.

The more so as both Ban and Mursi used the Tehran stage to castigate the Iranian leadership and its Syrian allies. Ban condemned Ahmadinejad’s denial of the Holocaust as well as his proclaimed hopes for the disappearance of the “Zionist entity.” Mursi went even further and castigated the murderous Syrian regime, Iran’s main ally.

(This speech was broadcast live on Iranian television. The translator evoked general admiration for his presence of mind. Whenever Mursi said in Arabic “Syria,” the translator said in Farsi “Bahrain.”)

This whole episode is important only insofar as it illustrates the incredible folly of Netanyahu and his close advisers (all of them handpicked by his wife, Sarah, easily the most unpopular person in the country). They seem to be cut off from the real world and to live in an imagined world of their own.

In this imaginary world, Israel is the center of the universe, and Netanyahu can give orders to the leaders of the nations, from Barack Obama and Angela Merkel to Mohamed Mursi and Ban Ki-moon.

Well, we are not the center of the world. We have a lot of influence, owing in part to our history. We are a regional power, much beyond our actual size. But to be really effective, we need allies, moral standing, and the support of international public opinion, just like everybody else. Without this, Netanyahu’s pet project, to secure for himself a place in the history books by attacking Iran, cannot be carried out.

I know that many eyebrows were raised when I categorically stated that neither Israel nor the U.S. would attack Iran. It seemed that I was risking my reputation—such as it is—while Netanyahu and Barak were preparing for the inevitable bombing run. When talk about the impending attack reached a crescendo, my few well-wishers were sincerely worried.

However, during the last few days, there has been an almost imperceptible change of tone here. Netanyahu declared that the “family of nations” must lay down a “red line” and timetable for stopping Iran’s nuclear arms effort.

Translated into simple Hebrew: there will be no Israeli attack, unless approved by the U.S. Such approval is impossible before the coming U.S. elections. It is highly unlikely afterward, too, for the reasons I tried to set out. Geographical, military, political, and economic circumstances make it impossible. Diplomacy is called for. A compromise based on mutual interests and respect may be the best outcome.

An Israeli commentator has made the interesting suggestion that the president of the United States—after the elections—personally travel to Tehran and reach out to the Iranian people. That is no more improbable than Richard Nixon’s historic visit to China. I would add the suggestion that while he is at it, the president come to Jerusalem, too, to seal the compromise.

A year and a half ago, I also dared to suggest that the Arab Spring would be good for Israel.

At the time, it was a common assumption in Israel, and throughout the West, that Arab democracy would lead to a surge of political Islam, and that this would present a mortal danger to Israel. The first part of the assumption was right, the second was wrong.

The obscurantist demonization of Islam can be dangerously misleading. The painting of Islam as a murderous, inherently anti-Semitic religion can lead to destructive consequences. Fortunately, the dire forecasts are being disproved daily.

In the homeland of the Arab Awakening, Tunisia, a moderate Islamic regime has taken root. In Libya, where commentators foresaw chaos and permanent civil war between the tribes, chances for stability are growing.

And most importantly, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is behaving with exemplary caution. Six thousand years of Egyptian wisdom is having a moderating effect on the Brothers, including Brother Mursi. In the few weeks of his rule, he has already demonstrated a remarkable ability for compromising with divergent interests—with the secular liberals and the army command in his own country, with the U.S., even with Israel. He is now engaged in an effort to settle things with the Sinai Bedouins, addressing their (justified) grievances and calling a halt to military action.

It is, of course, much too early to tell, but I believe that a rejuvenated Arab world, in which moderate Islamic forces play an important role (as they do in Turkey), may form the environment for Israeli-Arab peace. If we desire peace.

For this to happen, we must break out of Netanyahu’s imaginary world and return to the real world, the exciting, changing, challenging world of the 21st century.

Otherwise, we will just add another sad chapter to the late Barbara Tuchman’s brilliant book, The March of Folly.

New Rules


By Thomas L. Friedman, NY Times, September 8, 2012
I just arrived in Shanghai, but I’m thinking about Estonia and wondering about something Presidents Clinton and Obama have been saying.

