Jesus spoke of the “Kingdom of Heaven” and described it in many ways, such as “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a ….”.Where is the Kingdom of Heaven? When we speak of it in churches or in public we usually refer to it as being a place that is not a “physical” place but rather like another ethereal dimension or universe than our own.

We know that other universes are predicted now by theoretical physicists and possibly that is where “Heaven” resides, but, what if it is within our own backyard and in this physical universe? You might ask, “how is it possible”? I would like to offer an argument for that possibility simply for consideration and debate, knowing that my own preference is that it is “outside” physics and this universe.

I do this because the topic came up in an earlier post about what would be the nature of “ET”, and the discussion led to the idea that ET may be so far advanced that hostility would not be a factor if “he” landed on earth. I began to think of the possibilities for the real characteristics of ET, and it occurred to me that there is a level of advancement that would approach the description of “The Kingdom of Heaven” as given in the Bible, but one that could exist here, in this universe. What would the characteristics of a truly advanced extraterrestrial civilization be like? FULL POST

One of the most ridiculous statements I have heard from the Atheists' camp is that “If an extraterrestrial landed on earth, it would mean the end of religion”. I also remember that statement being made on a documentary on the History Channel on UFO's. I believe the statement results more from wishful thinking than real “logic”.

Why would the existence of extraterrestrials pose a threat to Christianity, God, or religion in general? Does the Bible say anywhere that a scenario like that is not possible? In fact in John 10:16 Jesus said, “Other sheep I have which are not of this fold”.

Is it logical that God, who created the earth as a paradise for mankind, could not, or would not, possibly do the same somewhere else in the vast universe? I like what the leading character in the movie “Contact” said when asked if there could be other planets with life on them. She said “If there isn’t, it would be a tremendous waste of space”. FULL POST

The book of Revelation is perhaps the most studied book in the Bible because it is such a mystery. Only after decades of contemplation and study have I come to the point that I may have a handle on only about 50% of its message. I do believe I have some constructive suggestions for anyone who wants to try to understand this book. I have studied many different, very methodical, attempts to understand the organization of the book, and this is my own, based on my own enlightenment while studying the text.

Observation number one: The significance of the seals.

A seal is placed on an object to protect a mystery inside until such time as it is meant to be revealed. The seals in Revelation are the most important part of the vision of John, and are so important that only “the lamb” was worthy to break them. A mistake many make is to interpret them as a “succession” of “events”. The entire 7 seals read like a program to a play by introducing the characters of the play to the reader. Each seal, as it is broken, “reveals” something about the last 7 years of the period of the great tribulation. The first four seals are like an introduction to the reader of the principal characters in the play. Each “character” plays an important role in the major events that are to take place after the period begins. The key idea here is that the period has not yet begun, and won’t begin until the last seal is broken and brings on the trumpets, which are heralds that “announce” each event just before it happens. The “tribulation period” begins with the breaking of the 7^th seal and the beginning of the “trumpets”. Seals “reveal mysteries” whereas trumpets “announce” events. FULL POST

In my attempts to understand the most un-understandable book in the Bible, I have come to some conclusions.

The problem of understanding Revelations is separating symbolism from detail. We know that much of the book is symbolic because Jesus tells us it is in Rev. 1:20 when He says the candlesticks John saw were the 7 churches and the stars are the “angels” of the churches or leaders. Here are some of my "observations", which may change at any time that I get further insight.

1. The judgements of the “Trumpets”, and “bowls”, are not to be taken as successive, but parallel or concurrent, descriptions of the same events. Just as the four gospels of the NT are not successive, they each tell the same story, but from different perspectives. Examples are, Trumpet #3, corresponds with Bowl #3, concerning with rivers, and Trumpet #2 corresponds with Bowl #2, and is concerned with the sea turning to blood. The other judgements fall in this pattern too as #6 in both have to do with the Euphrates, and #4 has to do with the sun in both. Interestingly, in #7 in all of the Seals, Trumpets, Bowls, and Visions, the last prophesy has to do with the end of all things such as a “new heaven and new earth”, “final judgement against Babylon”, “the harvest”, and “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord”, etc. In some way, maybe all the visions and prophesies are parallel descriptions of the same events but from different perspectives.
2. Many bible scholars believe in “codes” and secretive language in the book but no one has forwarded a consistent interpretation of how to read it. I would like to offer my “suggestion” for some of the “coded” wording for consideration. Any attempt to assign meanings to certain phrases and statements will be of necessity, speculative and probably wrong, but if no one attempts, no progress will be made.
   1. Whenever the book refers to “1/3 of the earth”, “1/3 of the seas”, and “1/3 of man” I believe it is referring to the “western hemisphere”. I came to this conclusion because the land area of North and South America constitutes about 1/3 of the earth’s land mass. When this phrase is used it doesn’t necessarily mean “all” of that area is destroyed, but that everything in that area is affected. The phrase "The third part of the sea became as blood" actually means, "The sea in that part of the world looked like blood". The phrase "The sea" doesn't indicate "which sea". There are many seas in the world, but I believe it refers to "a" sea in the "third part of the world".
   2. The use of the phrase “angel” refers to events or objects that follow a path through the atmosphere. Even though they are be described as being performed by an angel, the “event” always involves something coming down. It could refer to artificial satellites as well as missiles. The phrase “loose the four angels of the Euphrates” may refer to 4 “missiles” in that region being “loosed to destroy a third part of man”. The missiles are considered “angels because they move through the air. The “third part of man” could be referring to the US. Any such missiles would already be aimed and prepared for a time when they would be launched. The phrase “for to destroy” doesn’t necessarily mean that they were successful but their “intent” was to destroy.
   3. We have already seen how the “sea will turn red as blood” from the oil spill in the gulf. If many oil rigs at once were suddenly destroyed by some means, this prophesy would come true very accurately.
   4. The use of the phrase “bottomless pit” should refer to a volcanic eruption. The ancient people of John’s era believed that Satan came up from the center of the earth by way of these eruptions and was unleashed on the earth by this means. The prophesy that after the millennium he would be unleashed again for a short while may be the foretelling of another catastrophic eruption. The “throats” of volcanoes are truly “bottomless” and reach down to the mantle where there is no definite structure.
   5. As has been long recognized and pointed out by many, the referring of anything as “coming” or “rising” from the sea, usually means coming from the masses of people on the earth. The “sea” refers to the people.
   6. When references are made to “1/3” of the sun, moon, or stars, this is referring to the length of the day in which they are not seen, not the actual destruction of those objects. A smoke or darkening of the sky could hide the sun or moon for 1/3 of the normal time they would be seen. When volcanic eruptions have occurred in the past the air has been so polluted that the only time the sun could be seen was at noon when it shined through the thinnest part of the atmosphere.

