The “Church,” Pope and so-called religious entities are rife with bloodguilt. The National Socialists began viewing the Jews as a cancer and started segregating and persecuting them. Hitler begins his “master race” propaganda (which such prejudice is an unscriptural “christian” teaching BTW), and all the while no religion stepped up to condemn him. To the contrary, they gave their approval.

Guenter Lewy writes in his book The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany: “Had German Catholicism from the start adhered to a policy of resolute opposition to the Nazi regime, world history might well have taken a different course. Even if this struggle had ultimately failed to defeat Hitler and prevent all of his many crimes, it would in this view have raised the moral prestige of the Church immeasurably. The human cost of such resistance would undeniably have been great, but these sacrifices would have been made for the greatest of all causes. With the home front unreliable, Hitler might not have dared going to war and literally millions of lives would have been saved. . . . When thousands of German anti-Nazis were tortured to death in Hitler’s concentration camps, when the Polish intelligentsia was slaughtered, when hundreds of thousands of Russians died as a result of being treated as Slavic Untermenschen [subhumans], and when 6,000,000 human beings were murdered for being ‘non-Aryan,’ Catholic Church officials in Germany bolstered the regime perpetrating these crimes. The Pope in Rome, the spiritual head and supreme moral teacher of the Roman Catholic Church, remained silent.”—Pages 320, 34

The Catholics supported both sides in the two world wars, in which people of the same religion, “brothers,” killed one another. For example, in WW II, French and American Catholics killed German and Italian Catholics; At times, they killed others who were not only of the same religion but also of the same national background. The two world wars erupted in the heart of Christendom and wouldn’t have been possible had the clergy obeyed the commandment to love, and taught their followers to do the same. But instead, review of the historic record will show that it was the Church’s illicit religio-political relationship that catapulted Hitler into power in Nazi Germany.

In Fascist Italy, on February 11, 1929, the Lateran Treaty was signed by Mussolini and Cardinal Gasparri, making Vatican City a sovereign state. Pope Pius XI claimed that he had “given Italy back to God, and God back to Italy.” Really? 6 years later, on October 3, 1935, Italy invaded Abyssinia, claiming that it was “a barbarous land which still practises slavery.” Who was really being barbarous? Did the Catholic Church condemn Mussolini’s barbarity? While the pope issued ambiguous statements, his bishops were quite vocal in blessing the armed forces of their Italian “fatherland.” In the book The Vatican in the Age of the Dictators, Anthony Rhodes reports:

“In his Pastoral Letter of the 19th October [1935], the Bishop of Udine [Italy] wrote, ‘It is neither timely nor fitting for us to pronounce on the rights and wrongs of the case. Our duty as Italians, and still more as Christians is to contribute to the success of our arms.’ The Bishop of Padua wrote on the 21st October, ‘In the difficult hours through which we are passing, we ask you to have faith in our statesmen and armed forces.’ On the 24th October, the Bishop of Cremona consecrated a number of regimental flags and said: ‘The blessing of God be upon these soldiers who, on African soil, will conquer new and fertile lands for the Italian genius, thereby bringing to them Roman and Christian culture. May Italy stand once again as the Christian mentor to the whole world.

Yes, Abyssinia was raped with the blessing of the Roman Catholic clergy.

Most damning of all is their OWN admittance! The Roman Catholic Church in France  issued a formal “Declaration of Repentance,” asking God and the Jewish people for forgiveness for the “indifference” the Catholic Church showed toward the persecution of Jews under France’s wartime Vichy government. From 1940 to 1944, more than 75,000 Jews were arrested and deported from France to Nazi death camps. In a statement read by Archbishop Olivier de Berranger, the church admitted that it had allowed its own interests “to obscure the biblical imperative of respect for every human being created in the image of God.” This was reported in the French newspaper Le Monde.

The declaration read, in part: “The church must recognize that in regard to the persecution of the Jews, and especially in regard to manifold anti-Semitic measures decreed by the Vichy authorities, indifference by far prevailed over indignation. Silence was the rule, and words in favor of the victims the exception. . . . Today, we confess that this silence was a mistake. We also recognize that the church in France failed in its mission as the educator of people’s consciences.”

I also thought the words of British flying officer, David Walker, in a conversation with a Catholic priest during World War II was interesting.