Wired magazine reported last week that public schools in Estonia are establishing a program for teaching first graders—and kids in all other grades—how to do computer programming. Wired said that the curriculum was created “because of the difficulty Estonian companies face in hiring programmers. Estonia has a burgeoning tech industry thanks in part to the success of Skype, which was developed in Estonia in 2003.”

The news from Estonia prompted The Guardian newspaper of London to publish an online poll asking its readers: “Children aged 7 to 16 are being given the opportunity to learn how to code in schools in Estonia, should U.K. school children be taught programming as part of their school day?” It’s fascinating to read about all this while visiting Shanghai, whose public school system in 2010 beat the rest of the world in math, science and reading in the global PISA exam of 15-year-olds. Will the Chinese respond by teaching programming to preschoolers?

All of this made me think Obama should stop using the phrase—first minted by Bill Clinton in 1992—that if you just “work hard and play by the rules” you should expect that the American system will deliver you a decent life and a chance for your children to have a better one. That mantra really resonates with me and, I am sure, with many voters. There is just one problem: It’s out of date.

The truth is, if you want a decent job that will lead to a decent life today you have to work harder, regularly reinvent yourself, obtain at least some form of postsecondary education, make sure that you’re engaged in lifelong learning and play by the rules.

Why? Because when Clinton first employed his phrase in 1992, the Internet was just emerging, virtually no one had e-mail and the cold war was just ending. In other words, we were still living in a closed system, a world of walls, which were just starting to come down. It was a world before Nafta and the full merger of globalization and the information technology revolution, a world in which unions and blue-collar manufacturing were still relatively strong, and where America could still write a lot of the rules that people played by.

That world is gone. It is now a more open system. Technology and globalization are wiping out lower-skilled jobs faster, while steadily raising the skill level required for new jobs. More than ever now, lifelong learning is the key to getting into, and staying in, the middle class.

There is a quote attributed to the futurist Alvin Toffler that captures this new reality: In the future “illiteracy will not be defined by those who cannot read and write, but by those who cannot learn and relearn.” Any form of standing still is deadly.

I covered the Republican convention, and I was impressed in watching my Times colleagues at how much their jobs have changed. Here’s what a reporter does in a typical day: report, file for the Web edition, file for The International Herald Tribune, tweet, update for the Web edition, report more, track other people’s tweets, do a Web-video spot and then write the story for the print paper. You want to be a Times reporter today? That’s your day. You have to work harder and smarter and develop new skills faster.

Study: Most Churchgoers Do Not Read Bible on Daily Basis


By Michael Gryboski , Christian Post, September 7, 2012
A recently released study by a Christian research organization shows that most churchgoers do not read or study the Bible on a daily basis.

The findings of the Transformational Discipleship Assessment released by LifeWay Research noted that 19 percent of respondents report reading or studying the Bible outside of church “every day.”

By contrast, 36 percent of respondents said that they either engage the Bible “once a week,” “once a month,” or “a few times a month.” Eighteen percent reported rarely or never reading or studying the Bible outside of worship.

Scott McConnell, director of LifeWay Research, told The Christian Post that he felt attributes from the modern American culture influenced the responses.

“Regular Bible engagement is both personal and requires discipline. Neither are popular in Western culture today,” said McConnell. “Too many churchgoers want the benefits of salvation without investing in personally knowing Christ and the abundant life He offers.”

“Bible engagement encompasses more than just Bible reading. It measures the extent to which individuals interact with the truth of Scripture and allow it to permeate their thinking and influence their actions,” said McConnell.

“There is a widespread desire among churchgoers to please Jesus, but much less interested in daily wrestling with what pleases Jesus. Instead of Christ being preeminent in the lives of every churchgoer, He is often only the preamble to lives lived apart from biblical truth.”

Other findings in the study included 90 percent of respondents agreeing with the statement “I desire to please and honor Jesus in all I do” and 59 percent agreeing with the statement “Throughout the day I find myself thinking about biblical truths.”