FULL POST

The question of how real was the first man Adam is brought up in biblical discussions often. The argument of the evolutionists is that man came about through evolutionary processes and that there was no “first” man. Biblical believers say that the book of Genesis describes very well how the first man came about. God created him in the garden of Eden. Who is right?

Before that question can be answered it must be asked “who” man is. Is he a member of the animal kingdom that just “developed” intelligence and evolved into the creature we call human? Or is man defined by the Bible and God as someone who has descended from the first man called Adam?

That question may seem trivial, but it is crucial to the argument. What if Adam was not what we call “homo Sapiens” and did not have the characteristics of “humans” around the time of the Garden of Eden, about 6,000 years ago? FULL POST

In the process of debating religion with atheists, I rarely encounter any intellectual respect of opposing views. I considered why that is, and am still puzzled as to why two people cannot discuss opposing views on a subject and maintain a mutual respect for each other. It would seem to me that if both parties are intelligent, they would recognize the following statement to be true.

I believe the most fundamental right, and freedom, any person has is the right to believe and think what he/she chooses. Whether that belief is logical, accurate, or correct, or not, is irrelevant. Religion, to me, is a philosophical issue, that is beyond question or ridicule. When a person has a philosophical outlook, he doesn't have to prove it or justify it. Aristotle and Plato were not ridiculed for their views concerning what constitutes "reality". That right should be respected by anyone else who understands intellectually why people are different in their outlook. Why then do atheist's even question, or ridicule people of faith when it is a personal issue? The subject can be intelligently discussed or debated, but, seriously, does either side ever change their outlook?

I have to believe they do not understand the above concept or they would show more respect. I believe it is wrong to even try to change a person of faith in their beliefs, if in forming those beliefs, they have become comfortable and influenced most of their life by environmental factors. I know psychologically that to move them out of the comfort zone would create great stress on their psyche. FULL POST

There are two famous experiments in quantum physics that demonstrate a single point. The outcome of both experiments is not "real" until the person doing the experiment makes an "observation" of the outcome.

 In the famous 'Schrödinger's Cat" experiment, quantum physics says that the cat is both dead and alive in a 'probability' state until the observer opens the box and observes the outcome. At that point the "probability state" "collapses" and the outcome becomes 'real'.

In the "double slit" experiment, the outcome is determined entirely by which of two types of measurements the experimenter makes. Any attempt to change the type of 'measurement' also changes the outcome. This experiment has been repeated in many various forms, with the conclusions always the same. A single outcome does not exist until the observer makes a decision as to how to measure the outcome. FULL POST

I was sitting in a Bible study group, discussing Revelation, chapter 16, when we read verse 3.

 "And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea."

I asked the group, "What does the blood of a dead man look like"? Someone said "Well, its probably brown in color". I then asked, "Have any of you seen the aerial shots of the spill in the Gulf? What did it look like"? The group went silent. FULL POST

We all watch the apocalyptic programs on cable and it is easy to be overwhelmed by all the  prophesies of doom and destruction from asteroid strikes, global disease, economic collapse, huge tectonic events, and every other imaginable kind of destruction. If we took these programs seriously we would be convinced that today is the last day before doomsday and we should prepare for disaster.

What does the Bible say about a global disaster?

Surprisingly, it is pretty specific about some kind of apocalyptic event that will take place in a time called the "end of days". Most readers of Revelation are bewildered  by the sequence of events described in the "seals", "trumpets", and "bowls" passages concerning events that "must shortly come to pass" on the earth. But Revelation is not the only source of these descriptions. FULL POST

Christians are divided over the issue of Evolution. There are those that believe Evolution is simply non-existent and didn't have any part in the creation of Man OR animals. There are some who believe that Man evolved through the process of evolution, but that the process was guided by God. To these people, evolution was the process begun by God when he created the Earth and "seeded" it with life. They find no problem with evolution being both a natural and a divine process that worked to create the many species of life on this planet.

There is a third category of believers that believe that everything that is said about evolution in our science books is true, except the creation of man. They believe that evolution proceeded as described through the millions of years, even to the creation of a creature that could be called a "primitive" form of man by science textbooks. However that is where they draw the line. They believe that, in a creation event separate from evolution, a genetically superior man, called "Adam" in the Bible was created from non-living materials in a place called Eden around 6000 years ago. According to Genesis 2:7 God created Adam from the 'dust of the ground' and breathed into him the "breath of life", and man became a living soul.

If we accept the 'biblical' definition of "man" and not the scientific, Adam was the first man. If we let science define who man is, then he began with "Ardi" or Australopithecus, several million years ago. The Bible only recognized man as someone who is descended from Adam, so the creature Homo sapiens is not necessarily "man". FULL POST