5 Problems With “Origin of Life from Primordial soup Theory”

Will we ever be able to create life from scratch? I don’t think so.

Advertisements

There are numerous problems, but here’s my list of the top 5:

Problem 1: No Viable Mechanism to Generate a Primordial Soup.
According to conventional thinking among origin-of-life theorists, life arose via unguided chemical reactions on the early Earth some 3 to 4 billion years ago. Most theorists believe that there were many steps involved in the origin of life, but the very first step would have involved the production of a primordial soup — a water-based sea of simple organic molecules — out of which life arose. While the existence of this “soup” has been accepted as unquestioned fact for decades, this first step in most origin-of-life theories faces numerous scientific difficulties.

In 1953, a graduate student at the University of Chicago named Stanley Miller, along with his faculty advisor Harold Urey, performed experiments hoping to produce the building blocks of life under natural conditions on the early Earth.1 These “Miller-Urey experiments” intended to simulate lightning striking the gasses in the early Earth’s atmosphere. After running the experiments and letting the chemical products sit for a period of time, Miller discovered that amino acids — the building blocks of proteins — had been produced.

For decades, these experiments have been hailed as a demonstration that the “building blocks” of life could have arisen under natural, realistic Earthlike conditions,2corroborating the primordial soup hypothesis. However, it has also been known for decades that the Earth’s early atmosphere was fundamentally different from the gasses used by Miller and Urey.

The atmosphere used in the Miller-Urey experiments was primarily composed of reducing gasses like methane, ammonia, and high levels of hydrogen. Geochemists now believe that the atmosphere of the early Earth did not contain appreciable amounts of these components. UC Santa Cruz origin-of-life theorist David Deamer explains in the journal Microbiology & Molecular Biology Reviews:

This optimistic picture began to change in the late 1970s, when it became increasingly clear that the early atmosphere was probably volcanic in origin and composition, composed largely of carbon dioxide and nitrogen rather than the mixture of reducing gases assumed by the Miller-Urey model. Carbon dioxide does not support the rich array of synthetic pathways leading to possible monomers…3

Likewise, an article in the journal Sciencestated: “Miller and Urey relied on a ‘reducing’ atmosphere, a condition in which molecules are fat with hydrogen atoms. As Miller showed later, he could not make organics in an ‘oxidizing’ atmosphere.”4 The article put it bluntly: “the early atmosphere looked nothing like the Miller-Urey situation.”5 Consistent with this, geological studies have not uncovered evidence that a primordial soup once existed.6

There are good reasons why the Earth’s early atmosphere did not contain high concentrations of methane, ammonia, or other reducing gasses. The Earth’s early atmosphere is thought to have been produced by outgassing from volcanoes, and the composition of those volcanic gasses is related to the chemical properties of the Earth’s inner mantle. Geochemical studies have found that the chemical properties of the Earth’s mantle would have been the same in the past as they are today.7 But today, volcanic gasses do not contain methane or ammonia, and are not reducing.

A paper in Earth and Planetary Science Letters found that the chemical properties of the Earth’s interior have been essentially constant over Earth’s history, leading to the conclusion that “Life may have found its origins in other environments or by other mechanisms.”8 So strong is the evidence against pre-biotic synthesis of life’s building blocks that in 1990 the Space Studies Board of the National Research Council recommended that origin-of-life investigators undertake a “reexamination of biological monomer synthesis under primitive Earthlike environments, as revealed in current models of the early Earth.”9

Because of these difficulties, some leading theorists have abandoned the Miller-Urey experiment and the “primordial soup” theory. In 2010, University College London biochemist Nick Lane stated that the primordial soup theory “doesn’t hold water” and is “past its expiration date.”10 Instead, he proposes that life arose in undersea hydrothermal vents. But both the hydrothermal vent and primordial soup hypotheses face another major problem.

Problem 2: Forming Polymers Requires Dehydration Synthesis
Assume for a moment that there was some way to produce simple organic molecules on the early Earth. Perhaps they did form a “primordial soup,” or perhaps these molecules arose near some hydrothermal vent. Either way, origin-of-life theorists must then explain how amino acids or other key organic molecules linked up to form long chains (polymers) like proteins (or RNA).

Chemically speaking, however, the last place you’d want to link amino acids into chains would be a vast water-based environment like the “primordial soup” or underwater near a hydrothermal vent. As the National Academy of Sciences acknowledges, “Two amino acids do not spontaneously join in water. Rather, the opposite reaction is thermodynamically favored.”11 In other words, water breaks down protein chains into amino acids (or other constituents), making it very difficult to produce proteins (or other polymers) in the primordial soup.

Problem 3: RNA World Hypothesis Lacks Confirming Evidence
Let’s assume, again, that a primordial sea filled with life’s building blocks did exist on the early Earth, and somehow it formed proteins and other complex organic molecules. Origin-of-life theorists believe that the next step in the origin of life is that — entirely by chance — more and more complex molecules formed until some began to self-replicate. From there, they believe Darwinian natural selection took over, favoring those molecules which were better able to make copies. Eventually, they assume, it became inevitable that these molecules would evolve complex machinery — like that used in today’s genetic code — to survive and reproduce.

Have modern theorists explained how this crucial bridge from inert nonliving chemicals to self-replicating molecular systems took place? Not at all. In fact, even Stanley Miller readily admitted the difficulty of explaining this in Discover Magazine:

Even Miller throws up his hands at certain aspects of it. The first step, making the monomers, that’s easy. We understand it pretty well. But then you have to make the first self-replicating polymers. That’s very easy, he says, the sarcasm fairly dripping. Just like it’s easy to make money in the stock market — all you have to do is buy low and sell high. He laughs. Nobody knows how it’s done.12

The most prominent hypothesis for the origin of the first life is called the “RNA world.” In living cells, genetic information is carried by DNA, and most cellular functions are performed by proteins. However, RNA is capable of both carrying genetic information and catalyzing some biochemical reactions. As a result, some theorists postulate the first life might have used RNA alone to fulfill all these functions.

But there are many problems with this hypothesis.

For one, the first RNA molecules would have to arise by unguided, non-biological chemical processes. But RNA is not known to assemble without the help of a skilled laboratory chemist intelligently guiding the process. New York University chemist Robert Shapiro critiqued the efforts of those who tried to make RNA in the lab, stating: “The flaw is in the logic — that this experimental control by researchers in a modern laboratory could have been available on the early Earth.”13

Second, while RNA has been shown to perform many roles in the cell, there is no evidence that it could perform all the necessary cellular functions currently carried out by proteins.14

Third, the RNA world hypothesis can’t explain the origin of genetic information.

RNA world advocates suggest that if the first self-replicating life was based upon RNA, it would have required a molecule between 200 and 300 nucleotides in length.15 However, there are no known chemical or physical laws that dictate the order of those nucleotides.16 To explain the ordering of nucleotides in the first self-replicating RNA molecule, materialists must rely on sheer chance. But the odds of specifying, say, 250 nucleotides in an RNA molecule by chance is about 1 in 10150 — below the “universal probability bound,” a term characterizing events whose occurrence is at least remotely possible within the history of the universe.17 Shapiro puts the problem this way:

The sudden appearance of a large self-copying molecule such as RNA was exceedingly improbable. … [The probability] is so vanishingly small that its happening even once anywhere in the visible universe would count as a piece of exceptional good luck.18

Fourth — and most fundamentally — the RNA world hypothesis can’t explain the origin of the genetic code itself. In order to evolve into the DNA/protein-based life that exists today, the RNA world would need to evolve the ability to convert genetic information into proteins. However, this process of transcription and translation requires a large suite of proteins and molecular machines — which themselves are encoded by genetic information.

All of this poses a chicken-and-egg problem, where essential enzymes and molecular machines are needed to perform the very task that constructs them.

Problem 4: Unguided Chemical Processes Cannot Explain the Origin of the Genetic Code.
To appreciate this problem, consider the origin of the first DVD and DVD player. DVDs are rich in information, but without the machinery of a DVD player to read the disk, process its information, and convert it into a picture and sound, the disk would be useless. But what if the instructions for building the first DVD player were only found encoded on a DVD? You could never play the DVD to learn how to build a DVD player. So how did the first disk and DVD player system arise? The answer is obvious: a goal-directed process — intelligent design — is required to produce both the player and the disk.

In living cells, information-carrying molecules (such as DNA or RNA) are like the DVD, and the cellular machinery that reads that information and converts it into proteins is like the DVD player. As in the DVD analogy, genetic information can never be converted into proteins without the proper machinery. Yet in cells, the machines required for processing the genetic information in RNA or DNA are encoded by those same genetic molecules — they perform and direct the very task that builds them.

This system cannot exist unless both the genetic information and transcription/translation machinery are present at the same time, and unless both speak the same language. Not long after the workings of the genetic code were first uncovered, biologist Frank Salisbury explained the problem in a paper inAmerican Biology Teacher:

It’s nice to talk about replicating DNA molecules arising in a soupy sea, but in modern cells this replication requires the presence of suitable enzymes. … [T]he link between DNA and the enzyme is a highly complex one, involving RNA and an enzyme for its synthesis on a DNA template; ribosomes; enzymes to activate the amino acids; and transfer-RNA molecules. … How, in the absence of the final enzyme, could selection act upon DNA and all the mechanisms for replicating it? It’s as though everything must happen at once: the entire system must come into being as one unit, or it is worthless. There may well be ways out of this dilemma, but I don’t see them at the moment.19

The same problem confronts modern RNA world researchers, and it remains unsolved. As two theorists observed in a 2004 article in Cell Biology International:

The nucleotide sequence is also meaningless without a conceptual translative scheme and physical “hardware” capabilities. Ribosomes, tRNAs, aminoacyl tRNA synthetases, and amino acids are all hardware components of the Shannon message “receiver.” But the instructions for this machinery is itself coded in DNA and executed by protein “workers” produced by that machinery. Without the machinery and protein workers, the message cannot be received and understood. And without genetic instruction, the machinery cannot be assembled.20

Problem 5: No Workable Model for the Origin of Life
Despite decades of work, origin-of-life theorists are at a loss to explain how this system arose. In 2007, Harvard chemist George Whitesides was given the Priestley Medal, the highest award of the American Chemical Society. During his acceptance speech, he offered this stark analysis, reprinted in the respected journal Chemical and Engineering News:

The Origin of Life. This problem is one of the big ones in science. It begins to place life, and us, in the universe. Most chemists believe, as do I, that life emerged spontaneously from mixtures of molecules in the prebiotic Earth. How? I have no idea.21

Many other authors have made similar comments. Massimo Pigliucci states: “[I]t has to be true that we really don’t have a clue how life originated on Earth by natural means.”22 Or as science writer Gregg Easterbrook wrote in Wired, “What creates life out of the inanimate compounds that make up living things? No one knows. How were the first organisms assembled? Nature hasn’t given us the slightest hint. If anything, the mystery has deepened over time.”23

Likewise, the aforementioned article in Cell Biology International concludes: “New approaches to investigating the origin of the genetic code are required. The constraints of historical science are such that the origin of life may never be understood.”24 That is, they may never be understood unless scientists are willing to consider goal-directed scientific explanations like intelligent design.