While the study noted the small percentage of regular Bible engagement from respondents, it also pinpointed six actions that “positively impact” the level of Bible engagement a churchgoer partakes in.

These actions were confessing wrongdoings to God, believing in Jesus as the only way to heaven, following God with an awareness that it “may be costly,” praying about the spiritual statuses of acquaintances who are not Christian, reading a book on spiritual growth, and being mentored by a “more spiritually mature Christian.”

Change, Change, and More Change

By Jesus, speaking in prophecy

Download Audio (4.88MB)

It’s uncomfortable for most people to learn something new. Most people are creatures of habit and like doing things that they feel they are good at or are naturally talented in. So it’s a stretch to take on something new that is “so not you.”

People generally like consistency, security, and being competent and comfortable in their tasks. But the life of a disciple is always an uphill climb. You’re disciples. You’re men and women who have received the great commission of going into all the world and preaching the Gospel to every creature.1

For with God, all things are possible to him that believeth.2 Do you believe that? Then have faith and know that you can do what I am asking of you. You may feel clumsy, awkward, or even like a fish out of water. But when you take the plunge and step out in the direction I am leading you, and keep at it, you will grow, your talents and gifts will be honed, and you will become a well-rounded professional. You are capable of a lot, because I am capable through you.

I know the steps of change that I ask of you can sometimes seem daunting. It’s challenging to face something new, an “impossibility,” something you’ve never done before, something that is beyond your level of expertise and your personal comfort zone. However, I am able to stretch the limits that you have put on yourself, and take you farther and higher than you have gone before.

I am capable and strong to help you. I want you to have faith and confidence. Believe that nothing is impossible. Otherwise, when I put an opportunity before you, the Devil can tempt you to think, “After looking at all the factors, there really is no way that I’m ready for something like this.” That’s not true! I know it, but you must know it as well.

Don’t let anything deter you from embracing change and letting it work for you as you do your part. It will be tough at first; change is tough. But I want you to see yourself doing what I have said is possible, and it will become possible.

Let Me show you My perspective: Your realm of possibilities is only so wide, and every time you try to go beyond your boundaries and self-imposed limitations, you come up against a wall that can’t be moved. However, as you claim My promises, you will find that I can lift you over those walls. I will bring you into a new dimension that will astonish you and thrill you, as you see what you’re truly capable of.

Believe in your heart that change is possible, and that everything that I ask of you is doable. You will see results as you act on My promises by doing the difficult thing of learning and stepping out of your comfort zone. The difference between the little box that you’ve placed yourself in and My sky of no limits will be like night and day.

Take your square cubicle where all you can see and feel are brick walls that encase you, and compare that to open fields, the vastness of the sky, and the fresh oxygen that abounds. Think of a horse that has been kept in a tiny stable. Imagine his happiness when he gallops out into the wide-open world and sees the beauty and the freedom surrounding him.

There are new worlds to discover, if you have the faith and patience to keep trying and not give up. I have created your spirit to be wild and free; it is not meant to be caged in by a world of impossibilities. So let’s ride together, shall we? Let Me take you to places you've never been before.

Imagine yourself riding a wild and free horse. It will take you to many cool spots, out-of-this-world places, and you will be amazed at the treasures and riches that I have in store for you. Let Me expand your horizons as I take you from place to place and show you that it can be done, for “all things are possible to him that believeth.” You’re a disciple, and following Me is what you do best. “Put your hand into the hand of God, and He will be more to you than a light and better than a known way.”

I am so proud of you. You’re making changes and expanding your comfort zone. You are capable of anything that I ask of you, because I am living and working within you.

Originally published March 2010. Updated and republished September 2012.
Read by Simon Gregg.

Monday, September 10, 2012

Georgia Purdom: Dear Huff Post: Do Your Homework!


 07 Sep 2012

In two recent Huff Post articles on the Bill Nye video and AiG’s rebuttal videos they have stated, “Purdom did not comment on studies that have shown that evolution has been observed in a laboratory setting.”[1] Curious, I clicked on the link provided and was directed to an article about Richard Lenski’s work on E. coli “evolution” at Michigan State University. In 2008, Lenski published a paper showing that E. coli he had been culturing in his lab for 20 years had gained the ability to utilize citrate.[2] A New Scientist writer proclaimed, “A major innovation has unfurled right in front of researchers’ eyes. It’s the first time evolution has been caught in the act of making such a rare and complex new trait.”[3] Really?

As I stated in the title, the Huff Post didn’t do their homework because contrary to their claims, I published a semi-technical article[4] on the AiG website on June 30, 2008, in response to Lenski’s research! E. coli (such as those found in our gut or in the soil outside our home) have the ability to utilize citrate when oxygen levels are low. They transport citrate into the cell and break it down. Lenski’s lab observed that the E. coli they had been culturing in the lab for many years could now utilize citrate under normal oxygen levels (likely through mutation, although no genetic studies were released in relation to the finding). Rather than an “a major innovation” or the “making of a rare and complex new trait” it was simply a change in the regulation of when citrate is used by E. coli!

As I stated in the article,


Since E. coli already possess the ability to transport and utilize citrate under certain conditions, it is conceivable that they could adapt and gain the ability to utilize citrate under broader conditions. This does not require the addition of new genetic information or functional systems (there are no known “additive” mechanisms). Instead degenerative events are likely to have occurred resulting in the loss of regulation and/or specificity.

In other words, the types of changes in E. coli observed by Lenski do not add new genetic information that over eons of time can lead from microbes to man. They simply alter (in a degenerative fashion) genetic information that was already present.

I’ll conclude with this:


It is interesting that in spite of the clear evidence for the adaptation of E. coli, Lenski refers to his findings as evidence for bacteria developing a “key innovation” and a “new function” and a “fascinating case of evolution in action.” Obviously, presuppositions (human reason apart from God vs. God’s Word) play a major role in interpreting the evidence. Richard Lenski and I are looking at the same evidence but drawing different conclusions based on our source of truth—man’s ideas or God’s ideas. It is only possible to obtain truth about the past if we start with the only source of absolute truth in the present—the inerrant Word of God.

So there you have it, Huff Post, I’ve responded. Enjoy!

Keep fighting the good fight of the faith![1] Dominique Mosbergen, “Bill Nye ‘The Science Guy’ Slammed by Creation Museum, Pastor Ray Comfort, September 2, 2012.

[2] Zachary Blount, et al., “Historical Contingency and the Evolution of a Key Innovation in an Experimental Population of Escherichia coli,” PNAS 105 no. 23 (2008): 7899–7906.

[3] Bob Holmes, “Bacteria Make Major Evolutionary Shift in the Lab,” New Scientist, June 9, 2008.

[4] Georgia Purdom, “A Poke in the Eye? Lenski and the Adaptive Acrobatics of E. coli,” June 30, 2008.

Life is Irreducibly Complex


As we learn more about biological life, it becomes increasingly apparent that its similarity to complex machines is startlingly strong. Yet, because science has been redefined to exclude the possibility of a designer, we are left without any plausible explanation of how life developed.

Michael Behe is a biochemistry professor at Lehigh University who wonderfully illustrates the similarity between mechanical machines and biological life in his book, Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. According to Dr. Behe, even at the smallest biochemical level, life is made up of irreducibly complex machines. Although these machines are made of proteins instead of metal, their complexity is proof that they could only have been produced by an incomprehensibly intelligent designer.

The perfect example of an irreducibly complex machine is the simple mouse trap. This machine consists of at least five parts: the platform, the spring, the hammer, the catch, and the hold-down latch bar. The absence of any one of these components will turn the machine into a piece of useless junk. Furthermore, each of the components has to be designed to a specific size and positioned in a specific place in order for the mouse trap to function. Thus, the simple mousetrap is irreducibly complex … it will not function unless all five pieces are in place. It is this interdependence of the individual parts which makes it so obvious that the simple mousetrap has a designer.

