Over the years I’ve learned that once someone tells me they’re an atheist or an agnostic, it’s a good idea to ask them, “Why? Why are you an atheist/agnostic? What evidence have you found that proves that God does not exist?”  Not one of them has been able to come up with a good answer.  After that simple little question, some of the atheists changed their stand to agnostic.  And that’s the point where I want to lead them. 

“There is no such thing as absolute truth.”

Really?  What does 2 + 2 =?  Four.  And not just sometimes…every time.  Truth, by definition, is very narrow.  It has one right answer but it can have many wrong answers.  There’s only one planet in our solar system called Earth.  Last year’s Super Bowl had only one winner.  One right answer but many wrong answers.  I would expect that when it comes to eternity, there is one right answer and many wrong answers.  There’s only one truth to eternity, and it’s found in the bible.

You see, it doesn’t matter what you believe, it only matters what is true.  I might believe that the sky is orange, but it’s not.  My agnostic friend Stanley may think I’m going to send him a million dollars tomorrow.  Fat chance. 

Some say that as long as they believe something in their heart to be true, then it is.  Now there’s something called relative truth, which basically is the belief that truth is relative to a particular situation.  This is not the same as absolute truth.

Here’s my argument for that:  “If Adolph Hitler believed in his heart that it was okay to kill six million Jews, then was it really okay?” Of course not.  There has to be only one absolute truth. 

One night, on a show called Politically Incorrect, there was a woman on there that asked the others, “In what situation is rape okay?”  Everybody just sat there in silence.  Since it’s not okay, then the statement that rape is wrong would be an absolute statement. 

“Prove that God exists.”

Unbelievers often ask this question, implying that our faith is blind while they have reasoning on their side.  I disagree.  God never asked us to have blind faith.  That’s what leads people to cults.  We use calculated faith for most decisions, and we should do the same for eternal decisions. 

Let’s take four things:
1.      Creation
2.      Design
3.      Art
4.      Order

Every time you see a telephone, you know it had a creator.  Every time you see a watch, you know it had a designer.  Every time you see a painting, you know it had an artist.  Every time you see order, like clothes in a closet separated by color, you know it had an orderer.  When you look around the universe, you see creation, design, art, and order.  If every other thing has these characteristics, why would you not think that the universe also has a Creator, a Designer, an Artist, an Oderer? 

Romans 1:20 says, “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse.”

Atheists and agnostics both have blind faith.  No?  Well, again I ask the question, “Prove that God does not exist.”  The same thing that they accuse Christians of is what they themselves use to make their decision for eternity.

“Prove the bible is true.”

A most frequent question.  Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?”  In John 17:17 Jesus said of God’s Word, “thy word is truth.”  The bible’s internal information points to it being the true word of God.

Of course, non-believers will argue that you’re just using circular reasoning.  Most Christians just say they that they simply believe the bible to be true.  The problem with that, again, is that it doesn’t matter what you believe, it only matters what is true.

So is the bible true?  Consider these points:

1.      The bible is the best-selling book in the world.  So what, that doesn’t mean it’s true!  You’re right, it doesn’t.  But because it is the best-selling book, perhaps we should read it.  About 150 million are sold each year.  Show me another book that has those numbers.  It’s possible that the bible contains at least some truth, so why not read it and see?

2.      The bible claims to be written by God.  Now this is important because many believe men wrote it.  But scripture records, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tim. 3:16); and “for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Pet. 1:21)

Now just because the bible claims to have been written by God doesn’t mean that it was.  I could sign a letter, “Love, God,” but that doesn’t mean that God wrote it.  Read on.

3.      Evidence supports the bible. To date, no one has ever been able to prove a single historical mistake anywhere in the bible.  Now that’s pretty amazing.  If man wrote it, someone would’ve found at least one mistake somewhere.  Let me plug some books that I recommend:

·        Evidence That Demands a Verdict, by Josh McDowell

·        The Case for Christ, by Lee Strobel

Both of these books provide strong evidence for God’s authorship. 

4.      Archaeological evidence supports the bible.  So far, not a single archaeologist has found anything in the Middle East to prove the bible wrong.  I read somewhere where there has been something like more than 20,000 archaeological finds relating to things in the bible and nothing has contradicted scripture.  If I’m not mistaken, the books I mentioned above also contain this information.  My question is, “If you can believe the historical and the archaeological evidence of the bible, why can’t you believe the spiritual part?”

5.      There are many fulfilled prophecies in the bible which validate its accuracy.  Fulfilled prophecies prove the reliability of the bible as well as God’s existence.  What book contains hundreds of detailed prophecies?  The bible; not the Quran or the Book of Mormon.  If a book contained prophecies that did not come true, what does that say about that book?  It’s worthless.  I’ve already covered in my last blog the probability of one man, the God-man Jesus, being able to fulfill so many prophecies so I won’t get into that again.  But who is the only person that could see to it that so many prophecies were fulfilled?  God. And by the way, it’s not circular reasoning to cite fulfilled prophecies.  The bible is compiled of 66 books by roughly 40 writers over a 1600 year period.  