“You know, padre, on our aircraft one of our crew members is a Catholic, and you bless him before we go off on bombing missions over Germany. Now, the same Catholic religion in Germany is blessing a Catholic crew member of a German aircraft that comes over and destroys our cities. So the question I ask is, ‘Whose side is God on?’”

The New York Times stated: “In the past local Catholic hierarchies almost always supported the wars of their nations, blessing troops and offering prayers for victory, while another group of bishops on the other side publicly prayed for the opposite outcome. . . . The contradiction between the Christian spirit and the conduct of war . . . seems increasingly clear to many, as weapons grow more brutal.” And U.S.News & World Report noted: “The prestige of Christianity in the world has been gravely impaired by the frequency with which the so-called Christian nations have used violence.”

The Catholic’s bloodguilt goes back hundreds of years actually. Christendom’s, and the Catholics in particular, leaders, religious and secular, displayed intense hatred for anyone who tried to encourage Bible reading or anyone who exposed their unscriptural practices. John Hus and Bible translator William Tyndale were persecuted and martyred. During the Middle Ages their oppressive rule reached a peak in the diabolic Catholic Inquisition. Any who disputed the teachings or authority of the church were suppressed, and countless thousands of so-called heretics were tortured to death or burned at the stake.

The Inquisition lasted over 600 years! It was a murderous attempt to torture and stamp out all who disagreed with the church. The Catholics have been swimming in the blood of the innocent for many, many centuries, and the atrocities of the 1930′s and 1940′s represent only a very small part of their guilt.

Peter De Rosa, who states that he is a “patriotic Catholic,” says in his book Vicars of Christ—The Dark Side of the Papacy: “The church was responsible for persecuting Jews, for the Inquisition, for slaughtering heretics by the thousand, for reintroducing torture into Europe as part of the judicial process. . . . Popes appointed and sacked even emperors, demanded that they impose Christianity on their subjects under the threat of torture and death. . . . The cost to the Gospel message was horrendous.” The only “crime” of some who were murdered was that they possessed a Bible. I won’t even get started on the Crusades.

If there really IS a God, this murderous, idolatrous religion’s blood-stained hands will be the evidence for its adverse judgment. Any who associate themselves with this vile organization can only suffer the same fate.

Why is it Harold Camping cannot get his ‘Doomsday’ prediction correct? First, let’s lay the foundation for his initial prediction of a 5.21.11 Doomsday prediction, followed by a 10.21.11 Doomsday.

According to Camping, May 21st marked exactly 7,000 years since Noah’s flood. Since the number ’7′ is a significant number in the Bible, Camping concluded that the 7,000 year mark must signify the end of times for wicked mankind. When May 21 came and went, Camping explained the lack of a global destruction by stating May 21 was actually Judgment Day, and that those judged worthy would be taken to heaven, and those deemed unrepentant and wicked would be destroyed along with the physical earth, on October 21, 2011. Just as May 21 did, so too did October 21 come and pass with nothing out of the ordinary happening. So, what went wrong? Two things.

1) The date is impossible to calculate to begin with. Mark 13:32 says: "Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father" and 1 Thes 5: 2 says: "For YOU yourselves know quite well that God’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night." In other words, we know no more as to when "The End" is coming as we know when a thief is going to break in in the night.

2) Even if it was possible to calculate the date, Camping has the date for Noah’s Flood wrong anyway.

Camping’s basis for their End of Times prophecy was that May 21 marked exactly 7,000 years since Noah’s flood. WRONG.

The Bible provides chronological information that allows for a careful count back to the beginning of human history. At Genesis 5:1-29, we find the genealogical line from the creation of the first man, Adam, to the birth of Noah. The Deluge began “in the six hundredth year of Noah’s life.”—Genesis 7:11.

To determine the time of the Flood we need to start with a date that is accepted in secular history and corresponds to a particular event recorded in the Bible. From that point, we can determine the exact year of the flood.

One pivotal date is 539 B.C.E., the year when Persian King Cyrus overthrew Babylon. Secular sources for the time of his reign include Babylonian tablets and documents of Diodorus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Ptolemy. Because of a decree issued by Cyrus, a Jewish remnant left Babylon and arrived in their homeland in 537 B.C.E. That marked the end of Judah’s 70-year desolation, which according to the Biblical record had begun in 607 B.C.E. By taking into account the period of the judges and the reigns of Israel’s kings, we can determine that the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt occurred in 1513 B.C.E.

