In Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” the problem wasn’t that the emperor was naked… he was. The problem was that he wouldn’t admit it.

“He thought it better to continue the procession under the illusion that anyone who couldn’t see his clothes was either stupid or incompetent. And he stood stiffly on his carriage, while behind him a page held his imaginary mantle.”

So, how many of us are placing weekend religion and tax-exempt ministry before spiritual authenticity?  How much humility and honesty is giving way to pomp and pro forma? Sometimes it just takes a child, without orthodoxy or agenda, to declare, “The emperor is naked.”

And thus starts spiritual renewal for many of us…

This is a huge reminder for me today,

Randall Niles

Although Pascal had a genius mind, he struggled with questions of the soul. Beginning with the unbearable loss of his mother to a mysterious illness when he was three, he later developed his own illness that sapped his life. Ultimately, Pascal’s intellect couldn’t provide all the answers.

On November 23, 1654, Blaise Pascal was reading the 17th Chapter of John when he had a life-changing encounter with God. He wrote the following:

From about half past ten at night to about half an hour after midnight,

FIRE

“God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob,” not of philosophers and scholars

Certitude, heartfelt joy, peace.

God of Jesus Christ.

God of Jesus Christ.

The world forgotten, everything except God.

“O righteous Father, the world has not known You, but I have known You” (John 17:25).

Joy, joy, joy, tears of joy.

It was at this moment that Pascal knew it wasn’t enough to know about God or debate his existence with the finest thinkers in the world. Rather, it was essential to meet God personally.

Pascal was an intellectual giant who wrote about God for years. However, it was this emotional event that shook Pascal into the truth that you can’t know God through intellect alone. He later wrote, “The heart has its reasons; that reason knows not of.”

Happy New Year!

Randall Niles

But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from everlasting. (Micah 5:2)

“And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:8-11)

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this. (Isaiah 9:6-7)

And that’s what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown 

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Randall Niles

Who was this predicted “Shiloh” mentioned as far back as the Book of Genesis?

“The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples” (Genesis 49:10 NASB).

Who was this coming “Ruler” that the prophet Micah said would be born in Bethlehem, yet preexisted time itself?

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:2 (NKJV).

Who was this “Redeemer” that Job said would come to save him and the world from death?

“I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth” (Job 19:25).

Who was this prophesied “Son” that the prophet Isaiah declared would come to earth and be referred to as “Wonderful,” “Counselor,” “Mighty God,” “Everlasting Father,” and “Prince of Peace?”

“For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6 NKJV).

Who was this “Messiah” (Hebrew: Mashiyach) that the prophet Daniel said would come sixty-nine “weeks” (weeks of years in Hebrew, meaning 483 years) after a decree to rebuild Jerusalem?

“Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince, there shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublesome times” (Daniel 9:25 NKJV).

Who was this “Root of Jesse” that the prophet Isaiah said would offer hope and rest at some future date in time?

“In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and his place of rest will be glorious” (Isaiah 11:10 NIV).

Who was this righteous “Branch” that the prophet Jeremiah said would reign as “King” and execute judgment throughout the earth?

“Behold, the days are coming,” says the Lord, “That I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness; a King shall reign and prosper, and execute judgment and righteousness in the earth” (Jeremiah 23:5 NKJV).

Who was this “Son of Man” that the prophet Daniel said would have everlasting dominion over all peoples and nations?

“I was watching in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:13-14 NKJV).

Once you investigate these scriptures, contemplate their meanings in light of the historic Jewish record. What’s the common theme? What’s the powerful conclusion?

Merry Christmas indeed!

Randall Niles

Merry Christmas — The Video 

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

When the marketplace of ideas is widely-available for everyone (including balloon-toting free-loaders), we get open and honest access to a variety of viewpoints. When passionate people have the opportunity to “make their case,” we’re all better for it.

As we know from history, good ideas have good consequences and bad ideas have bad consequences. Without free access to the full pallet of ideas, we don’t get the collective opportunity to weigh the arguments and discern logic from lunacy. We make each other better when we have to “compete” in a free enterprise information system.

