for the Star Trek fans Jesus was not really from our planet. He came from heaven, dwelt among us as a human, and returned to heaven where he is even now sitting at the right hand of the father, wherever that is. Though he presented himself in the form of a human male, he is really an altogether different life form from us. What exactly he really is, is beyond our comprehension, but with the eyes of faith we can learn to accept that HE IS, and that is enough for our small intellect. Can we can all agree on that? In the Star Trek televsion and movie series, there is a Prime Directive that mandates non-interference with the evolution and development of primitive species, planets, cultures or civilizations by members of Star Fleet. Jesus did not violate the prime directive. Unlike his contemporaries in the first century, Jesus was omniscient and therefore had extensive knowledge of the following subjects Ø Germs Ø Disease Ø Vaccines Ø Sanitation Ø Waste Disposal Ø Sewage Disposal and Clean

I picked up the paper today and read an article by Kathleen Parker that got me to thinking. Ms. Parker is a conservative columnist, and I agree with much she has to say. Today was no exception has I read her insights on the recent Michael Jackson fiasco over in Germany this week. For those of you who may be out of touch, or read this article in the future, Mr. Jackson dangled his young infant over the guard rail of his fourth floor hotel balcony. He held the squirming kid by one arm showing the child off to the crowd in the street. Now what is so interesting about this event is that there is no moral outcry about child endangerment for this display. When I was stationed in Japan about 10 years ago, my wife and I went shopping at the base exchange taking our 2 year old daughter with us. She was the proverbial terrible two child at the time and wanted to touch this and grab that. When she was told no, she would go into a royal screaming fit of anger. Typical really for a chi

One of the pet doctrines I was always at odds with as a Christian was the tithe. Just out of curiosity I looked up what "Christianity Today" has to say about the subject. Since they are fairly mainstream, at least Evangelical mainstream, I find it interesting what I find there. For instance, this question and answer: " Q: The tithe is clearly taught in the Old Testament, but in the New Testament it seems to be downplayed. Are those of us who give 10 percent of our income doing something not required?" " A: A simple yes or no to this question would be horribly misleading. (D.A. Carson)" Well is it yes or no Mr. Carson? Christians are continually saying that true Christianity is not about money, but is that really true? Here is a little more of what good old DA had to say: "...the New Testament provides no passage with the same explicit conclusion. (that 10% should be given)" So, then that means Christians are not required to give 10% off the to

Scripture is clear that one of the ministries of the Holy Spirit is to illumine the minds of Christians so they can understand Scripture (1 Corinthians 2:13-14). This being the case, why do spirit-filled Christians sometimes have different understandings as to what certain Bible verses mean? In answering this question, one might liken the Holy Spirit to a radio station that is transmitting a perfect signal. Even though that radio signal is transmitted perfectly, there are all kinds of different quality radio receivers out there. Some have good reception; some have poor reception. Some have a good antennae; others have a broken antennae. Some have good batteries; others are low on energy. The point is, different radio receivers have varying degrees of success in receiving that perfect signal. Christians are much the same way. The Holy Spirit's "signal" (that is, His illumination) is always perfect. But because of varying circumstances (perhaps sin, or not fully walking in

I have a wonderful lucky rabbit's foot. I don't know what I would do without it. I try always to keep it with me. My rabbit's foot is magical: I can ask it for anything I want, I can ask it to do anything I want, or to make anything happen, and it will make it happen. I can't explain how it does this, but I know, because it works. I have seen it work many, many times. Of course, it only grants the requests that are best for me. Sometimes I foolishly ask for things that I shouldn't have, and so it wisely does not grant those requests. I have no idea how it "knows" what is best for me, but it does! It is a lot smarter than me, because a lot of things I ask for that I think would be good for me, it won't let me have them. So somehow they must be not good for me. My rabbit's foot is also very protective of me. It keeps so many bad things from happening to me. I shudder to think of all the terrible things that would have happened to me if I hadn't h

Justifying Non-Christian Objections Douglas Wilson & Farrell Till Whenever we object to something, we always assume some standard or rule that the thing violates. Similarly, when non-Christians object to the Christian faith, they assume some standard that Christianity violates. But can non-Christians justify these standards that they so readily use? In the following interchange, the editor of Credenda/Agenda, Douglas Wilson and Farrell Till, editor of The Skeptical Review, discuss the topic of justifying non-Christian standards of ethics and reason. For the past thirty years, Farrell Till has been an English instructor at Spoon River College in Canton, Illinois. Prior to this, he was a preacher and foreign missionary for the Church of Christ. He attended two Bible colleges and received his bachelor's and master's degrees from Harding University. His preaching career spanned twelve years, five of which were spent in missionary work in France. After becoming an agnostic, he