References:
[1.] See Stanley L. Miller, “A Production of Amino Acids under Possible Primitive Earth Conditions,” Science, 117: 528-529 (May 15, 1953).
[2.] See Jonathan Wells, Icons of Evolution: Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution Is Wrong, (Washington D.C.: Regnery, 2000); Casey Luskin, “Not Making the Grade: An Evaluation of 19 Recent Biology Textbooks and Their Use of Selected Icons of Evolution,” Discovery Institute (September 26, 2011).
[3.] David W. Deamer, “The First Living Systems: a Bioenergetic Perspective,”Microbiology & Molecular Biology Reviews, 61:239 (1997).
[4.] Jon Cohen, “Novel Center Seeks to Add Spark to Origins of Life,” Science, 270: 1925-1926 (December 22, 1995).
[5.] Ibid.
[6.] Antonio C. Lasaga, H. D. Holland, and Michael J. Dwyer, “Primordial Oil Slick,”Science, 174: 53-55 (October 1, 1971).
[7.] Kevin Zahnle, Laura Schaefer, and Bruce Fegley, “Earth’s Earliest Atmospheres,”Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, 2(10): a004895 (October, 2010) (“Geochemical evidence in Earth’s oldest igneous rocks indicates that the redox state of the Earth’s mantle has not changed over the past 3.8 Gyr”); Dante Canil, “Vanadian in peridotites, mantle redox and tectonic environments: Archean to present,” Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 195:75-90 (2002).
[8.] Dante Canil, “Vanadian in peridotites, mantle redox and tectonic environments: Archean to present,” Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 195:75-90 (2002) (internal citations removed).
[9.] National Research Council Space Studies Board, The Search for Life’s Origins(National Academy Press, 1990).
[10.] Deborah Kelley, “Is It Time To Throw Out ‘Primordial Soup’ Theory?,” NPR (February 7, 2010).
[11.] Committee on the Limits of Organic Life in Planetary Systems, Committee on the Origins and Evolution of Life, National Research Council, The Limits of Organic Life in Planetary Systems, p. 60 (Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, 2007).
[12.] Stanley Miller quoted in Peter Radetsky, “How Did Life Start? Discover Magazine (Nov., 1992).
[13.] Richard Van Noorden, “RNA world easier to make,” Nature News (May 13, 2009).
[14.] See Stephen C. Meyer, Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design, p. 304 (New York: HarperOne, 2009).
[15.] Jack W. Szostak, David P. Bartel, and P. Luigi Luisi, “Synthesizing Life,” Nature, 409: 387-390 (January 18, 2001).
[16.] Michael Polanyi, “Life’s Irreducible Structure,” Science, 160 (3834): 1308-1312 (June 21, 1968).
[17.] See William A. Dembski, The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small Probabilities (Cambridge University Press, 1998).
[18.] Robert Shapiro, “A Simpler Origin for Life,” Scientific American, pp. 46-53 (June, 2007).
[19.] Frank B. Salisbury, “Doubts about the Modern Synthetic Theory of Evolution,”American Biology Teacher, 33: 335-338 (September, 1971).
[20.] J.T. Trevors and D.L. Abel, “Chance and necessity do not explain the origin of life,” Cell Biology International, 28: 729-739 (2004).
[21.] George M. Whitesides, “Revolutions In Chemistry: Priestley Medalist George M. Whitesides’ Address,” Chemical and Engineering News, 85: 12-17 (March 26, 2007).
[22.] Massimo Pigliucci, “Where Do We Come From? A Humbling Look at the Biology of Life’s Origin,” in Darwin Design and Public Education, eds. John Angus Campbell and Stephen C. Meyer (East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 2003), p. 196.
[23.] Gregg Easterbrook, “Where did life come from?,” Wired, p. 108 (February, 2007).
[24.] J.T. Trevors and D.L. Abel, “Chance and necessity do not explain the origin of life,” Cell Biology International, 28: 729-739 (2004).

ATHEISTS DON’T EXIST

No Pun Intended 🙂

First off, before i get attacked, Let me start by saying that I used to be a “hardcore” atheist (Really, that’s how deep I was) to the extent that I bet a lot of money to a friend in case I ever changed my worldview. Well, here I am. (I’m not paying by the way 🙂 so don’t even bother to ask) I hope I’m now forgiven & it’s forgotten lol anyway let’s define the big word:

atheist

ˈeɪθɪɪst/

noun

a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

“he is a committed atheist”

synonyms:non-believer, non-theist,disbeliever, unbeliever, heretic,sceptic, doubter, doubting Thomas, agnostic, infidel,irreligious person, heathen, pagan,freethinker, libertine, nihilist..etc

Special Note for Christian Readers – Atheists and Agnostics Can Skip This Blue Box.

To my Christian readers of this blog, today’s post is not for you. It’s for my atheist friends, skeptical acquaintances, and undecided agnostics.

Then please share this blog post on Facebook and Twitter because it may bring unbelievers to Christ.

Before we go any further: let me be blunt & honest:

Here is what I can prove:

1. You don’t really need “evidence” to believe in something that you really do want to believe in. E.g Love (Atheists love their kids, atleast that’s what I believe:)

2. “Atheists” are not really Atheistic as they say they are.

3. A lot of people don’t fear God but pretend to be Christian/Religious to avoid being judged (Closet Atheists) lol we all don’t like being judged but hey, that’s the same reason a lot of people hate the idea of existence of “God.”

Here is what I am NOT here to prove/debate:

1. Existence of God – Make your own choice.

2. Evidence – lol “I don’t have any” In other words , understand that “God is OUTSIDE OF SCIENCE and ABOVE ALL THE PHYSICAL LAWS. He created ALL so why would he be affected by the small laws of physics?”

3. That I am more Intelligent than anyone else (lol clearly I didn’t evolve) Really, forreal if you’re in this world to prove that you’re more intelligent than the next person then you might need to leave.

(if you wanna debate about this topic Kindly dm me on instagram @bellkariuki I’ll be happy to…ignore you 🙂 )

Ever wonder how people in the modern world can still believe in God despite the enormous amount of scientific evidence that points against one existing?

I mean, you would think that with all the scientific research out there and the progress we’ve made in academia, that religion would be near annihilated by now. Right?

But it’s not. Religion is alive and not well.

I’m Campbell, and I can relate to you in a few ways:

  • I used to believe that Christianity was a made up religion for people who are too weak to go through life on their own
  • I used to think that there is no God, and the likelihood that One exists is the same as that of leprechauns and unicorns existing
  • I used to believe that when we died, there is no afterlife. Everything just goes to a black screen, like when you turn off your TV after having a good laugh of watching Friends.

But I no longer believe those things. You see, I’ve become a Christian.

Why I Left Atheism

I have dozens of atheist friends and acquaintances.

From my conversations with them, I found that atheists generally fall into two groups:

  1. They were raised in a home that didn’t believe in any god. (minority)
  2. Or they were raised in a home that believed in some sort of god. But when they grew up, they abandoned their faith and became atheists for different reasons. (majority)

I’m part of group number two.

How Certain Are You That God Doesn’t Exist?

I ask atheists and agnostics to share with me a numerical statistic of how sure they are that God doesn’t exist.

Their answers vary from being as high as 99% percent positive that God doesn’t exist, to as low as 10%.

How sure are you that God doesn’t exist? 100%? 99%? 80%?

How certain are you that God doesn't exist?

If you say 100%, then I have to say that doesn’t make sense.

Some people estimate that the average human has about 1% percent knowledge of all the knowledge that there is in the world.

So how can someone who has 1% of all knowledge in the world say that they are 100% sure that they’re right about there being no God?

That doesn’t make sense.

The number should be lowered to something less than 100%.

For the rest of this post, I’m going to assume that you’re 99% sure that God doesn’t exist, and that you’re just 1% certain that He does exist.

If your numbers are different, just stick with me for a little bit.

If You Don’t Eliminate Your 1% Doubt as an Atheist, Then You’re in Danger

You see, I used to be 99% sure that God didn’t exist, and I was willing to admit that there was a 1% chance that I was wrong.

That 1% bothered me sometimes. I would ask myself sometimes:

  • What if God is real?
  • What if there is an after-life?
  • What if I end up going somewhere for the rest of eternity to be punished for the wrong things I’ve done in this life?

After all, I’ve lied, I’ve stolen a few things, and I’ve hurt a few people along the way even though it was mostly unintentional.

If you’re honest with yourself, then you too have had your moments of doubt about your position about God’s existence.

It’s left you feeling uncomfortable sometimes.

Whatever the number is of how certain you are that there is no God,if you don’t eliminate your doubt, then you’re going to suffer these problems:

  • You’re never going to have that inner peace that you’re looking for. That 1% doubt is going to be that itch in the middle of your back that you just can’t reach and scratch.
  • You’re going to continue searching Google, going from one search result to the next, and choosing to believe the articles that affirm your position. Your 1% doubt will never go away, and that dark cloud of uncertainty will continue to rain on your thoughts.
  • You’ll continue to feel lonely from time to time. At least, that’s the way I felt when I was an atheist.

Imagine Your World When You’ve Eliminated Your 1% Doubt

What would your world look like if you put to rest the issue of God’s existence, and you became 100% sure of your position?

You’d probably be happier.

You would finally be able to get rid of your lingering doubt so you can have peace of mind.

You would feel comfortable in your shoes, like walking in flip-flops along a sandy beach.