So, what’s the ideological position of those currently occupying Wall Street? Here’s a “List of Demands” (sounds kind of childish and a bit totalitarian, doesn’t it?) posted to the Occupy Wall Street website (http://occupywallst.org/)…

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending “Freetrade” by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America’s nuclear power plants.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the “Books.” World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the “Books.” And I don’t mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

These demands will create so many jobs it will be completely impossible to fill them without an open borders policy.

I want to thank GOD for the First Amendment to our Constitution, which allows whackos to freely express themselves. Thank GOD these people have a public forum to present and defend their insane ideas. Our country will be better for it.

Keep Thinking,

Randall Niles

The Atheist: “Even if a finely-tuned cosmos and/or complex life suggest a first cause/designer, there’s too much pain and suffering in the world to believe in the Judeo-Christian God.”

The Theist’s Response: “Life’s order, design, and complexity require an Intelligent Designer, and our response to pain and suffering is relative to our knowledge of right and wrong/good and evil in a fallen world.”

Indeed, writers from Job to Augustine, Aquinas to Lewis, have filled volumes on this subject… My “one-liner” didn’t quite cut-it. Here’s where I was going…

Many atheists deny the existence of God based on the evil, pain, and suffering they observe in the world.

The simple logic: (1) A good and loving God wouldn’t allow evil, pain, and suffering in His world. (2) Evil, pain, and suffering exist in our world. (3) Therefore, God doesn’t exist.

But does this logic really work? On what objective basis is the atheist defining “evil,” “pain,” and “suffering” in his purely materialistic, naturalistic universe?

If the entire cosmos is nothing but the long-term result of an initial cosmic accident, then we have no universal standard for comprehending right and wrong. If conscious life is somehow the ultimate effect of mindless matter in motion, how can any individual declare what is objectively good or evil? Asked differently, how can the atheist reject the existence of God based on evil, pain, and suffering, when there’s no transcendent basis to argue “cosmic unfairness” in the first place?

C.S. Lewis said: “My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?”

Richard Rorty, a popular atheist philosopher, gives us a different perspective on the same truth: “There is no answer to the question, ‘Why not be cruel?’”

The theist observes and acknowledges evil, pain, and suffering in this broken world. The theist understands that evil, pain, and suffering are contrary to the opposite “good” states – The “way it should be.” The theist has an ultimate answer for why we are the way we are, and what the end of the story looks like. Indeed, our response to evil, pain, and suffering is relative to our objective knowledge of right and wrong, good and evil, in God’s fallen world.

The atheist, on the other hand, has no such bearings in this area, no objective basis for declaring what’s right and what’s wrong. In fact, the atheist has no foundation for believing things are broken (“fallen”) in the first place. If the atheist rejects any type of objective standard for evil, how can he use the so-called “problem of evil” to deny the existence of God? Similarly, without a transcendent plumb line (a “true north”) to define what “evil”, “pain,” and “suffering” really are, how can the atheist reject God (condemn God) for things that don’t really exist? Logically, how can anyone use a subjective feeling or personal experience to reject the ultimate existence of anything?

Still Thinking,

Randall Niles

Remarkably, the same issues repeat themselves over and over again. Although certain “double PhD’s” would like you to think otherwise, the core controversies aren’t really “rocket science” at all. In a nutshell, “New Atheism” vs. Christian Theism boils down to the following:

The Atheist’s Response to the Theist:

(i)            God doesn’t exist because science explains the cosmos without him.

(ii)           Even if a finely-tuned cosmos and/or complex life suggest a first cause/designer, there’s too much pain and suffering in the world to believe in the Judeo-Christian God.

(iii)          The Judeo-Christian Bible is myth and legend.

(iv)         A moral life doesn’t require God, anyway.

The Theist’s Response to the Atheist:

(i)            Science affirms that the finely-tuned cosmos was created out of nothing.

(ii)           Life’s order, design, and complexity require an Intelligent Designer, and our response to pain and suffering is relative to our knowledge of right and wrong/good and evil in a fallen world.

(iii)          The Bible is trustworthy based on history, science, archaeology, manuscripts, and prophecy.

(iv)         True morality requires a transcendent standard — God.