That’s all for now boys and girls.  More to come later.  Keep the Faith.

Looking back at Reck’s blog (http://recksblog.townhall.com/ - see: The Word on Evolution) on this subject, I went through the comments looking to see if Stanley Rosenthal had commented on anything I had written in part 1 of this topic.  His direct reply to me was:

“got this far: Proving God’s existence requires two things: verifiable information and faith…

Faith basically means that you believe something.  I have faith that someone will give me a million dollars tomorrow.  Call me deluded, but I believe it!!!!”

I was disappointed that he didn’t take the time to read the entire blog.  In all seriousness, I’m sure he’s a good person, but it appears that he’s not really interested in reading something different than his own presuppositions.  I’ve found that most agnostics have the same attitude.  It’s okay for them to believe that the earth is much older than 6,000 years because some scientists say so, but if Creationist scientists say something different, then they’re dead wrong.  I wish more agnostics would at least admit that they can’t have it both ways.  Why is it that it’s okay to believe in one thing that requires verifiable information and faith, but not in the possibility that God does exist?  Nonetheless, I will continue the series.

In Psalm 22:12-18 we read:

¹¹ Do not be far from me,
       for trouble is near
       and there is no one to help.

 ¹² Many bulls surround me;
       strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.

 ¹³ Roaring lions tearing their prey
       open their mouths wide against me.

 ¹⁴ I am poured out like water,
       and all my bones are out of joint.
       My heart has turned to wax;
       it has melted away within me.

 ¹⁵ My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
       and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
       you lay me in the dust of death.

 ¹⁶ Dogs have surrounded me;
       a band of evil men has encircled me,
       they have pierced my hands and my feet.

 ¹⁷ I can count all my bones;
       people stare and gloat over me.

 ¹⁸ They divide my garments among them
       and cast lots for my clothing. - NIV

Many bible scholars believe that these verses describe the agony that Jesus was going to go through on the cross, or that these were the words/thoughts actually used by Jesus on the cross.  Is this true?  Let’s examine.

In Matthew 27:46 we read:

About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" – NIV (see also Mark 15:34)

Some critics ask, “If Jesus is God, why did he say this?”  First of all, Jesus was quoting Psalm 22:1 which says My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?  Why?  To draw attention to that verse and to show that He was fulfilling the prophecy of Psalm 22, particularly verses 11-18.  Skeptical?  Try this on:  This Psalm was written approximately 1000 years before Jesus came to the earth.  Crucifixion would not be invented until many centuries later.  Actually, the Phoenician's invented it and Rome got the idea from them.   So, when Rome ruled over Israel, it became the Roman (Gentile) means of capital punishment imposed upon the Jews whose God-given means of execution was stoning.  Nevertheless, Jesus is pointing to the scriptures to substantiate His messianic mission.

That in and of itself isn’t proof that those verses foretell of Jesus’ crucifixion, but consider this:  The term ‘dogs’ was used by the Jews to refer to Gentiles (see Matt. 15:21-28).  His heart had melted within Him (v. 14).   During crucifixion, the loss of blood would cause the heart to beat harder and harder and become extremely fatigued.  Dehydration occurred (v. 15).  Verses 16b-18 speak of piercing His hands and feet and dividing his clothing by casting lots.   This is exactly what happen as described in Matt. 27:35.

Jesus fulfilled several hundred Old Testament prophecies that were written about Him.  To give you and idea of how staggering the odds are of one person doing that, here’s something I found from Josh McDowell’s book entitled, “Evidence That Demands a Verdict:”

The following probabilities are taken from Peter Stoner in Science Speaks (Moody Press, 1963) to show that coincidence is ruled out by the science of probability. Stoner says that by using the modern science of probability in reference to eight prophecies, “we find that the chance that any man might have lived down to the present time and fulfilled all eight prophecies is 1 in 10¹⁷.” That would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. In order to help us comprehend this staggering probability, Stoner illustrates it by supposing that “we take 10¹⁷ silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They will cover all of the state two feet deep.

“Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would have had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man.”

Stoner considers 48 prophecies and says, "we find the chance that any one man fulfilled all 48 prophecies to be 1 in 10¹⁵⁷, or 1 in

100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,

000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,

000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

The estimated number of electrons in the universe is around 10⁷⁹. It should be quite evident that Jesus did not fulfill the prophecies by accident.” 

Some critics say, “Well, the New Testament writers were biased and wrote the NT to make it look like those prophecies were fulfilled.”  I could accept that argument except for this:  Why would someone be willing to die for something that wasn’t true?  And not just one Disciple/Apostle, but almost every one of them.  John, as far as we know, was the only one who died of old age, but only after having been boiled in oil and then later sent to the island of Patmos in exile.  Acts 12:2 records the death of James, son of Zebedee (not to be confused with the author of the book called James, the half-brother of Jesus.), that he was killed by Herod.  The other nine disciples of Jesus (later becoming apostles in Acts) were killed in various ways, albeit according to church tradition, all of who stuck with their story to the end. 