Inspector Gadget

INSPECTOR GADGET IS A FUNNY CARTOON CHARACTER WHO INVESTIGATES STRANGE CASES AND ALWAYS SOLVES THE PROBLEM. YOU’RE BEING CHALLENGED TO INVESTIGATE GOD’S EXISTENCE DEEPER THAN BEFORE.

That’s why I’m making you a special offer.

I’m offering for you to get rid of your 1% doubt (or greater) by reading things you’ve never read before.

For the rest of this article, I’m going to give you three areas of investigation.

I want to challenge you to become like Inspector Gadget, without the weird hat.

I want you to read the opposition’s materials.

It’ll be a spoon full of sugar that will make the medicine go down, spin around, and fall to the ground (That’s just me being silly because I felt like rhyming).

This Exercise is Only For an Elite Group of Atheists

Let’s face it. Reading the opposition’s point of view sometimes gets us angry, upset, or outraged.

But only atheists that can set their emotions aside will be able to carry out the task at hand.

It’s something that’s hard to do, but it is possible.

I’ve done it when I was an atheist.

I’ve also done it now that I’m a Christian because I read all kinds of material by non-Christians about spirituality.

If doing a deep investigation into the opposition’s point of view is not your cup of tea, then stop reading this article, and go drink a cup of orange juice.

But if it is, then keep reading.

You Might Be Thinking, “But I’ve Already Read About This Stuff Before.”

I hear you loud and clear captain. But I’m pretty darn sure you haven’t read the material that I’m about to give you.

Plus, I’m not asking you just to read the sources listed below.

I want you to understand enough about each of the topics mentioned either until you eliminate your 1% doubt, or until you change your mind about God’s existence.

3 Kinds of Evidence For the Christian God That You Should Investigate with Eyes Wide Open and a Magnifying Glass the Size of Texas

So here are the areas that I think are most compelling for you to investigate.

As you’re looking at the reading material, consider the source.

Ask yourself these questions to identify if the source is a good one:

  1. “Can the author relate to me?”
  2. “Do they know what they’re talking about?”
  3. “What’s their motivation for writing this?”

1. Evidence #1 – Evidence For the Resurrection of Jesus

Was Jesus a real person who existed? Did He die on a cross? How did Christianity spread?

There are all sorts of theories and information out there about Jesus.

Some information is good, and other information is garbage.

Cold Case Christianity

THIS BOOK IS UNIQUE BECAUSE IT’S WRITTEN BY A FORMER ATHEIST WHO WAS A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE.

One of the best books I’ve read on this subject is by a brilliant detective by the name of James Warner Wallace.

The best part is that Wallace was an atheist too, so he knows exactly the way you think, your skepticism, and he can relate to where you’re coming from.

For a small investment, you can read how a homicide detective approaches the investigation of Jesus and His resurrection.

I guarantee you that this book is unique, and Wallace’s methodologies of investigation have not been applied before to the subjects of Jesus and Christianity.

Here’s the linkhttp://amzn.to/1RMtYmF

2. Evidence #2 – Evidence For a Finely Tuned Universe

This is the evidence that the late atheist Christopher Hitchens said was the most compelling argument for God’s existence.

I highly recommend that you make the fine tuning of the universe an area of investigation.

Go to Google and type, “fine tuning argument.”

You’ll also find related search topics like, “fine tuning argument debunked.”

Here’s the thing: the fine tuning argument doesn’t say that a particular God exists.

But what it does say is that because the universe has the appearance of being designed, then the probability of there being an Intelligent Designer is the most likely choice.

3. Evidence #3 – Evidence For a Created Universe in Physics

If you’re fascinated by physics, then I recommend starting with reading this article.

http://www.strangenotions.com/how-contemporary-physics-points-to-god/

Then I recommend doing an investigation of the problems with Dr. Lawrence Krauss’s theory on a universe from nothing.

Google “Lawrence Krauss a universe from nothing problems,” or a similar search term.

Also, Stephen Hawking had a theory about how the universe could come from nothing.

But his theory has some fatal flaws that are pointed out by Sir John Lennox, a mathematician from Oxford.

John’s book is another eye-opening read that is highly recommended.Click here to check it out.

You Can Be Either Like Sam Harris or Antony Flew

Sam Harris is considered by many to be the champion for atheists.

He’s regularly seen debating people from different religions. Sam’s arguments are seen by some as being best-of-class.

I’m sure you’ll agree that Sam spends a lot of his time reading material from “the other side.”

You can be like Sam too by reading these resources.

Either it’ll cause you to continue to be an atheist.

Or it will cause you to switch sides like former atheist, Antony Flew.

Antony was one of the most famous atheists of his generation.

He was well-known for teaching that all people should assume atheism, until evidence for a God surfaces.

Antony wrote books, made speeches, and did many things to be a staunch advocate for atheism.

But all of his efforts were reversed in 2004 when he made the shocking announcement that he believed in God.

I Care About What Happens to You After You Die

So why am I doing all of this?

It’s because I care about you, and about what happens to your soul after you die.

I’m so convinced that my position about God is true, that I’m willing to put up with the hateful comments, snarky social media comments, and even false accusations by some people.

You see, I believe that you and I are sinners and we do a lot of things that are wrong.

Just answer these questions right now:

1. How many lies have you told in your life?

I’ve told a gazillion billion lies and I’m just 25 years old.

If you’re anything like me, then you’ve told a ton of lies throughout your life.

That makes us both liars.

2. Have you ever stolen something, even if it was something small?

When I was a kid, I stole a toy from a supermarket near my home.

My mom found out about it, and made me return it.

I was a thief. If you’ve stolen something big or small, then you’re one too.

I’ve also stolen a bunch of pens and paperclips from companies that I’ve worked for in the past.

That counts as well.

3. Have you ever lusted (had a strong sexual desire) for someone, or slept with someone who you’re not married to?

God sees both of these acts as being sinful.

One day you’re going to face God on Judgement Day and you’re going to have to answer for all the wrong things you’ve done, said, and thought.

You and I are going to be found guilty of doing all sorts of bad things unless there is a way out.

God made a way for you and me to ditch our punishment for the wrong things we’ve done by turning away from our sin (repenting), and putting our trust in Jesus.

You and I committed crimes against a Holy God, and we stand before Him waiting for our sentence to receive our punishment.

But then in comes Jesus who tells the judge:

Judge, take the sentence that you’re about to give my friend and give it to Me instead. Let them go and put Me in jail.

If you repent (forsake your sins) and put your trust in Jesus, then you can avoid getting the punishment you deserve (hell), and go to heaven instead.

I Know it Sounds Crazy But That’s What I Believe

There was a time in my life when if I read the preceding paragraphs then I would have dismissed them as the rantings of a fool.

But now I am a fool for Christ and it’s a privilege for me to be that way.

If I can answer any questions, or help you in any way on your spiritual journey, please leave a comment or contact me using this contact form.

The Subtle Gold Digger

The most highly-effective gold digger knows her man enough to get what she wants WITHOUT ASKING!

Gold digger: a person who seeks or digs for gold in a gold field. 2. Informal. a woman who associates with or marries a man chiefly for material gain. Origin of gold digger.

What’s wrong in being a gold digger?

She seems innocent and harmless, right? ?

Exchanging a perceived “love” for money.

The typical scenario of the old wealthy man and younger, often beautiful, woman is what most people think of when the word “gold digger” is used. It’s a contrast that immediately stands out and makes people very judgmental and/or jealous.

However, it’s not much different than two people marrying for other reasons: security, love, sex, power, etc.

These things are much harder to see because they are not physical attributes on display.

I will give examples of two type of people here:

1 . Gold Diggers

2 . Person Who Want A Partner With good position but not a Gold Diggers

And How being no. 1 is bad but not no. 2

Let’s imagine you are person with good income, nice car, and a home, But due to some circumstances you lost these things so how would your partner react in both cases?

In case 1 GOLD DIGGER : Your partner will start ignoring you , you will not feel same love now as that when you felt when you were wealthy and that person will start looking for other rich date and finally dump you

Where As in case 2 : Your partner will start caring for you more , they will be with you , they will comfort you , they will understand and won’t ask for dates in restaurants and will help you rise again .

What are the habits of highly-effective gold diggers?

Subtlety “Can you help me pay for the electricity? I’m running short this month.”

Patience “My car broke down, can you help me with rent too? I promise to pay you back when I can.”

Sacrifice “Since I lost my job when my car broke down, can you take care of rent and electricity for a little while? As soon as I get a job, I’ll take care of it, but in the mean time, remember that <sexual act> you wanted?”

Guilt “I’m still not on my feet, but I feel like I’ve been washing your clothes and having sex with you so you might be taking advantage of my hard times. But it’s kind of working for us, except I want to have less sex.”

Conversion “I’m pregnant. How can you ask me to work now while I’m carrying your baby? You did this to me.”

Escalation “I need $1000 a month for my credit card bills because I buy things when I’m not happy. And you’re not making me happy.”

Divorce “I need you to pay my rent, bills and child support while I do my best to prevent you from having equal custody so that I can reinforce the idea that you’re not a good father.

Also, I’ll use that man to pay for the birth of the next child I’ll have fathered out of wedlock to keep the pressure off my next victim…er husband – and make it appear that I’m the together lady you thought I was.”

How do you gauge gold diggers from non-gold diggers?

Gold diggers are masters of manipulation and deception. Do not make the mistake and think of them as lazy. They are hard and dedicated workers with their goals always on their mind. They can go great lenghts to get what they want. If you are a good catch they may invest years.?

They are looking for a provider who ideally is easy to influence. These can be young and naive people, or older people who miss something that the gold digger provides. May it be the illusion of being caring, sex, having astonishing “trophy” looks, or some kind of mental support.

Gold digging only works, because a gold digger studies her subject excessively. They have a predatory mindset and are constantly looking for weaknesses that they can supply. Also they may try to isolate you in some way, or tell you secrets you have to keep. This is how she finds out if you are trustworthy, and if you will keep your mouth shut when weird stuff starts to happen.

If you are lonely, they give you company. If you are boring, they give you the impression you are exciting. If you have nobody to talk to you, they are your shoulder to lean on and cry. They will also trade sex for gifts, or suggest ridiculous things like they will make your dreams come true if you do the laundry.

It is very possible, that the whole persona you are dealing with is made up. Again, she has studied you. If she thinks you want the sweet girl, she will be the sweet girl. If she thinks you need a smart girl, she will be the smart girl. If you want a dumb ass, she will be the dumbest.