Bible-based chronology takes us back another 430 years to the making of the covenant with Abraham in 1943 B.C.E. Next, we must take into account the births and life spans of Terah, Nahor, Serug, Reu, Peleg, Eber, and Shelah, as well as Arpachshad, who was born “two years after the deluge.” (Genesis 11:10-32) Thus, we can place the beginning of the Flood in the year 2370 B.C.E. Which would mean that only some 4,381 years have elapsed (give or take a year), NOT the 7,000 years that Camping calculated. ***

*** Counting Backward From Cyrus’ Decree Allowing the Jews to Return From Exile to the Flood of Noah’s Day
537  Cyrus’ decree
539  The overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus the Persian
68 years

2370  Beginning of the Flood

 *   Cyrus’ proclamation for the release of the Jews from exile was made “in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia,” likely in the year 538 B.C.E. or early in 537 B.C.E.

In no particular order:

True Grit (2010)
King Kong (2005)
3:10 To Yuma (2007)
The Magnificent Seven (1960)
Cape Fear (1991)
Dawn of the Dead (2004)
The Departed (2006)
A Fistfull of Dollars (1964)
The Fly (1986)
Insomnia (2002)
Scarface (1983)
The Ten Commandments (1956)
The Thing (1982)
The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (2005) – I saw this performed as a play at a local college a few years ago. Wonderful!
The Champ (1979)
Dark Water (2005) – This version gets a bum rap but I enjoyed it.
Halloween (2007) – Its sequel was disgusting, appalling and an insult to the franchise, but this was actually quite good.
Heat (1995)
The Lake House (2006) – I don’t care that it’s Keanu Reeves and the film has a sub-7 rating at the IMDB, I liked it!
Let Me In (2010)
Pure Luck (1991) – This movie only has a 5.0 rating at the IMDB, but I tell you, I don’t think I ever laughed so hard at a movie! Martin Short was a comedic genius! That it only has a 5.0 is a travesty.
Quarantine (2008)
The Toy (1982)
Vanilla Sky (2001)
The Vanishing (1993)
Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979)
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels (1988)

I have conducted a thorough examination of the scriptures since 1989, and have been trying to reconcile science and the Bible since 2003. In particular, I’ve been studying biology since 2003. My wavering faith is not so much that an invisible, all powerful being is difficult to believe in; it’s more that if he DOES exist, how can he stand idly by and watch the corruption, hate and violence we see today? And I have issues with the Genesis account of the deception of Adam and Eve. But that is neither here or there.

My conclusions or not based on blind faith. They are always based on what I can see, observe and examine. If there is tangible evidence of an intelligent creator, it resides in the living cell.

Researchers have learned that in order for a cell to survive, at LEAST three different types of COMPLEX molecules must work together-DNA, RNA and proteins. Few scientists would assert that a complete, living cell just suddenly formed by chance from a mix of inanimate chemicals.

Many scientists feel that life could arise by chance because of an experiment conducted in 1953. Stanley L. Miller was able to produce some amino acids by discharging electricity into a mixture of gases that was THOUGHT to represent the atmosphere of primitive Earth. And since then some amino acids have been found in a meteorite. But does this mean that ALL the basic building blocks of life could easily be produced by chance? New York University’s Professor of Chemistry Robert Shapiro stated that “Some writers have presumed that ALL life’s building blocks could be formed with ease in Miller-type experiments and were present in meteorites. This is NOT the case.”

Consider the RNA molecule. It’s constructed of SMALLER molecules called nucleotides. A nucleotide is a different molecule from an amino acid and is slightly MORE complex. Shapiro says that “no nucleotides of ANY kind have been reported as products of spark-discharge experiments or in studies of meteorites.” He further states that the probability of a self-replicating RNA molecule randomly assembling from a pool of chemical building blocks “is so vanishingly small that its happening even ONCE anywhere in the visible universe would count as a piece of exceptional good luck.”

In 2009 scientists at the University of Manchester, England, reported making some nucleotides in their lab. However, Shapiro states that their recipe “definitely does not meet my criteria for a PLAUSIBLE pathway to the RNA world.”

Then what about proteins? They can be made from as few as 50 or as many as several thousand amino acids bound together in a HIGHLY specific order. The average functional protein in a SIMPLE cell contains 200 amino acids! Even in THOSE cells, there are THOUSANDS of different types of proteins. The probability of just ONE protein containing only 100 amino acids could ever randomly form on Earth has been calculated to be about ONE chance in a million billion.