First of all, let me say that I understand why some Americans cry out for socialized medicine in this country.  Emotionally, it sounds like the right thing to do.  "Shouldn't little Johnny get the same healthcare that Bill Gates get?"  The answer is no.  Healthcare is not a human right that everyone should have regardless of whether or not they can pay for it.  Socialists argue that healthcare is too important to be left up to the market.  Really?  Well, let's take a peek into other countries to see how they're doing with socialized medicine.

In March of 2002, the London Observer reported that an "unpublished report shows some patients are now having to wait more than eight months for treatment, during which time many of their cancers become incurable."  The World Health Organisation [sic] published a report that said around 10,000 British people die needlessly from cancer each year - "three times as many as are killed on our roads."

"Okay, but how about Canada?  Now there's a model if I ever saw one!"  You're right, it's a model for disaster.  The Fraser Institute, a Vancouver think-tank, puts out an annual report entitled "Waiting Your Turn."  In 2006, the report showed waiting times for various treatments, showing how long it took for patients to see a specialist once they had been referred by their general practioner.  The shortest, now get this, waiting time was for oncology: 4.9 weeks.  The longest was for orthopedic surgery: 40.3 weeks.  

The median wait for an MRI in Canada was 10.3 weeks, but in Newfoundland, it was 28 weeks.  The median wait for a CT scan was 4.3 weeks, but in Prince Edward Island, it was 9 weeks.  

Despite the long waits, often ending in unnecessary death, private practices are prohibited, by law, from providing health care that is covered under the Canadian Health Act.  In addition, they cannot accept payment from the patient, nor anyone else for services.  British Columbia's Bill 82 says that a surgeon may be fined by up to $20,000 for accepting fees for surgery.  In other words, it's against the law if you choose to opt out of the system.

Many doctors in Canada have simply said, "enough," and have left the country to practice elsewhere.  In fact, an article by Canada News in March of 2003 stated that 10,000 left the country during the 1990's.  In addition, medical schools in Canada are reporting a huge drop-off in their number of graduates.  What is Canada doing about it?  They're using nurses to take up the slack.   Many Canadians are pouring into the U.S. for their care.  

Do we really want government employees running our healthcare system?  Have you ever been to the post office?  Most of them I've encountered walk as if they've just been shot up with an entire syringe of Thorzine.  Do you want people like those down at the DMV, or those involved in government education to take care of your medical needs?  "Well, they're not motivated by profits!"  Give me for-profit healthcare any day.  Give me people like those who work for UPS or Fed-ex, people who sell me my groceries, people who dry clean my clothes, people who sell me my phone service or internet service.  In other words, people who know I can go elsewhere if they don't get me what I want when I want it.  

In the business world, profit demands accountability.  The forces of profit make producers accountable to us, but government related services have no accountability.  Not so you say?  I refer you to the previous paragraph.  Government-run schools have delivered poor quality returns and for that, the folks that are in charge of that get salary increases.  You and I pay for that increase of course.  "Well, just fire them!"  Don't make me laugh.  

Zero price to the user does not equate to zero cost.  If a product or service has a zero price, demand will always exceed supply.  In order to meet the demands, other measures must be taken.  One way is to make people wait for it.  Another way is to make someone in charge of dictating just who can and cannot receive the product or service.  In the case of healthcare, that person could say, "Those who smoke are not eligible for a lung or heart transplant."  

The solution for the healthcare problems we have here in America is not more government involvement, but rather less.  I know a bit about "guaranteed issue" health insurance.  Basically, that means that you are guaranteed to be able to purchase a policy, regardless of your health.  The insurance company, which is not financially supported by the government (and rightfully so), now has to issue a policy for the woman that was just diagnosed with a brain tumor, the guy with AIDS, the child with Cerebral Palsy.  Think they might experience some claim losses?  What happens next?  Well, everyone else who has a policy with that company will soon experience a rate increase.  Now, these guaranteed issued policies do not have the same level of coverage that a healthy person has, but the company still must issue a policy to someone that really is uninsurable.  If your neighbor wanted to borrow your lawn mower, and he told you, "By the way, I'm going to break it and let you pay to have it repaired," how motivated would you be to loan it to him?  If you're an insurance company, and the government says you must issue a policy to someone receiving kidney dialysis, and his premiums are $250/month, how excited are you to give him the policy?  Do ya think his doctor bills might exceed $250/month?  Now you run the risk of losing your other policyholders, those in good health, when they receive their guaranteed rate increases.  

This is getting to be very long and I apologize, so I'll end with this:  Little Johnny is the result of his parents having sex.  That doesn't give him the right to free healthcare.  That's mom and dad's responsibility to pay for it; either through sharing the risk with the insurance company or to pay for the whole thing out of their pocket.  I don't have a problem with people who want socialized medicine.  I just have a problem when they try to drag me into it.

Since a comment to another blog is limited to 2000 characters, I'm forced to reply to a comment found on Reck's blog http://recksblog.townhall.com/ by making my own post.   Reck had posted a blog entitled "The Word on Evolution" and there I saw a comment by Stanley Rosenthal which said: