Swan Lake

Friend of mine sent me this.  Pretty amazing.

You might be a heretic..

If you never read the word of God. Which by the way for you TBN listeners is the Bible. Just so you know.

And here to prove that point is “Pastrix” Paula White

HT: Lee Shelton IV

The Dark Knight

Movie Review Spoilers Present

So over the weekend I went with my son to see the Dark Knight. We went to the local Imax theater and all I can say if you get a chance to do so you should see this movie in Imax format. Certain scenes were especially filmed for the Imax screen and they are sweet.

You first meet Joker as he about to rob a mob controlled bank. This is where you see Heath Ledger bring to life the first few bits of the maleficent chaotic force that is the trademark of this insane killer in white faced clown make-up.

You also see that Gary Oldman (Lt. and then later Commissioner Gordon) has developed a relationship with this strange vigilante dressed in a bat costume . The bat signal flashes over the city and the criminal element decides to stay home that night.

You also see Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) waging night long battles over various parts of the city and coming home to his underground hide out in his penthouse where he stitches himself together after getting yet another wound to his body. In fact as he turns his back to us you see the scars, bruises, and dried blood that maps out his physique. Something Alfred notices with some concern on his face.

But not everything is going wrong in Gotham a new DA dubbed the white knight by the press has come to join forces with Batman and Gordon to rid the city of crime. This is Harvey Dent. (Aaron Ekhart) He is also with Bruce’s old girlfriend Rachel.

Large amounts of violence in this film, I saw children six years of age in the theater which is a definite no-no.
Also don’t go into this movie thinking that you see sunshine and lollipops its not going to happen ever.

Ledger does an excellent job as the Joker he deserves to get something for this performance even if it would be posthumously. Bale is also delivers an excellent performance you believe that he is Batman.

Certain scenes were disturbing but none quite so much as the mayor of Gotham interviewing Lt. Gordon and then you realize that the mayor has too much guyliner on, somebody should tell him it makes him look cheap.

This is a movie for grown ups thumbs up.

History of Early Church Invalidates Apostolic Succession

Dear Friend, The Pope’s visit to the U.S.A., April 15-20, placed him in the limelight of his so-called apostolic succession from Peter. It is actually required in the Catholic Church that one believes in an historical continuity between the early Church and the Church of Rome. Most Catholics presume that this is an historical fact. Regrettably, many Bible believers have not really analyzed the question. Our article, which studies the authentic early Church, is one of the most important articles that we have written. We depend on the conviction that truth is derived from God alone and on His strength alone. We trust that He will use this article to pull down the strongholds of man-devised apostolic succession, and the Papal re-writing and amending of early Church history to shore up this dogma. “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds.” The article called, “History of the Early Church Invalidates Papal Claim of Apostolic Succession,” is given below. We ask that you respond by carefully studying the article and through your much needed prayers. We would greatly appreciate it if you would forward the article to others. We request also, if possible, that you post it on your Web page. Trusting in the Lord’s grace and mighty power, Richard Bennett

 

Read the entire article here

Redemption

In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, (Ephesians 1:7 ESV)

Sin Nature

Dustin Segers some excellent posts on Sin Nature over at Strange Baptist Fire.

Sin Nature part 1

Sin Nature part 2

Sin Nature part 3

 

ht Dustin S. Segers

Responding to Marc

I had said that I would get back to Marc’s responses to my old post on Doxoblogy about Original Sin.  And its taken me longer than I wanted but here goes: 

 

Marc:

 

I think you need to take another look at what Paul is saying in Romans 5. He explicitly says “death passed to all men, because all sinned” and not “death passed to all men, because all are sinners”.

If you like, all men are sinners because even the sweetest baby will eventually sin, but wrath and punishment are results of sinning and not of just being sinners.

I’ll continue my comments in part 3…

Well lets take a look at that passage in Romans:

 

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned– for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.
(Romans 5:12-19 ESV)

 Now let’s add the rest of Marc’s comments:

Guilt is not what is inherited but rather the potential (if not predisposition) to sin – it’s our sorry state. If we are born guilty then God’s judgement would not be just but a farce. This would not be judging deeds but producing fodder for hell. Also, don’t confuse spiritual death with natural death. Spiritual death is a result of sin. The idea that no meat was eaten by carnivores before the fall or that animals looked carefully in case they stepped on ants is simply ludicrous. You would need super-evolution to produce the anatomy and metabolism carnivores now have if they formerly munched on grass. The death of Adam “in the day” of his trespass was obviously not natural and neither was Christ’s conquering of death at the cross referring to natural death. It is clear that spiritual death is the break or separation from God initiated in Eden and resolved at Calvary.

All right Marc let’s examine your statement about inherent guilt.  You assert that everyone that is born doesn’t have a status before God as one guilty of sin.  This directly contradicts the doctrine of original sin.  Which states: 

We believe that through the disobedience of Adam original sin is extended to all mankind; which is a corruption of the whole nature and a hereditary disease, wherewith even infants in their mother’s womb are infected, and which produces in man all sorts of sin, being in him as a root thereof, and therefore is so vile and abominable in the sight of God that it is sufficient to condemn all mankind. Nor is it altogether abolished or wholly eradicated even by regeneration;[1] since sin always issues forth from this woeful source, as water from a fountain; notwithstanding it is not imputed to the children of God unto condemnation, but by His grace and mercy is forgiven them. Not that they should rest securely in sin, but that a sense of this corruption should make believers often to sigh, desiring to be delivered from this body of death.

Wherefore we reject the error of the Pelagians, who assert that sin proceeds only from imitation. 

The Belgic Confession of Faith, Article XV Original Sin

Now you next statement is that “if we are born guilty then God’s judgment would not be just but a farce.  This would not be judging deeds but producing fodder for hell.”

Now the obvious problem with that is that if it is unjust for God to condemn us all because of Adam’s sin then it too would be unjust to save us through Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross. 

Instead scripture teaches us:

 For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.  (Romans 5:15-17 emphasis mine)

So Marc your denial of original sin puts your view to be the same as that of Pelagius who taught that Adam’s sin didn’t affect anyone but instead all other men didn’t have the propensity to sin but rather came to it through outside sources.   However, the bible distinctly teaches that the progenitor does represent further generations see Hebrews 7:9 thus Adam represented all of us and so all of us are just as guilty as Adam because we all were in Adam. 

 

Now as to your statements regarding superevolution and what the original diet of creation I’ll direct you toward this article:  Creation’s original diet and the changes at the Fall.