That’s it – While the barbs, buzzwords, and bravado change from time to time, this is the essence of the Atheism vs. Theism dispute. Although Christian apologetics and worldview discussions appear vast and intimidating to many of us, these are the four foundational arguments to understand, explore, and defend. Once you feel comfortable with these basics, there’s not much that will surprise you. Clothe yourself in humility, have fun, and engage the discussion.

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools… (Romans 1:20-22)

Keep Thinking,

Randall Niles

Although Israel (and the United States?) will resist Palestinian statehood as currently concocted, the UN vote is pretty much assured.

“We will, of course, be voting for any of the Palestinians’ proposals. We are saying that whatever you decide to do, we will support you.” (Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s UN ambassador, September 12, 2011)

Of course, historic tensions in the region tell us that declaring a Palestinian state is one thing, but it’s quite another to actually create one.

“The appeal to the UN is a battle for all Palestinians, and in order to succeed, it needs millions to pour into streets.” (Yasser Abed Rabbo, Palestinian Authority, September 3, 2011)

“Jordan and the future Palestine are stronger than Israel is today. It is the Israeli who is scared today.” (King Abdullah of Jordan on September 12, 2011)

Currently, the Palestinians are divided between two views of what the Palestinian state should look like. Fatah is based in the West Bank and grounds its secular philosophy in the 40-year-old Pan-Arab movement. Fatah views the Palestinian people as a “state” within the broader Arab nation. Generally, Fatah accepts Palestinian co-existence with a permanent Israel.

Hamas is the other dominant ideology. Currently based in Gaza, Hamas understands the struggle for Palestinian statehood as part of a widespread Islamist expansion. Hamas rejects survival of the Israeli state.

In recent months, we’ve watched uprisings throughout North Africa and the Middle East that point to a severely damaged Pan-Arab movement. Mubarak of Egypt, Gadhafi of Libya, and (although more complicated) Bashar of Syria are all figureheads of an increasingly bygone era. Therefore, it looks like Fatah may be hitched to a dying ideology in the region, while Hamas may be positioned to roll with current Islamist momentum.

It’s important to understand that Egypt traditionally held Hamas in check through its treaty with Israel and coordinated blockade of Gaza. However, look what’s happened in the last few weeks – a resurgence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, terror attacks launched against Israel from the Egyptian Sinai, and the sacking of the Israeli embassy in Cairo. Who’s really in control of Egypt? What about Iranian-backed Hezbollah in the north? Syria? Turkey? Jordan? Have you been reading the latest news from these places? A new Palestinian state bordering (within?) Israel could provide a perceived beachhead for a broader Islamic push. The scenarios for chaos and conflict in the coming months are vast.

But wait… Let’s quickly return to history in the region…

It was 70 AD when the Jewish people were removed from their homeland after the Roman Emperor Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the temple. The Jewish people were strewn throughout the world. For nearly 1,900 years, the Jews remained scattered and persecuted in unfriendly lands. The contempt for these people culminated in the Holocaust, when six million Jews were executed (approximately one-third of the Jewish population at the time).

Then, on May 14, 1948, against tremendous odds, the Jewish people returned to their homeland as a formal country. The United Nations, by the slimmest of margins, reestablished the State of Israel.

In 1967, after the Six-Day War with its hostile neighbors, Israel reclaimed Jerusalem and other strategic positions throughout the present-day borders. It was these events that displaced those who have occupied the land as “Palestine,” which is the foundation of the dispute between today’s Israelites and Palestinians.

And here we go again… The world returns to the United Nations next week for another historic “vote.” In light of growing tensions in the region, it’s time to examine the evidence of history for yourself, and understand where you stand…

“This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will take the Israelites out of the nations where they have gone. I will gather them from all around and bring them back into their own land” (Ezekiel 37:21).

“In that day the Lord will reach out his hand a second time to reclaim the remnant that is left of his people… He will raise a banner for the nations and gather the exiles of Israel; he will assemble the scattered people of Judah from the four quarters of the earth” (Isaiah 11:11-12).