Also it is very likely that she made things up, just so that you are similar. Her parents do the same things as your parents. Her sister is like your sister. Her hobbies are like your hobbies. Her interests are like your interests.

Because of the nature of the beast, she may be dating multiple guys. Business trips, or friends or family she meets with that you never meet, may be indicators of that. While doing this, she may be very controlling. Asking about your day, gathering information to use it against you.

So how do you figure out if somebody is a gold digger?

  • if you are in love, your mind is clouded. You are easy to manipulate. If she does or says odd things write them down. Ask friends, family or “neutral” people for advice for the given situations. This is absolutely key. If you are secretive about a toxic relationship, you are lost.
  • Is she manipulative in general? Does she trade favors with you? Does she suggest she will “repay” you if you buy something for her?
  • Does she offer some things or actions only if you buy her something?
  • How often does she pay, or does she pay at all? This can be a tricky one. She may even appear generous, but keep in mind that it is possible that somebody bought her those concert tickets. And now she is going with you to the concert. Does she leave her wallet at home often? Does she buy groceries from time to time?
  • Is she telling stories about how her father provided for the family? How her sisters husband bought all the furniture? How her friends boyfriend is financing everything? Is she telling you that the man always has to provide?
  • Is she wearing expensive clothes and jewelry, that she unlikely can afford herself? Probably even telling stories how luxury bags have good resale value (men buy her stuff she can sell for income)?
  • Is she living in an expensive place, or driving an expensive car, or constantly travelling to fancy places, despite not having a significant income or a rich family? If so, somebody is

probably paying for her services.

Is it important for her to point out which brands or luxury stuff she, her family, or her friends own? Does she appear to have different personas? Is she sweet like honey to you, but can change instantly to a fury when talking to service personal? Do you sometimes think her “mask” just slipped. Is she keeping up with the “mask” she is portraying? Is she telling she is from rich background, but has weird manners that do not fit?

    • Do you sometimes feel that something is off?
    • Is she both (appearing to be) caring but also ruthless and ice cold? Is she ready to leave you if you have no money? Does she suggest you should meet less if you can’t afford to pay up for whatever?
    • Does she suggest to move out instead of helping in any way?
    • Is she moving to “her mother” if you are short on cash (her mother = other guy)?
    • Is she charming everybody, do all your friends love her? Does she have different characters in public and in private that don’t fit together?
    • Is she kind of aggressive when pursuing goals?
    • Does she flirt with more wealthy or more attractive men in your presence but plays it down later? Is she testing how far she can go with flirting?
    • Is she generally pushing boundaries often? This may be very subtle, depending on the skillset of the golddigger. Like the slowly cooked frog that doesn’t jump out of the pot.
    • Is she too perfect? Like you can’t believe it to be true perfect? Like, suspicious perfect? If it is too good to be true, be wary. It probably is.
    • Does she have narcissistic tendencies? Does she value people that are higher up on the social ladder more? Does she devalue less successful people openly?
    • Is she talking a lot about plastic surgery, has she had some, or is she even talking about her ex-boyfriend how he paid for surgeries?
    • Does she have antisocial, especially parasitic tendencies?
    • Do you have the impression that she is always in a good mood, but still the relationship kind of feels like she is working a job? Is she putting unreal effort into the relationship to keep you hooked? Do you ask yourself, is this possible that somebody is putting this crazy effort into your relationship?
    • Does she compliment you on everything? Is everything you want to do a great idea? You’re the best without exception? That ripped jeans that all women hate, she likes when you wear them?
    • Does she view her money as strictly her money, but your money and your assets also as hers? Is your house or business already your and hers when she talks about? Even if you have been dating only for a couple of months?
    • Does she say “we” often, meaning “you”? Like, we should do task xy, but always you end up doing it alone for her? Then she tells you how great and caring and manly you are?
    • Does she want to move in very fast? Usually before talking about who does the laundry or talking about costs? After she moves in, is she hard to get out when you are breaking up? Does she refuse to move to her parents or friends, even if she lives in your house, or despite having her own appartement?
    • Has she some kind of nomadic lifestyle? Nobody knows her for a long time? She switches cities or countries often for some reason?
    • Has she some fairytale story about her life, assets in some foreign country that probably do not exist, is she a duchess in whatever land but without proof? If in doubt ask, check and double check.
    • is she lying a lot about small things? Is she lying a lot about big things? Is she secretive? Is she asking you a lot of questions but at the same time not answering yours (gathering information to use it against you)?
    • Does she stop putting in effort after she moves in or after you start “seriously” dating? Does she threaten to move out if you ask her to do something associated with house work?
    • Does she literally expect you to put her on a pedestal and does she expect that you tell her often how you love her (this can be a test to see how easy you are to manipulate at the moment)? At the same time she tells you less often how she loves you?
    • Is she controlling, like somebody who is watching his business?

Gold diggers come in different shapes and from different backgrounds. Despite of all of these tips, it is very hard to spot a skilled gold digger. Yes, amateurs are easy to spot because they are obvious. The pros are con artists. You literally don’t see it coming.

To The Basic Girl

The Basic Chick Syndrome by Bell Kariuki

This one is for the boring girl. The girl with no creativity and no personality. The girl with the overly enormous sense of entitlement. The girl who is impossible to connect with on any level. 

The girl whose “interestingness” ends with her makeup. The girl whose conversation skills are the same as a piece of plywood. The girl who sits back and lets the guy do all the seductive work. The girl who doesn’t return the flirt. The girl who doesn’t return the call. The girl who is emotionally constricted. The girl who is mentally prudish. The girl who uses weird grammar in her chats on WhatsApp.

The instagram models.The girl who has absolutely unambitious goals. The girl who wants the pleasure without the pain. The girl who fails to inspire awesomeness in her man. The girl who spends ungodly amounts of time in church praying for a husband. The girl who misrepresents feminism. The girl who cries rape falsely. The girl who relentlessly allows her dark past define her present.

The girl who creates barriers with her marriage obsessions. The girl with emotional blockages so tight, she is unable to go with the flow. The girl who lets her issues take the front seat. The girl with the unrealistic and (even bordering on) delusional expectations of a man. The girl unable to live in the moment because she’s worrying about the future. The girls who breaks her own heart, taking it too far down a lonely road. The girl who says she wants love but when it’s close enough she just lets it go.

The girl who, the very thing she is afraid of, she ends up doing to herself. The girl who plays the victim. The girl who believes a guy must do all the work. The girl who plays the age card. The girl who is rude because the only way to hide her insecurities is by making others feel the same way.

The girl without a sense of humour. Because to have a sense of humour is to have a sense of self. And someone without a sense of self can never have a self to give. Thus, selfishness. This one is for the girl who do nothing but take. And take.

The girls who say things like, “all guys want is sex”. To you I ask: what else do you have to offer? Are you interesting? Do you have any stories to tell? Did you do things worth talking about and do you want to talk about things worth doing? Do you engage in the game of seduction with the required finesse? What is it about you that is worth staying for? Have you taken the time to work on yourself and in the process developed interesting habits and traits that another human being can fall in love with? Because sure, the diamond between your legs and the portrait on your shoulders are what bring all the boys to the yard but what else do you have to share that can make losing you hard?

Most men will agree that once you’ve had one vagina you’ve had them all (except on rare occasions) but the beautiful mind of a beautiful woman – flaws and all- is as unique as I can imagine. 

A relationship  is a two-way street. Both parties must engage in flirtatious banter that move the relationship forward. And if either partner fails to return the ball, the spell is broken. The other person starts to find excuses to push them away. We start to see their flaws. I’ve found that while men definitely have their annoyances, the inability of most girls to play the game is what sells them short.

This may come across as a nonsensical rant against women but it really isn’t. I love all women irrespective of how far we’ve gone, romantically and platonically. And also, this really isn’t about me, to make this about me would be to prove my point. Rather, make this an open letter. A letter about hearts that you’ve broken and ties that you’ve severed. No doubt in my mind that will make you feel better.

Jezebel

New Age Jezebel by Bell Kariuki

Hello, it’s been a while, as I promised I’d make a post before end of the year (2017) so here it is. Let’s talk about the “new age Jezebel.”

Disclaimer: This Post Might Come off as Extremely Offensive. I try to keep it as real as i know. Feminists… Proceed with caution. I’ll try my best to stick to the Bibilical perspective because it’s universal. However,as I’ve observed, these character traits appear in both the modern day male and female genders .
You can add some of your insights on the comment section just incase I’ve missed out something.

Please note: The pictures as expressed  here have no relation to the real characters of this article. They only represent the Modern day woman. Like characters in a film. Respect the hustle.

Personally, i believe that Jezebel is a spirit/culture that has found it’s way through our generation, not really an actual person, but more like a toxic mindset that we have acquired from the media/social[circles].
DEFINITION

Jezebel: A female who is seeking attention from and possibly plotting to use someone who is wealthy or otherwise desirable in order to gain status in society.

She is often beautiful and knows it, she uses her looks to her advantage to “lure in” her next victim.

She doesn’t enjoy being out of the loop, she very much has to be the center of attention but also doesn’t have many real friends because of how shallow she is.

She will do anything and will use anyone to get what she wants. She is interested in the people she’s interested in purely as a status symbol and will toss them away and move on when they no longer satisfy what she wants.
“She’s such a Jezebel”

Urban Dictionary 

Jezabel: A female whom is a fundamental danger to men, she’s a shameless hoe will track your cock down and males are powerless in her morally void traction pull. (Not my words , i don’t endrose that)


Jezebel, according to the bible.

“But I have this against you, that you let the woman Jezebel say she is a prophet [claiming to be inspired] and give false teaching, making my servants go after the desires of the flesh and take food offered to false gods.” (Rev 2:20)
[1 Kings 16:31; 2 Kings 9:22,30.]
Who was Jezebel??

Jezebel was an actual person. Jezebel, the Biblical character, first appears in First Kings 16, when she marries Ahab, king of Israel. Jezebel was the daughter of Ethbaal, the king and high priest of the Baal worshipping Sidonians. Baal worship was closely associated with obsessive sensuality and often involved sex acts. Jezebel, as a daughter of this perverse kingdom, was raised in an atmosphere where sex was a path to power and influence.