Biological life is also made from irreducibly complex structures, even at the smallest molecular level. For instance, there are millions of organisms, including human bodies, which use a structure called a cilium to either swim or move things around within a creature. Cilia are hair-like structures attached to cells which beat like a whip in order to move foreign particles out of our lungs. Sperm also use cilia to swim. Because these structures are so biologically important and so widespread throughout the animal kingdom, Dr. Behe estimates that TEN THOUSAND technical papers have been published on various aspects of cilia.

Like the mouse trap, cilia require several components in order to operate. In the case of a mousetrap, the components are specifically sized pieces of metal and wood. In the case of cilia, they are specifically shaped proteins. The absolute minimum number of components needed for a cilium to operate are three: proteins forming the hair-like fibers (the rotor), proteins linking the adjacent fibers so that they do not fly apart (links), and proteins which contract to cause its whipping motion (the motor). Without all three of these components - the structure would not function. Thus, cilia are irreducibly complex machines. In reality, cilia contain hundreds of different proteins and all are required for its operation. But even these three specific proteins could never have formed by chance mutations. All three are specifically designed to function together and if any one as missing, the cilia could not operate. Thus, the cilia would become a useless drag line hindering the motion of the organism rather than aiding its survival.

In Dr. Behe’s words, “The amount of scientific research which has been done... leads many people to assume that even if they don’t know how cilia evolved, somebody must know. But the search of professional literature proves them wrong. Nobody knows.”

Nobody knows where cilia came from because cilia are irreducibly complex and can never be explained without a supernatural designer. Yet most biochemists are trained to ignore this possibility when examining biological features. If the correct answer has been eliminated; is it any wonder that ten thousand papers can be written on cilia and not one can explain their origin?

Todo restituido en Él


Una recopilación

¡Oh, Dios, exáltate sobre todas mis posesiones! Ninguno de los tesoros de la tierra será agradable para mí, si Tú te glorificas en mi vida. Te ensalzaré a Ti más que a mis amistades. He decidido colocarte por encima de todo, aunque eso me cueste quedar desterrado y solo en medio de la tierra. Exáltate sobre todas mis comodidades. Aunque eso signifique renunciar a mis comodidades y el tener que llevar la cruz, yo guardaré el voto que hago en este día. Exáltate sobre mi reputación. Hazme ambicioso solo de agradarte a Ti, aunque eso signifique que me hunda en la oscuridad y mi nombre quede olvidado como un sueño. Exáltate, Señor, a Tu sitio de honor por encima de todas mis ambiciones, mis gustos y mis disgustos, sobre mi familia, sobre mi salud y aun sobre mi vida misma. Permíteme menguar, para que Tú puedas crecer, déjame hundir para que tú puedas surgir. Cabalga sobre mí, como lo hiciste al entrar a Jerusalén, montado en un pollino, hijo de asna, y permíteme escuchar las voces de las muchedumbres: «¡Hosana en las alturas!» Aiden Tozer[1]

*

Supongo que podría considerarme a mí mismo o pasar por un hombre relativamente exitoso. Cada tanto las personas se me quedan mirando en la calle… eso es ser famoso. Puedo ganar, sin mayor dificultad, lo suficiente como para figurar en el segmento superior de Hacienda o Impuestos Internos… eso también es ser famoso. Con algo de dinero y fama, hasta los ancianos, si les da la gana, pueden disfrutar de las diversiones de moda. Eso es placer. Puede llegar a suceder que, de cuando en cuando, prestaron suficiente atención a algo que dije o escribí como para que me convenza de que tuve impacto en nuestros tiempos… eso es sentirse realizado. No obstante, les digo —y les ruego que me crean— que si multiplican esos pequeños triunfos por un millón y los suman todos, equivalen a nada. A menos que nada, en realidad, si se los compara con una gota de esa agua de vida que Cristo ofrece a quienes tienen sed de lo espiritual, sin importar quiénes o qué sean en la vida. Malcolm Muggeridge[2]