“I myself will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them and will bring them back to their pasture, where they will be fruitful and increase in number. I will place shepherds over them who will tend them, and they will no longer be afraid or terrified, nor will any be missing,” declares the LORD” (Jeremiah 23:3-4).

Still Thinking,

Randall Niles

It seems Dr. Marks is the latest “ethicist” to publicly declare that there’s no difference between right and wrong. In fact, as a scholar at the Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics at Yale University, Professor Marks now honestly declares:

“The religious fundamentalists are correct: without God, there is no morality. But they are incorrect, I still believe, about there being a God. Hence, I believe, there is no morality.”

As a naturalist/atheist, Marks used to hold to the deontological view of morality. Allegedly, this view does not require God (a transcendent standard) to distinguish between right and wrong. However, Marks now maintains that this is just as unreasonable as believing in the Divine.

Through a series of articles in Philosophy Now, Dr. Marks fully developed his “Amoral Manifesto” throughout 2010. In the process, he had an “anti-epiphany,” in which he ultimately grasped that “morality was nothing more than a fuzzy subjective feeling.”

“I retain my strong preference for honest dialectical dealings in a context of mutual respect. It’s just that I am no longer giving premises in moral arguments; rather, I am offering considerations to help us figure out what to do. I am not attempting to justify anything; I am trying to motivate informed and reflective choices…. But this won’t be because a god, a supernatural law or even my conscience told me I must, I ought, I have an obligation. Instead I will be moved by my head and my heart. Morality has nothing to do with it.”

Remember, this is a top ethicist scholar in the area of bioethics.

Dr. Marks’ coming-out party reminds me of another shindig shortly after President Obama’s inauguration. In early March 2009, with a cloud of witnesses in the East Room of the White House (“more happy scientists than I’ve seen,” said Alan Leshner, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science), President Obama abolished the Bush-era restraints on stem-cell research and declared the following:

“Our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda—and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.”

Here’s a thought… As more and more “ethicists” in the medical establishment declare there’s no such thing as ethics, on what basis is our medical community (our culture) going to make bioethical decisions in areas such as abortion, euthanasia, cloning, stem-cell research, organ harvesting, end-of-life decisions, etc.? Who’s “fuzzy subjective feeling” are we gonna run with at the next meeting of the Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics?

Just Thinking,

Randall Niles

In 1839, Layard determined to follow in his father’s footsteps and return to Ceylon (present-day Sri Lanka) to serve in the British civil service. Layard’s family had served as diplomats in Ceylon for generations. However, rather than travel by standard aristocratic means, Layard decided to walk from England to Ceylon by way of Asia. He was 22.

Once he embarked on his trek, Layard’s life journey took a totally different track. He never made it to Ceylon. Instead, he spent years wandering about Persia and Turkey, fascinated by the local cultures and ancient Assyrian ruins. Ultimately, he was responsible for rediscovering the ancient ruins of Nineveh in 1847, including the lost palace of Sennacherib. He also stumbled into the famous library of Ashurbanipal, which contained 22,000 clay texts, including important finds such as the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Remarkably, since the fiery fall of Nineveh in 612 BC, many of the huge walls and relief sculptures of Sennacherib’s throne room were still preserved under the desert sands. And right there, inscribed in cuneiform on the massive doorway, was Sennacherib’s own account of his siege of Jerusalem.

Layard’s discovery was stunning! The mid-19th century was a time of religious skepticism and biblical revisionism in Europe. Now, the world had new and compelling evidence for a biblical event. Layard’s journeys and exploits continued throughout his life, including more biblical discoveries from the ancient Assyrian ruins. In 1866, Layard became a trustee of the British Museum, where he published a number of books and articles about his phenomenal adventures into the past.

Check out More Fascinating Archaeology Now!

In the news this week: A 2,000-year-old golden bell was found among the ruins of the City of David in Jerusalem. The tiny bell has been traced to the priesthood of the Second Temple period in Israel. “Make pomegranates of blue, purple and scarlet yarn around the hem of the robe, with gold bells between them. The gold bells and the pomegranates are to alternate around the hem of the robe.” (Exodus 28:33-34) Awesome – CLICK HERE to read more!

Some things to Think About,

Randall Niles