Ahab, King of Israel, was completely subdued and dominated by Jezebel (a type of modern man). Jezebel then introduced the worship of Ashtoroth to Israel. This god/goddess, represented the Canaanite culture of the moon, was a power-hungry goddess of love and sensuality. Priestess-prostitutes filled her shrines and serviced her worshippers. The lure of these legal, readily available erotic encounters was more than the men of Israel would resist. By Jezebel’s influence, most Israelites, the northern kingdom, left the worship of God for Baal and Ashtoroth. The prophet Elijah laments that only 7000 men in the entire nation were not swayed by her control.

Ashtoroth or Asteroth for the Philistine was the same as the Semite Astarte, both modelled from the Babylonian Ishtar, Her other counterparts are Isis and Hathor of Egypt, Kali of India, and Aphrodite and Demeter of Greece. The Roman counterpart was Diana the same as in Act 19:35. Indeed the same goddess in these days goes by the name of Mary.

The Council of Ephesus, 431 AD had the cult of Diana the virgin goddess (in Greek = Artemis, in Phoenician = Astarte, her cult continued in Ephesus until 431) supplanted by the cult of Mary by the Roman Catholic Church to legitimise that Mary was the “mother of god” and the “mother of all” and not Diana that also had these attributes. They also gave to Mary all the other attributes of Diana such as: “queen of heaven” and “divine virgin” etcetera. Before 431 AD Mary was not recognized and so they effectively paganised Christianity at Ephesus and Diana, still alive, had her name changed to that of Mary.


What kind of spirit

The Jezebel spirit is born of witchcraft and rebellion. This demon is one of the most common spirits in operation today, both in the church and in the world, and it is a powerful enemy of the body of Christ. She operates freely on sincere believers whose hearts are for God individually, and has also attained positions of power as powers and principalities within the Church. This spirit establishes its stronghold primarily in women; however, many men have been victimized by it as well, where it functions as a “controlling” spirit.
The spirit of Jezebel is behind the daughter of Democracy, i. e. Feminism.

The Spirit of Jezebel is basically a controlling spirit working through the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. It has, in general, two aims:

To gain identity, glory, recognition, power, and satisfy the need for the “praises of men”. This is a consequence of the desire for love and self-worth focussed on SELF.
Secondly the Jezebel spirit is a men hater and seeks to emasculate all men, and divest them of their authority and power over others. It fosters a distrust and hatred of men in general. The “Jezebel spirit” is in a constant agitation, terribly aggressive, very determined, callous, controlling, selfish, power-hungry, manipulative, unrepentant, deceitful spirit, an overwhelmingly evil spirit, and those are mostly only it’s good points! Indeed this spirit can be definitely named “Satan’s woman”.


There are two main types of the Jezebel spirit:

The high-profile type is generally gregarious, outspoken and highly visible. She is often seen as the “woman who wears the pants in the family”.

The low-profile type is soft-spoken, giving the illusion of being solicitous, motherly, protective, even appearing very submissive. The low-profile type may be the most dangerous, as she is the most difficult to discern. She relies heavily on manipulation for her power, in extremely subtle performances.


Some Characteristics

Within these two main types there are two manifestations: the SEDUCER and the COOL.


The SEDUCER
uses any type of seduction available to gain control and power, as a method of manipulation but specialises in spiritual seduction to operate on both males and females. 

Her seduction usually uses subtle flattery and her seduction is spiritual fornication. Men are particularly blind and easy victims to the subtleties of this seduction, as she flatters them with her attention. Women seduced by the Jezebel are blinded to their own seduction, as they do not expect it, or are not aware of such manipulation.

A good example of the COOL Jezebel personality can frequently be seen as the efficient (and often plain) executive assistant at the side of a powerful businessman or church leader. This Jezebel often lacks a gregarious personality, but may be very outspoken and aggressive.


Some of this spirit’s features:


Deceiver

This spirit works in “private”, people outside her circle hardly know her manoeuvring and are an easy pray for manipulation. Those that are possessed by her tend to defend her from any form of criticism. Like many men today defend feminism.

Man-Hater

Jezebel hates men and majors in destroying them. She cannot have a true Godly relationship with men; because her desire is to strip them of all their perceived power and then destroy them, to emasculate them emotionally and spiritually.

Un-submitted

Jezebels revile (despise and show no respect for) authority over her. Building on “dislike of authority” (especially of men since they are frequently the authority figure) coupled with rebellion, she hates anyone placed in authority over her (particularly men), and seeks to destroy them and take their power. Jezebel sees herself as the “goddess on the pedestal”.

Power-Hungry

Jezebel is extremely power-hungry, respecting only power stronger than her own. She disdains or considers herself superior to anyone she perceives as having no power, or power less than hers. She works through her conquest to attain power over others.

Intelligent

This spirit from hell is very intelligent and finds very challenging to control and manipulate intellectually able people. She is able to manipulate them so well that actually they worship her.

Hard Worker

Jezebels are frequently “super achievers”, which sadly is admired both in the church and business world. She is also a master in hinder others to achieve anything, kind of: doing everything she can to prevent others achieving their set goals for then criticise them for not having achieved these aims.

Self Worship

Internally Jezebel worships herself even though externally she may portray a picture of humility and submission. She is very proud of herself and extremely vain, and in her pride can only talk about herself. They are usually very attractive and they use that to seduce their victims.

Jealous

She cannot suffer other getting attention over herself and she will do all she can to prevent others receiving attention and recognition. If one gets between Jezebel and the person she is trying to control, she’ll attack most viciously, trying her best to destroy that relationship with that person. She will try and destroy his reputation, undermine his authority and generally stop at nothing to separate anyone from her intended “victim”. Beware!

Manipulator

Jezebel uses other people as objects, where it suits her need, to gain control, influence and power. Once she has gained the control desired, she generally rejects and tosses the people aside. If they are in her family, she does this emotionally.

Queen Bee

Jezebel demands worship from others (the “queen-bee” syndrome). She must have dominance and control in her home. Other family members exist just to please her. Jezebel requires “worship” from her family and followers … to be their “goddess”.

Domineering

The Jezebel is extremely authoritarian (“bossy”) by nature, though subtly with the low profile type. She is easily offended if her authority is questioned, and will often respond with extreme anger at even the slightest offence. She demands blind loyalty.

Unrealistic Expectations of Others

Her expectations of others are always unrealistic, because others cannot meet her demand for complete submission. If they do try, she despises them and casts them aside when she has what she wants out of them. Anyone attempting to relate to a person with this spirit is literally in a “no-win situation”. Nothing pleases this spirit.

Perfectionist

Perfectionism is a common characteristic of the Jezebel, generating self-hatred in the victim, and a despising of others around her who fail to meet her exaggerated standards. This is part of the “unrealistic expectations” she has toward herself and others, but it is also an excuse for disrespect toward others, especially those in authority since they don’t “measure up” so she doesn’t have to show respect, of course.

Seduction, Control, Manipulation

Control and manipulation are the strongest parts of the Jezebel nature. These are “spirits of witchcraft” and are extremely dangerous! Nearly everything the Jezebel does utilizes one or both spirits to attain her goal. Jezebel is the ultimate manipulator. The adulterous woman says: “This is the way of an adulteress: she eats and wipes her mouth and says, “I have done no wrong.”” (Pro 30:20)

The first step in Jezebel’s work is to control her victim by seduction. She will use flattery, smooth prophetic sayings, pleasant words and seducing tears. She views children in a marriage as tools and weapons to manipulate hubby and family.
She knows how to use deep emotional hurts and wounds to manipulate and control as she creates apparent deep ties with others. Jezebel loves to pull people unto herself and away from those who can truly speak into their lives. Jezebel flows best in a whirlwind of confusion and turmoil, where she works best.

Shark

Jezebel is like a shark; she is most vicious and dangerous. She circles the lives of others looking for teachable, seducible, controllable, “disciples” of her own. Jezebel likes to birth spiritual children of her own as she looks for disciples to eat from her own table. She will look for those that are in rebellion, who are weak, wounded, or those who are contending, bucking, and fighting any established spiritual authority.

Possessive

Jezebel is very possessive and domineering; she wants to control over others. Jezebel loves power, “Give me, give me, give me.” You see, money is not really the issue with this spirit; it’s Power and Authority that she’s after. She likes to be in control of others life because she draws her strength from controlling others. She spiritually drains her victims. She uses faults or weaknesses she perceives in the person she is attempting to control to create feelings of shame or guilt, and therefore ultimately submission to her will. She also often uses fear and intimidation to manipulate others into submission to her.

Self-pity

She uses self-pity and her own weaknesses to manipulate another into submitting to her out of compassion or pity. Feeling sorry for Jezebel, is not compassion, it’s folly!
Even though often very gifted of the Lord, the Jezebel will frequently operate in the false discernment of the enemy by speaking words of knowledge gained from familiar spirits, and NOT from the Spirit of God. This is “witchcraft”. The power of witchcraft is derived from Satan himself and every attempt at manipulation or control “sells out” more to Satan and strengthens the deception the Jezebel is under

She will even use prayer to manipulate the one she is attempting to control, especially audible prayed over that person to create the illusion, that doing Jezebel’s will is actually “obeying God”, or to generate fear or other emotion within the person which the Jezebel can then use for manipulation of them.
This is what Rev 2:20 is all about.
Only Wants to be associated with the Rich & Powerful

Jezebels are attracted to people of power like “moths to flames”. Often, a very intelligent, efficient, attractive, and even blatant Jezebel can be found serving “at the feet” of prominent leaders, even in the church. The deception and/or seduction of the Jezebel is often so successful that the leader does not recognize who is at his right hand. The Jezebel’s true desire is to wrest the power from the person being served. If that person is prophetic in nature, the actual mission is to destroy them by any means available (destroy their credibility, undermine their authority, discredit their ministry, cause them to fall into sexual temptation, etc.).

Ambitious

Jezebels are desirous of “moving up the ladder” wherever they are, not that ambition is always “evil”. It’s just another character trait to look for. However, you simply will not find a humble, repentant, democratic and non-ambitious Jezebel.