Researcher Hubert P. Yockey goes further. “It is IMPOSSIBLE that the origin of life was ‘proteins first.’” RNA is REQUIRED to make proteins, yet proteins are involved in the production of RNA! Now, what if, despite the incredibly small odds, both proteins AND RNA molecules did somehow miraculously appear by chance in the SAME place and at the SAME time? How likely would it be for them to cooperate to form a self-replicating, self-sustaining type of LIFE?

Dr. Carol Cleland, a member of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Astrobiology Institute states: “The probability of this happening by chance seems astronomically low.” She continues, “Yet, most researchers seem to assume that if they can make sense of the independent production of proteins and RNA under natural primordial conditions, the coordination will SOMEHOW take care of itself.” And regarding the current theories of how these building blocks could have arisen by chance, she says: “NONE of them have provided us with a very satisfying story about how this happened.”

Just think of the challenge facing researchers who feel life arose by chance. They have found some amino acids that also appear in living cells. In their laboratories they have, by means of CAREFULLY DESIGNED and DIRECTED experiments, manufactured other, more complex molecules. Ultimately, they hope to build all the parts they need to construct a simple cell.

QUESTION: If the chemicals in the experiment represent the Earth’s early environment and the molecules represent the building blocks of life, WHOM or WHAT does the scientist who performed the experiment represent? Does he represent blind chance, or an intelligent entity?

This would be like a scientist taking NATURALLY occurring elements, transforming them into steel, plastic, silicone and wire, and constructing a robot. He then programs the robot to be able to build copies of itself. What does this prove? At best, that an INTELLIGENT entity can create an impressive machine.

If it takes an INTELLIGENT entity to create and program a lifeless robot, what would it take to create a LIVING cell, let alone a HUMAN?

Along the same vein, if scientists ever DID construct a cell, they would accomplish something truly amazing-but would they prove that the cell could be made by accident? If anything, they would prove the very opposite!

To believe that even a “simple” cell arose by chance from non-living chemicals requires a HUGE leap of faith. 

What requires greater faith? To believe that the millions of intricately coordinated parts of a cell arose by chance, or to believe that the cell is the product of an intelligent mind?

Thirteen years ago, there was a big-budget summer blockbuster that did something rare: it entertained people AND made them think about important philosophical issues. Its repercussions continue to be felt today. That movie, of course, was Beverly Hills Ninja. No, I kid, it was Contact, starring Jodie Foster and Matthew McConaughey. This was 1997, when Jodie Foster still made movies regularly, and when the novelty of Matthew McConaughey hadn’t worn off yet. Robert Zemeckis, who had just won an Oscar for directing Forrest Gump — THAT IS A THING THAT REALLY HAPPENED — was next hired to direct this story, based on a novel by Carl Sagan. Sagan, who died eight months before the film was released, was next to Isaac Asimov and Stephen Hawking in the category of Super-Smart Guys Who Look at the Stars and Know Everything About Them. The stereotype would be that he was therefore an atheist, but Sagan always insisted he was agnostic. “An atheist has to know a lot more than I know,” he said. “An atheist is someone who knows there is no god. By some definitions atheism is very stupid.”

Full article

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I just marvel at my atheist friends who are atheists, just because. They put no more research or thought into the subject at hand other than what they were force fed by college professors, peers and so-called “authoritative” figures. Basically taking the word of others, they are either too lazy or too ignorant to invest the time necessary to confirm or deny for themselves.

I’ve spent dozens of hours debating this topic. It is shocking to find how little they actually know, yet are so convinced they are correct. Based on….nothing really. Same goes for “believers”. I’ve had one too many friends try to “save” me, yet, I am usually more familiar with their Bible better than they are!

I tell my atheist and believing friends the same thing: “Don’t tell me you’re an atheist. I don’t care because more than likely you don’t know why you are.” “Don’t tell me you’re a believer because again, most likely you don’t know why you are.”

It has been said, and is the generally accepted belief, that if you write, you are a writer. Whether you wait on tables, repair PCs or milk goats, as long as you write, you are technically a writer. “Then why don’t I feel like one?” you ask? Some are reluctant to say, “I’m a writer.” As if making that statement would be committing the eighth cardinal sin. If asked, they might say, “I write.”