*

Ahora bien, lo que conviene a toda criatura es entregarse a su Creador; establecer intelectual, voluntaria y emocionalmente esa relación que se da por el mero hecho de ser criatura. Cuando así lo hace, es una criatura buena que se siente feliz. A menos que loconsideremos un inconveniente, esta clase de bien se genera en un ámbito muy superior al de las criaturas, ya que Dios mismo, en calidad de Hijo, desde la eternidad, por obediencia filial devuelve al Padre el Ser que el Padre, por amor paternal, genera en el Hijo desde toda eternidad. El hombre fue hecho para imitar este modelo, modelo que imitó el hombre del Paraíso; y dondequiera que la voluntad conferida por el Creador se retorne tan perfectamente, mediante una obediencia deleitosa y deliciosa por parte de la criatura, ahí, sin lugar a dudas, se encuentra el Cielo, y ahí obra el Espíritu Santo. En el mundo, tal como lo conocemos ahora, el problema radica en cómo recuperar ese abandono de uno mismo. C. S. Lewis[3]

*

¿Cuándo se llega a la etapa en la que les basta con Jesús? Pues eso depende de ustedes. Depende de cuánto aprendan de sus experiencias y cuánto pongan en práctica los consejos de Mi Palabra.

Todo depende de decisiones que se tomen y el equilibrio con que las tomen. Si lo que buscan primordialmente es satisfacer su naturaleza terrena, entonces Yo no los satisfaré. En cambio, si optan por Mí y eligen según lo que quiero, los deseos carnales se volverán menos importantes para ustedes.

Cuanto más elijan satisfacer su espíritu, más satisfacción espiritual recibirán de Mí. Es un hábito que se cultiva. Si alimentan su carne, tendrán más ansias de la carne; pero si se concentran en apacentar su espíritu, desearán lo espiritual. En última instancia, la satisfacción espiritual es lo único que realmente los satisfará.

Yo satisfaré su espíritu, pero la decisión depende de ustedes, de lo que elijan y el rumbo que tomen con sus decisiones.

«Solo lo que se haga por Cristo perdurará». Es una verdad innegable. Los resultados y los frutos de las decisiones de acercarse a Mí duran para siempre en Mi mundo, que es a donde se dirigen todos ustedes.

Por eso, Mis amores, Mis tesoros por los que lo entregué todo, quiero que sean tan felices como puedan. Oro por ustedes para que así sea. Conmigo les bastará, si quieren que así sea. Jesús, hablando en profecía[4]

*

Gustoso y por entero, Señor, a Ti me entrego;
eternamente tuyo, por siempre yo seré.
Hijo de Dios, que me amas, a Ti te pertenezco,
y todo lo que tengo y soy, desde este día tuyo es.
Francis Ridley Havergal

*

Todo a Ti, Señor, me rindo, a Tus pies postrado estoy.
Dejo todo lo del mundo y te sigo desde hoy.
Yo me entrego a Ti, yo me entrego a Ti.
¡Oh, Jesús, con toda el alma yo me entrego a Ti!

Salvador, a Ti me entrego, sí, de todo corazón.
Que Tu Espíritu yo sienta y me haga ver que Tuyo soy.
Yo me entrego a Ti, yo me entrego a Ti.
¡Oh, Jesús, con toda el alma yo me entrego a Ti!

A Tus pies yo deposito por entero hoy mi ser.
Lléname de amor y fuerzas y Tu amor podré ofrecer.
Yo me entrego a Ti, yo me entrego a Ti.
¡Oh, Jesús, con toda el alma yo me entrego a Ti!

*

Dios retiene la felicidad y seguridad estables que todos deseamos debido a la naturaleza misma del mundo. Sin embargo, Él ha derramado sobre nosotros gozo, placer y alegría en abundancia. Nunca estamos a salvo (permanentemente), pero tenemos muchas alegrías y algo de éxtasis. No es difícil entender el porqué. Contar con esa seguridad que tanto ansiamos nos enseñaría a poner nuestros corazones en este mundo y representarían un obstáculo en nuestro retorno a Dios. Unos momentos fugaces de dicha en el amor, un paisaje, una sinfonía, un feliz encuentro con nuestros amigos, un baño o un partido de fútbol no bastan para encaminarnos en ese derrotero. Nuestro Padre nos refresca en el camino con algunas posadas agradables, pero no nos alienta a confundirlas con el hogar. C. S. Lewis[5]