Convinced

While Jezebel’s beliefs system is obviously incorrect and evil, they are very firmly held beliefs.
Jezebels are usually people of deep convictions. As mentioned earlier, many people controlled by the Jezebel spirit have a true heart for God and earnestly desire to serve him. The original Jezebel (the Spirit’s first noteworthy in queen of Israel) was devoutly religious, but was at total enmity with God. She worshipped at the altar of Baal (worship of the flesh). Modern day Jezebels may indeed believe they are serving the one true God; however, the true hidden agenda is “self-worship”. In many cases they have a Private Interpretation on the Bible, but they will vehemently insist they are correct.

Murmuring, Complaint, and Criticism

Murmuring and complaint and criticism a type of spirit very popular everywhere, especially in the church, which one of the spirit most used by the evil one. She uses criticism of perceived faults in others to build up her own self-esteem, and to justify her disobedience of, or lack of respect for, others. Because she tends to perfectionism, any fault she finds in others is grounds for disobeying their authority. She uses criticism as a tool to manipulate those around her, and along with murmuring and complaint, causes divisiveness to weaken her opposition and thereby to gain control over and to destroy them.

Lustful

Jezebels are “lustful spirits” with lust for power being primary; however, as mentioned earlier, their lust may be manifested sexually, if it will bring the desired result. The manifestation varies from a wife withholding sexual union from the husband for manipulative purposes, to utilizing sexual temptation to draw one more powerful into a compromised position that will cause their destruction or downfall.

Jezebel displays angry, vicious and sometimes violent behaviour when opposed. 

She will turn on the one who refuses to do her will or submit to her (especially if she has been successful in manipulating this person in the past), frequently with a vicious, berating verbal attack aimed at humiliation. The emotional damage caused by these outbreaks can be devastating to the one at whom she directs her wrath. This is often the source of terrible emotional wounds for her children and spouse. When this angry behaviour happens in public, it often exposes the true spirit in operation to others who may have been previously deceived. Watch for it.

Infirmities and Disease

Jezebels frequently enjoy people’s (including their own) poor health, especially the “Low-profile” type. For them, it is a tool for attention, sympathy and other forms of manipulation. The tragedy is that this form of “invited infirmity” eventually leads to real physical problems, and becomes a part of the destruction wrought on the host by this spirit, but it serves to further Jezebel’s ends, not to weaken her.

Have you ever felt insecure? Be careful, Jezebel loves to delve in the realm of insecurity. She will spot this in you “instantly” and then the seduction begins.
Destruction

In addition to destroying those around her, Jezebel especially hates the prey she is controlling (remember the mission of Jezebel is to kill the prophets: the victim is often herself anointed of God to be prophetic), and will ultimately cause her victim to self-destruct. This is referred to as the “Black Widow spider syndrome” since black widow spiders kill their mates. In the spirit realm, there are two applications: 1. the Jezebel spirit seeks to kill the male authority figures (or prophets) and 2. She seeks to kill her victim, which is mated to her when Jezebel takes control of their life.
Cursing

Jezebels curse everyone, unwittingly bringing a curse upon themselves, most of the time. Criticism is a form of cursing, both of the person being criticized, and of God their Maker. Murmuring and complaint is a cursing of circumstances, which also curses God for allowing them. Jezebel is a master of criticism, murmuring and complaint, as mentioned previously. Often those whom she is at enmity with are deliberately cursed in a conscious effort to “punish” and “bring them back into line” to bring them back under her control. Jezebel firmly believes she has right on her side in doing these things, and displays vicious and callous disregard for the well-being and independence of others, having convinced herself that it is ultimately for their good as well and that she knows best and really has their best interests at heart in doing so. Those people who have been on the receiving side of Jezebel’s curses feel the anger and the viciousness other curses acutely and many succumb to them. However, for those under the “protection of the Cross”, these curses are most often transformed into blessings instead, leaving Jezebel sapped of emotional energy, frustrated, confused and completely defeated; wondering what went wrong?


Superiority Complex

Jezebels frequently perceive themselves as intellectually and spiritually superior to others, and “talk down ” to others. This attitude is actually despising of others.
The Jezebel Spirit absolutely hates and shuns Repentance and Humility.
Because the Jezebel spirit is prideful and rebellious, she hates repentance and humility. These are two mighty weapons, which can be used against her. This is also the key in discerning this spirit -a pride-filled rebellious person refusing to repent.

Jezebel and Fashion

Jezebel is very much attracted to the latest fashion in dressing and she dresses up to demonstrate superiority and literally to slay & “kill”.

Bitterness and Resentment

Bitterness and resentment against past hurts and offences are nurtured in the victim by the Jezebel spirit, because she knows a root of bitterness will grow like a cancer and manifest itself in all sorts of physical ailments, which she can use as tools of manipulation, as noted above. Of course, this cancer of bitterness is also slowly destroying the victim. In many cases, the countenance of the victim gradually grows more and more unattractive, and in the end, victims controlled by the Jezebel spirit may resemble the very witch like crones often used to symbolize witchcraft -where this spirit is birthed. The victim rots from the inside out, physically and spiritually, and it shows. People eventually find Jezebel’s “Spiritual ugliness” very repulsive.


Jezebel Covens

Many Jezebels will be drawn to the most influential Jezebel in operation. Though this is done unconsciously, it has the effect of creating a fully-fledged and very effective witches’ coven, with a “high priestess” in charge with devastating results! You can see them spread all over the country in the Feministic organisations.

Jezebel and Children:

Jezebel’s view of children is perverted. She says she loves them, but she really doesn’t even know how to love them, using them as weapons to advance her own selfish needs. Children are simply pawns in her power and control games. Indeed the trend now all over the Western world is to have very few children, if any. A Jezebel Feminist said: “The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it.”


Jezebel is a classic “Back-stabber”

Jezebel is the classic back-stabber, She will smile at you, give you a hug and a kiss and then, as soon as you turn-around, stab you in the back, repeatedly, with vigour, enjoying every wound she inflicts. She is a most vicious and devious spirit. Beware.
This, just to mention only a few of the characteristics of this very evil spirit from Hell.

What about the Spirit of Ahab?

One thing to be noted in these days is that in general there are more women in church than men. This occurs when the “spiritual and natural” head of the family is the women. Men have the tendency to “run to the hills” when women infringe upon their roles.
The spirit of Ahab is a weak and emasculated figure, indeed the majority of modern men are under that spirit, enslaved to their women. There is an adage that says: “There are two kind of people in this world: those who rule and those that are ruled, if you do not rule you are ruled”.

The couple Jezebel and Ahab represent very well our present society.
It is Jezebel that was the more spiritual, it was her that took the leading role, Jezebel used Ahab’s emotional stresses to endear herself to him, it was this woman that drove her husband to do what she wanted, she was ruling the roost in every aspect. Is not that a picture of our Democratic culture?
But what happens when the woman takes the leading role that God had prescribed for men?

When a woman takes the lead, she is playing the masculine role. Unless her husband fights her for supremacy, he must assume second place. And men who are forced into subjection to their wives tend to be angry, dejected and retreat like Ahab.

When a husband steps into a spiritual role at his wife’s command, he becomes vulnerable to her guidance in that role. This is against God’s directives and the nature He gave, and often brings conflict in the family and in the church.

Many men turn their heads when they see their wives stepping out of their God given role. These men would rather not have to deal with the stone-cold anger they would receive from their wives if they offered any resistance. Have you seen that behaviour here and there?
Ahab chose not to notice when his wife worked behind the scenes. Many men turn their heads when they see their wives stepping out of their God-given role. 

Jezebel knew that she was not the rightful head, so she invoked her husband’s name to give her word authority. Did you ever hears it said, “Oh, my husband will not let me do that,” when you knew in truth he really would not care? It is a way to maintain control and stop those who would question you. When a woman does this, she stops any ministry God has to her.
Jezebel was deeply concerned about spiritual matters and took steps to help promote her spiritual leaders. In the process, she provoked her husband to destroy those in spiritual authority she did not like. Have you ever seen women influencing their husbands to think evil of those in authority because you did not like something about them? When a woman comes to this place she might as well change her name to “Jezebel.”
The fact is that man is made in such a way that he has no defence against the love of a righteous wife, but if he falls into the end of a Jezebel, truly is life will be hell on earth.

Unfortunately for men, with the advent of Democracy and the so called feminist approach there are billions of Jezebels in the world and the once manly men have been reduced to weak type of Ahab’s, they have been mentally emasculated and the world is in deep decadence because of that, as we see today.

How many women do you actually know they do this today?: “10 An excellent wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels. 11 The heart of her husband trusts in her, and he will have no lack of gain. 12 She does him good, and not harm, all the days of her life.” (Pro 31:10-12)
How powerful is the demon of Jezebel?
For seven years, God had carefully protected Elijah. God fed him in the wilderness. When Ahab’s armies sought to kill Elijah, they were unable to lay a single finger on him.
Finally, in a showdown at Mt. Carmel, Elijah called down fire from heaven and resoundingly defeated and killed the priests of Baal. All Israel fell at his feet in repentance, worshipping the true God. Elijah was the man of the hour. He was vindicated, victorious, and clearly in charge.

Nevertheless, when Jezebel sent Elijah a single threat, he suddenly turned coward and fled to the desert. Anxious, depressed, and miserable, he begged God to kill him! Typical of men today, run to the hills. Once I asked one of our secretaries to prepare some papers, I gave her plenty time, but when time came they were not ready, so I let her know my displeasure in no uncertain terms. She looked at me with all the hate she could muster and hissed between her teeth the usual feminist phrase: “you are a male chauvinist”. “Yes” I responded, “on so is my Father for he created them “male And Female””. She looked a me rather violently, I felt she was about to hit me, (be sure that had she done that I would have returned the favor) but she turned around and never talked to me ever again, but the papers were made ready pronto and I had no problem with her with other papers. You see she hated me, but she respected me for I stood my ground. How many men would have done that in these days? Me thinks very few.

It makes NO sense. Elijah enjoyed supernatural protection for seven years. He watched fire fall from heaven and defeat his enemies, yet when a single angry woman threatened him one time, he lost every shred of vision and ran away. He moaned in self-pity and depression, begging God to kill him! Surely that was a magnificent display of God’s power and that power was with Elijah, but at a word from Jezebel he forgot all that and ran in fear. Surely that must have annoyed the Lord at least a little, for it seems that in that occasion Elijah feared more Jezebel that the Lord God.