This might be due to the misguided assumption many have, that unless you are a paid writer, you aren’t a real writer.

I visit numerous screenwriting and novel writing blogs and websites and am in awe of the unsigned talent out there. Most of those guys make little to no money for their efforts. They freely share their imagination and brilliance with anyone who would avail themselves of the opportunity to soak it in. Others write for a living. A good living. So whether you are a paid writer or not isn’t the point. Yet!

Another problem might be that you tend to compare your screenplays to those of Woody Allen, Billy Wilder, Francis Ford Coppola or Charlie Kaufman. Or compare your novels to those of the masters of horror, sci-fi, romance, mystery and so on. While it is good to read and learn from the greats, it is not good to compare yourself to them to the point of discouragement and apathy setting in.

Focus on honing your craft. Find your voice. Your style. You may not become a great writer, but you can become a good writer.

Remember, “The professional is the amateur who didn’t quit.” – Richard Bach

Write first for the personal satisfaction of letting your inner child, demon or alter-ego out. If you are only doing it for the money, then you are more likely to be washed away by the numerous waves of rejection and disappointed that will invaribly come your way. At least when starting out. If love of the craft, on the other hand, is your motivational force, you can enjoy your work whether published or not, whether paid or not. Then, down the road if you are noticed and published, then all the better.

Consider the example of J.L. Bourne. He started a blog several years ago, wrote a little bit of his story each day, and in time his compilations became the book entitled Day by Day Armageddon. What is more, its sequel is scheduled for release in July of 2010! “Ah, but he’s a professional writer.” you say. In truth, he was on active duty serving in the U.S. military when he wrote DBDA. He wrote a little bit each day as he had time to do so.

Not everyone will have a similar success story. But his story proves that it is possible if you just keep after it. And if fate delays in calling your number, don’t give up. Blogs are cheap-to-free to set up. There are also fairly cheap self-publishing alternatives out there. So just keep the pen to the paper or fingers to the keys and continue to do what you love most: BE A WRITER! The joy will ALWAYS be there and hey, could be the payday will follow. However, you’ll never know if you give up.

Check his most excellent blog out here.

Beautiful poetry is rarely the work of a shallow mind. Poetry has a long-standing connection with what matters most to us—relationships, love, spirituality, nature, and the meaning of life. It should come as no surprise then that poetry is one of the oldest art forms. Comparing poetry with prose one famous poet said that if both described the same thing and were equally well written, “the verse will be read a hundred times where the prose is read once.”

Because of its attributes, poetry is often relatively easy to memorize. The oldest surviving Greek poems, the Iliad and the Odyssey, were recited from memory at Greek festivals—quite a feat, given the epic proportions of these works!

The Macquarie Dictionary defines poetry as “the art of rhythmical composition, written or spoken, for exciting pleasure by beautiful, imaginative, or elevated thoughts” and as “literary work in metrical form; verse.” Note the two key attributes of poetry—rhythm and meter. Rhythm is part of the world around us. We see it in ocean tides, in seasons, and the beat of our heart. Meter is the pattern of rhythm. Another popular poetic device is rhyme.

Not dependent on rhyme, Japanese haiku is famous for combining beauty of thought with astonishing brevity. It packs its thoughts into just three lines comprising 17 syllables—5 in the first and third lines and 7 in the second. Its beauty and simplicity have made haiku an enjoyable introduction to poetry for many.

Traditionally, poetry is notorious for compressing considerable thought into few words. The World Book Encyclopedia states that poetic words “suggest much more than they say. They stir your imagination . . . The language of poetry is packed under pressure, and the meaning of a single word may trigger the thought, letting the entire poem explode in your imagination.” Of course, you may have to read some poems a few times before they “explode” in your mind, allowing you to grasp their sense.

If you want to write poetry yourself, you would do well to first read a wide range of verse. This will help you to grasp the various principles of composition. Obviously, the best way to learn to write verse is to sit down with pencil and paper and write, or sit at the computer and type.

Why not try putting your thoughts into verse when you send someone a get well or thank you card? Your poetry need not be long or brilliant. Just write a few lines expressing what is in your heart.  Be genuine. You don’t have to be a genius to write poetry, any more than you have to be a great chef to enjoy preparing a meal. Mix equal amounts of desire, imagination, effort, and persistence and the paintings with words that you produce may just surprise you.