*

¿Por qué debemos consagrarnos a Dios? Porque Él se entregó por completo a nosotros. Si Dios, que no nos debe absolutamente nada, está dispuesto a entregarse nada menos que a sí mismo a nosotros, ¿acaso habremos nosotros de responderle con una fracción de lo que podemos darle? Consagrarnos a Dios es una manera de recibir al propio Dios. Yo para Dios y Dios para mí. Yo vivo para Dios y renuncio a mí misma, y así logro que Dios viva para mí. Por lo tanto, al poseer a Dios debemos permitir que Él posea nuestra alma. Madre Teresa de Calcuta

*

Hemos sido hechos para Dios, y solo siendo de alguna manera corno Él, solo siendo una manifestación de Su belleza, de Su bondad amorosa, de Su sabiduría o virtud, los seres amados terrenos han podido despertar nuestro amor. No es que los hubiéramos amado demasiado, sino que no entendíamos bien qué era lo que estábamos amando. No es que se nos vaya a pedir que los dejemos, tan entrañablemente familiares como nos han sido, por un Extraño. Cuando veamos el rostro de Dios sabremos que siempre lo hemos conocido. Ha formado parte, ha hecho, sostenido y movido, momento a momento, desde dentro, todas nuestras experiencias terrenas de amor puro. Todo lo que era en ellas amor verdadero, aun en la tierra era mucho más Suyo que nuestro, y solo era nuestro por ser Suyo. En el Cielo no habrá angustia ni el deber de dejar a nuestros seres queridos de la tierra. Primero, porque ya los habremos dejado: los retratos por el Original, los riachuelos por la Fuente, las criaturas que Él hizo amables por el Amor en sí mismo. Pero, en segundo lugar, porque los encontraremos a todos en Él. Al amarlo a Él más que a ellos, los amaremos más de lo que ahora los amamos. C. S. Lewis[6]

*

Al final podrán decir, como han dicho tantas veces Mis siervos consagrados: «Puedes quedarte con todo este mundo, ¡pero dame a Jesús!» Al final descubrirán que les basta con amarme y vivir por Mí, y que a medida que lo hagan, todo lo que necesitan les será añadido. Al renunciar a todo, lo reciben todo.

Entréguense a Mí con alabanza y acción de gracias, sabiendo que lo hago todo bien y por amor a ustedes. Si desean adquirir esas características, si quieren ser capaces de decir que con Jesús les basta, pídanme que haga lo que sea necesario para infundirles esa actitud. Comiencen a ver cada acontecimiento de su vida como una oportunidad de conocerme mejor y poner a prueba Mis promesas. A medida que lo hagan los convertiré en nuevas criaturas. Les doy Mi Palabra. Lo prometo.

Conmigo les basta porque soy todo lo que satisface sus necesidades espirituales. Soy amor, soy bondad, soy ternura, soy paciente, soy misericordia. Yo soy lo que satisface su espíritu. Soy Yo. Soy el árbol que da los frutos que los satisfacen. Me refiero a su naturaleza principal, a la forma en que se los creó para empezar; a su ser espiritual.

A lo largo de la vida procuro conducir a cada uno de vuelta a Mí. Primero lo hago mediante la salvación. Después, con el alimento de Mi Palabra y las experiencias, procuro ayudar a todos a ahondar tanto como elijan en Mi Espíritu. Cuanto más ahondan, más felices son. Jesús, hablando en profecía[7]

Publicado en Áncora en septiembre de 2012. Traducción: Quiti y Antonia López.


[1] The Pursuit of God (La búsqueda de Dios).

[2] Distinguido periodista inglés, en su libro Jesus Rediscovered.

[3] The Problem of Pain (El problema del dolor).

[4] Publicado por primera vez en junio de 2006.

[5] The Problem of Pain.

[6] The Four Loves.

[7] Publicado por primera vez en junio de 2006.

Copyright © Fight for Your Faith