This is a great example of Jezebel’s powerful demonic “anointing” to intimidate, create fear, and cause men of God to withdraw. Jezebel steals our vision. Jezebel will even make us depressed and anxious when there is nothing significantly different in our circumstances. If there are difficult circumstances, this spirit will tell us they are insurmountable, impossible, and overwhelming. Jezebel will make us feel like dying when in reality, we are God’s man of the hour.

Jezebel’s witchcraft will attack key leaders in her targeted area through intimidation. Those under attack may awaken one morning to find it takes effort just to breathe. All joy seems to depart. Spiritual life seems irrelevant. Demonic voices will echo in our minds “something’s wrong with you!” We may suddenly find ourselves in unreasonable anxiety, fearing tragedy or death. Much of what is called “depression” in the ministry is simply Jezebel.

Jezebel wants to paralyze with fear, condemnation, depression, apathy or whatever it takes until we withdraw. The only answer for those under Jezebel’s attack is perseverance in battle. We must remain on course no matter how long it takes!

The sad thing is that she is so successful in her endeavour these days.

War

The war continues today between Jezebel and Elijah. Like all wars, there are casualties. Leaders sometimes fall. Soldiers sometimes withdraw. Jezebel wants to keep the church and the world within its present boundaries. She claims to decide the extent of the church locally. We must not tolerate this.


What we must do

First, we must rid ourselves of Jezebel’s ways. We cannot cast out lust when we harbor lust in our lives. We cannot bring down a spirit of control if we use manipulation and hype to control our congregations. We must examine our own ways, and repent of Jezebel.
Second, it takes Jehu. Although Elijah was Jezebel’s enemy, it took JEHU to trample Jezebel.
Jehu took no prisoners and showed no mercy to Jezebel. He had singleness of purpose and was driven by it. As he approached Jezebel those who saw his chariot noted he “drives furiously” (2Ki 9:20). When others offered peace and compromise, Jehu responded “How can there be peace as long as the harlotries and witchcrafts of Jezebel are many?” (2Ki 9:22)
This is repeated in the NT: “What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?” (2Co 6:15) NO COMPROMISE
Jehu would not rest until Jezebel was dead. Her pleasures could not attract him. Her threats did not deter him. He would not tolerate Jezebel.

Jesus says we too cannot TOLERATE Jezebel. (Rev 2:20) We must learn the prophetic power of the word “No!” We must give no ground.
When Jezebel attempted to captivate Jehu, he did not even allow himself to be drawn into conversation with her. Instead, he called on her eunuchs (a type of today’s men) to cast her down from her balcony. Those with the Jehu anointing will call to Jezebel’s emasculated slaves to rise up above their miserable situation, and they too will cast her down, and be set free.
“NO” is the operative word against Jezebel, when those in spiritual authority say “NO” to her, she is ready for war. Remember, Jezebel is a warring spirit who is always dressed for battle.
Brothers, the time is over nigh, the time is well passed, but we must stand and we must rise up and regain our God given position. What shall we say to our beloved Master, Christ Jesus, when He will ask us: “what have you done with the life I gave you?”.  There will be lowering of heads and faint voices: “You know, o Lord”.
We must work all of one accord with a Trowel in one hand a Sword in the other.

“16 ¶ From that day on, half of my servants worked on construction, and half held the spears, shields, bows, and coats of mail. And the leaders stood behind the whole house of Judah, 17 who were building on the wall. Those who carried burdens were loaded in such a way that each laboured on the work with one hand and held his weapon with the other. 18 And each of the builders had his sword strapped at his side while he built. The man who sounded the trumpet was beside me.” (Neh 4:16-18)
In conclusion, I’m strongly inclined towards the bibilcal values. As men we need to play our role and be responsible ,and females ,as much as i support you bossing up, and living life to the fullest, don’t forget your bibilical roles. You can still be a boss and respect your husband.
A virtuous woman is priceless! Enjoy your holidays.

Age Of The Sage (Faith vs Reason) 

Why Do We Believe Anything, Anyway?
Bell Kariuki on Perception, & illusions of the world.

​WHAT DO WE MEAN BY THE WORD “BELIEVER?”

Wikipedia defines the general concept of belief this way:
Belief is the state of mind in which a person thinks something to be the case, with or without there being empirical evidence to prove that something is the case with factual certainty.
“REALITY” VS “THE WORLD”

By Bell Kariuki (InstagramTwitter

Everything we know about reality enters our brains via one or more of our five senses.

An individual person, living in a specific physical location on the earth, will never in the course of a lifetime encounter 99% or more of all the information and/or experience that is available on just this one tiny planet. We won’t read all the books. We won’t visit all the places. We won’t meet all the people. Most of the animal species on earth we won’t even see a picture of in our lifetimes, let alone witness in person (there are some 950,000 species of insects, alone). The “world” each of us labels “reality” is in fact a construct in our brain, built from the miniscule slivers of data we take in through our senses, living in at most a few places, attending a few, or even just one school system, knowing at most a handful of people, and having even that tiny stream of experience narrowed down to the few scraps our brains don’t withhold from consciousness for our own good.
That may sound bleak, but if it were otherwise, we would almost certainly succumb to overwhelm and be unable to function.

So, why then does the unique “world” in each of our brains feel like the “whole world” to us? We can accept rationally, based on what we know about brain function as described in the previous paragraph, that our understanding of reality can’t possibly be an accurate/complete representation of the world we live in.
Yet it feels completely real. Why?

THE NECESSITY OF BELIEF

Why do we believe anything beyond the concrete, present-moment data being continually gathered by our senses? And not just God or religious/spiritual type beliefs, but anything at all? Why do I believe my wife loves me? Why do I believe my children will succeed in life? Why do I believe that I am a good person, and so are my friends? Why do I believe there are even such categories as good or evil in the world?

The explanation is that navigating the limited piece of physical reality we encounter in life, and remaining mentally and emotionally secure enough to survive, find mates, and propagate the species, requires an unquestioning, and when you think about it, strikingly unreasonable confidence in ourselves and in the world. Since full awareness of reality as-it-is was not an option for our ancient ancestors (as the overwhelm caused by so much data would have diminished, rather than enhanced, their chances of survival), evolution equipped them –and, as their descendants, us too  — with brains capable of generating a convincing illusion of the reality of our own small words.

Think about an optical illusion. What we see in the picture is not simply what’s there. Our brains connect dots and fill in gaps until the bits and pieces in the image coalesce into something we recognize. We are seeing what’s there, but our brains are adding “unreal” elements that allow us to make sense of what we’re seeing, or that allow us to understand incoming data in relation to purely mental pieces of our experience, like memory.

Our brains are not malfunctioning when they do this. They are operating as designed. Beliefs are the projected “lines” (storylines might be an even better analogy) our brains have evolved to draw between “dots” of otherwise unrelated hard data, in order to tease out a solid and relatable, if to a disturbing degree illusory, world for us to succeed in.

Our brains are simply Belief Generating Machines.
Without beliefs, we would have no context in which to understand ourselves and our lives. We would be lost and ineffective. Our brains generate beliefs because beliefs are necessary for biological survival.

EQUIVALENT BELIEF SYSTEMS — RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY, SCIENCE

From this perspective, the brains of not only Christians, Muslims and Hindus, but also Stoics, Existentialists, Transcendentalists (all philosophies), and even atheists who accept the reality-explaining power of science, are doing exactly the same thing. They are connecting the scant number of “dots” in their individual sensory experience with projected “belief lines” to create a picture of the world they can move about in confidently.
It’s important to stress here that the fact that our brains generate new, or accept established, beliefs to make sense of reality does not automatically mean that the content of those beliefs is false . I think that’s an easy conclusion to jump to, and I want to avoid easy conclusions.

WHAT DO WE BELIEVE?

Let’s do a little experiment together. Pick up some droppable object near you. Keys, a pillow, a small child, whatever. (For the literalists, I should add that I am just kidding about the child, and that you really shouldn’t ever drop children.)
Ok, now look at it and really try to believe that when you drop it, that it is going to float into the sky. I am going to do this with you. I just picked up a stuffed rabbit that happened to be on the couch. Now using your free will, REALLY try to BELIEVE that when you drop your object, gravity is not going to exist anymore. If you are anything like me, you will find that this is not possible. While I was staring at the rabbit, I actually was able to create this superficial feeling of suspense and tried to really expect it to not drop. But if you stopped me and asked me in the middle of that if I would bet my life on the results, I am going to go ahead and admit that I would have bet on gravity.
I dropped it. And guess what?! It didn’t drop! It floated in mid-air! Isn’t that amazing?

Do you believe me?

No?

Why not?

Because by the time you can use your conscious mind to “believe” something, your unconscious mind has already sorted through the data and there is no way you can force yourself to un-know what you know. You might be able to convince yourself that it is possible for gravity to stop for a moment. It’s like when I was in high school and I kept almost breaking my glasses to prove that I really believed God would heal my eyes.

But when the rubber meets the road, you really can’t choose to believe or not believe in something like gravity. Every moment of your existence has been influenced and limited by it. You’ve never escaped it, and unless you leave this planet on some space adventure some day, you never will.

I grew up in an environment that placed a high priority on belief. Belief was everything. Belief was made “us” vs “them”. Belief was what determined not just your life, but your afterlife. But what is belief really?

Do I believe in gravity or do I know that it exists? After all, isn’t it theoretically possible that gravity as we currently understand it doesn’t exist? I mean, our views of what holds us to the ground has changed pretty radically through history. Who is to know that we won’t discover that our current understanding of gravity is wrong? Even the most straight forward assumptions are still assumptions. There’s always another possibility. For example, isn’t it theoretically possible (even if unlikely) that we are part of a computer simulation that holds us to the ground simply because that’s what the programmer wanted the program to do?

So on that level, pretty much EVERYTHING is a belief because EVERYTHING we know is built on assumptions. We “know” that gravity is real, but that assumes that your perception of existence is real and not a dream or some sort of momentary simulation in the mind of God. Everything you believe or know is built on a lot of assumptions that have already been processed by your unconscious mind and that is the foundation upon which we can start forming words and ideas about what we “believe.”

So what happens when your unconscious mind removes some of the assumptions?
What happens when some of what you built the words and concepts on does not exist anymore?

For instance, let’s talk about God.

When I was a kid, I would pray up to the sky all the time. During worship services, I would look up because I was somehow taught that God was this Supreme Being “up” in Heaven, and someday he would come “down” here to rescue us. But then in school, of course, we learned about space and the earth and how it rotates and how there is really no such thing as “up” or “down.” These are ideas relative to earth and our position within its gravitational pull. And in fact, what is up to me right now is down for a lot of other people on earth, and in a few hours, up has drastically changed for all of us. So if up and down aren’t real, then what do we mean by God being “up” in Heaven? And why do so many worship leaders stare at the lights of the sanctuary and reach their hands into the sky as though trying to reach somebody “up” there? Up where? Towards which planet? Which galaxy? Because if it’s in some direction that we are supposed to think about God, that direction would be constantly changing. Sometimes the congregation should be gazing down and to the right or reaching their hands straight out behind them…

So what do you do when you lose the up and down assumption in your unconscious? Well, you either stop looking up, or you look up in a more metaphorical way. But once you lose that assumption, it’s impossible to once again BELIEVE that God is UP there. You can’t do it. You have seen that up is not real, and you will never be able to un-see that.

So here’s my point in all of this: we should be very slow to judge people for their beliefs.
I’m talking to myself as well here. There are some beliefs that drive me crazy. I find them backwards and limiting and destructive. But while I think it’s okay to make value judgments on beliefs, I think so many of us are so quick to label, categorize and dismiss human beings because of their beliefs.

But here’s the reality. We don’t really get to chose our beliefs. They are handed to us from our environment. Who of us came up with any our beliefs on our own? You can’t even have concepts or beliefs in your head without words. And where did you get those words? Did you make them up? Did you invent the word ‘God? Did you invent the words ‘science’, ‘humanism’, ‘good’, ‘evil’, ‘love’…? No, these words do not exist as something separate from your experience and environment. These words come to you with concepts and experiences that have been handed to you from your particular environment. And you either accept them, change them, or deny them, but even those decisions are largely out of your control. You will see what you will see, and those things cannot be un-seen. You will think with words that your environment hands you and you have no ability to unlearn those words or concepts. They are burned into your brain, and they always will be.

This sounds awfully fatalistic, but I don’t think it has to be. Because I believe that you can choose with your conscious mind what you want to do with the (un)beliefs that you have.

Back to the “up” thing. Even if you know God isn’t up there somewhere, perhaps you are a person that finds great solace in looking up while you pray or lifting your hands when you sing. Perhaps it makes you feel like a child looking up to a parent. Or perhaps it makes you feel lighter and more human, more connected and a part of everything. So maybe you decide to keep looking up sometimes. Maybe lifting your hands makes you feel like you are surrendering something of yourself to something or someone “higher” than yourself. Even though you realize the absurdity of thinking of God as some being that lives somewhere in the direction of Galaxy 54-tx42… You have a choice on what to do with that belief (or lack thereof) now. You can stop looking up. Or you can look up. That’s your decision. Unlike believing that the rabbit is not going to hit the floor when you drop it, that’s something you can actually choose.

Over the last year, I have had so many questions asked of me about what I believe. Just tonight I had a conversation with someone extremely close to me that said that he wouldn’t consider me a Christian anymore.
Why?

Not because of my life.. Not because my life looks like Jesus or doesn’t look like Jesus. But because of my lack of ability to nail down all the words and concepts of what I exactly BELIEVE. Because I’ve lost so many of the unconscious assumptions that I used to have and have no ability to un-see what I have seen.

I have no more ability to believe, for example, that the first people on earth were a couple named Adam and Eve that lived 6,000 years ago. I have no ability to believe that there was a flood that covered all the highest mountains of the world only 4,000 years ago and that all of the animal species that exist today are here because they were carried on an ark and then somehow walked or flew all around the world from a mountain in the middle east after the water dried up. I have no more ability to believe these things than I do to believe in Santa Clause or to not believe in gravity. But I have a choice on what to do with these unbeliefs. I could either throw out those stories as lies, or I could try to find some value in them as stories. But this is what happens…

If you try to find some value in them as stories, there will be some people that say that you aren’t a Christian anymore because you don’t believe the Bible is true or “authoritative”. Even if you try to argue that you think there is a truth to the stories, just not in an historical sense; that doesn’t matter. To some people, you denying the “truth” of a 6,000 year old earth with naked people in a garden eating an apple being responsible for the death of dinosaurs is the same thing as you nailing Jesus to the cross. You become part of ‘them’. The deniers of God’s Word.

The easy thing for me on the other side of my experience would be to see those who do believe in literal Genesis stories like that as somehow unenlightened or foolish. It would be easy and just as destructive for me to write off all THOSE people who believe those things as something less than beautiful, complicated and intelligent human beings. I must remember that the people that believe in a literal Genesis have no more ability to not believe it than I do to believe it. They have been handed a set of words, ideas and assumptions that they have built their consciousness on, and until something shifts for them, they see the world as they see it, and they can’t un-see it.

I think this understanding can help us see that all of us have assumptions and biases and beliefs and that we ought to be very slow in writing others off because of their words and concepts. That would almost be like writing them off because of the color of their skin or because they speak with a different accent or language than you.

So be careful of labels. Be careful who you judge as “in” or “out” of your camp. It’s a destructive way of seeing the world.

I think a healthier way of thinking about belief is to think about the kind of lives we choose to live with the words and beliefs that have been handed to us. Perhaps a more important question than whether God is a guy in the sky or the Ground of Being or the future, infinite Trinitarian relationality is what you will do with your assumptions of what God is or is not. Will you love God? Will you love your neighbor? Maybe these questions are far more important than what you BELIEVE about God or your neighbor. Maybe whether or not you do what Jesus said is more important than the language that use to describe Jesus.

I’m not saying that language is unimportant. It is important. Just not important enough to divide over. People are more important than ideas. Love is more important than the concept of love. We should never hurt or lessen the humanity of actual human beings because of the language, beliefs, and concepts that their environment and experiences have given them.

So, for me, I’ve decided to think about my ‘beliefs’ in terms of how I live rather than what my unconscious assumptions are. Because there are lots of people that have all sorts of beautiful ‘beliefs’ that live really awful lives. If I’m on the side of a road bleeding, I don’t care if the priest or the Levite have beautiful ‘beliefs’ about the poor and the hurting.. Give me the samaritan. The heretic. The outsider who may have the ‘wrong’ ‘beliefs’ in words and concepts but actually lives out the right beliefs by stopping and helping me. That’s the kind of belief I’m interested in at this point.

What do I believe? Look at my life. That’s what I believe. And that’s the kind of belief I’m interested in for my friends as well. I don’t care so much about what their words and unconscious assumptions are (even though that can make for some enjoyable pub conversation). I care about what kind of lives they live. Do they believe IN the underdog, or do they BELIEVE in the underdog? Do they believe in loving their neighbor or do they believe by loving their neighbor?

So you believe in God? So what. You believe Jesus was the Son of God that will someday come again to reconcile all things? Big deal. So do most serial killers.

Allow me to close this post with some words from the book of James, Chapter 2:
“What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.”

But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?

Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

Signs You Are a Side Chick

All The Surefire Signs You’re Just His Side Chick And Nothing More

“if you start a relationship being the other woman, you will never be the only woman.” Bell Kariuki on Relationships

​Sure Signs that you are a side chick and not his girlfriend.

By Bell Kariuki (InstagramTwitter

Within the past few years, guys having a “side chick” has reached an all time high. There are songs, movies, and even books about being the other woman, which is pretty messed up.

You’d think men would “keep it 100” and tell you if they weren’t ready to be in a relationship with only one person (or that he’s actually already with someone when you meet).

 Instead, they’ve gotten a lot more clever and underhanded in their tactics and they know how to keep their girlfriends and their side pieces separate.

Also, being a side chick is no longer an embarrassment to some women, which gives us men more reason to have one. 

Here are a few signs that he’s actually in a relationship with someone else.

1. He buys you sh*t to keep you happy.

Hush gifts are things he buys for you when you start talking about serious sh*t, like moving in together, committing, or spending time with his family, and an argument sparks. Because he wants to keep you as his side chick, he finds your material weakness and plays on that to stray you away from the serious topics and also to keep youaround.

2. He seems completely disconnected when you get emotional with him.

When women date, they anticipate the time in their relationships when they fall for the guy and can tell him how they feel. However, if you open up to your man and tell him how you feel repeatedly and he doesn’t reciprocate and/or tries to downplay the entire topic, this could be a sign that his heart lies elsewhere.

3. You’re never invited to stay the night after sex.

As couples get more comfortable with each other, they tend to stay over at one another’s place after sex. However, if he leaves your apartment in the middle of the night, or makes sure you never stay over at his place, this is a definite red flag. Also, keep in mind, if he has a family or“main chick”, staying until dawn will never be an option.
4. He refuses to show affection in public.

PDA (Public Display of Affection) should never be an issue in any relationship, so long as it’s within reason. But if you go to grab his hand and he pulls his away, or you never kiss or get too close when you’re out together, this could be a sign that you’re a side chick. This also gives him room to lie to his “main chick” about who you are if you two happen to be seen.
5. He dodges every photo opportunity.

Everyone is on Facebook and Instagram posting their food, kids, and significant others. Snapchat and Whatsapp make every day a motion picture production. So if you notice that your guy is dodging selfies like bullets whenever you tilt your phone to take a picture,you may be a side chick.

6. You have a “secret spot” that he tries to play off as romantic.

Every couple has a favorite spot to eat or hang out. However, if he choses to always take you miles outside of the city or to venues with very little traffic, it’s a possibility he’s trying to be discreet about being out with you, without letting you know.
Bonus

He always wants to meet late at night.

If you only meet after dark or after reasonable date hours, such as 11pm or later, chances are he has another life that he leads – the hours prior to those latenight “booty call” hours.
He prefers to stay in when you’re together.

If your guy always strays away from going out or always wants to just come to your place to hang out, this is a major side chick indicator. There’s a difference between a guy being a homebody and trying to be sneaky with your relationship. Every couple has dinner at restaurants or goes on movie dates from time to time.
You’re never invited to family gatherings. 

If you have never met a guy’s parents and children or haven’t been to any events that include his friends, this is another side chick indicator.

He has to go suddenly whenever you’re on the phone.

When you speak to your guy on the phone, if he speaks to you in a very formal tone without even addressing you by name more often than not, that’s a definite sign you are a side chick. If he’s always gotta go suddenly or straight up hangs up on you out of nowhere from time to time, that’s probably because his actual girlfriend got home.