Comments on "Proof that God Exists"

(Not to be sent out to email list, as file is too large to be emailed; share link only.)

Silver Stock Report

by Jason Hommel, July 6th, 2010


These are most all of the comments I received from my article:

Mathematical Proof that God Exists
(No math higher than pre-algebra required.)
Silver Stock Report
by Jason Hommel, June 24th, 2010
http://silverstockreport.com/2010/god.html

I note several things, based on the responses.

1.  There were a lot of responses.  Many positive responses.  Some negative, and a few weird ones, too.

2.  Nobody wrote in to say, "Hey, I didn't believe in God before, but I do now."  I don't mind.  Sometimes, it takes up to 10 years for men to think about things before they accept them as reality.

3.  Nobody even attempted to refute the math.  That is to say, nobody wrote in to say why the math is wrong.  That's because the math is correct.

4.  There were many people who tried to argue against it, but they all failed to show any comprehension of the basic argument, and many proved in their responses that they did not, in fact, understand the essential parts of the argument.

4A.  Some wrote to say that the "billions and billions" of years, or billions and billions planets make life possible, but again, they fail to understand that the argument took all of that into account.

4B.  Some wrote to say that there could be something other than God as the creator, such as aliens from another planet, or the "great big spaghetti monster", but again, my argument took that into account.

4C.  All other explanations for cellular life spontaneously forming, including all such assumptions that must be invented, cannot be called "science", because science is that which is testable, repeatable, observable etc. and thus, everything else must be correctly called "faith".  When it's faith vs. faith, and when the odds highly favor God over any other explanation, I think we can safely, and mathmatically, and yes, logically, determine that all the other faith based arguments are simply foolish.

5.  Based on the responses, I can now refine my argument, as can be seen below in some of my responses.  The essential element that I missed is that I led people to believe that "there was a chance".  No, there is no chance of life forming by chance, because there is no mechanism by which amino acids can continue to build up into the more complex molecules necessary for life, since they actually tend to break down, not continuously form; and also, life consists of more than just amino acids.  There is no dice thrower, there is no card picker, there is no chance.  It is more likely that you could take a bunch of rocks, shake them up at random, and have a fully functional 747 airplane pop out, than life could form by chance alone.  In other words, there is no chance.

5A.  I'm posting all of the responses for my own further reference.  Further, they provide a very interesting glipse at the varied reactions to preaching.  The responses themselves are a very interesting study, and perhaps they are also good for developing discernment, not only for me, but perhaps for you, too.

6.  I received a link to a man who is doing research showing that the speed of light has been slowing down according to a log curve that suggests that the universe began 6000 years ago.  In sum, if I understand it, as the Bible says, God "stretched out" the heavens.  When you stretch out something, you must add in energy.  This added energy is called plasma, which explains particles that pop into and out of existence all the time.  These particles slow down the speed of light, which began at nearly infinite speed, and has been slowing down since.


Interesting links:

Two people mentioned Barry Setterfield. www.setterfield.org.

One reader wrote:  I learned of Barry through Chuck Missler at khouse.org. Barry has proved that the speed of light is slowing down. 

I note: Barry might have a proof based on that, that the universe was created 6000 years ago.  This, of course, would nullify and refute and explain the long ages as shown by radioactive decay rates.

Jason notes: specifically see:
A Basic Summary
Helen Setterfield (with constant help from Barry), November 2008
http://www.setterfield.org/000docs/basic%20summary.html

See also:
Book and Website: "the Science of God" by Gerald L. Schroeder
The Science of God: The Convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom
1998
http://www.amazon.com/Science-God-Convergence-Scientific-Biblical/dp/076790303X 
See also:
God According to God: A Physicist Proves We've Been Wrong About God All Along
2009
http://www.geraldschroeder.com

SnapShot: Key Numbers in Biology (Such as the number of carbon atoms in a cell (10 to the 9th power, or 1 billion)
http://www.rpgroup.caltech.edu/publications/SnapShot2010.pdf

Conspiracy of Science - Earth is in fact growing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ

http://www.privilegedplanet.com/

=====

Hey Jason
 
You wrote: "I got all they taught, and then, I learned more, so now I know more than my former teachers in college do."

Psalm 119:99 KJV say:  "I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation."
 
deja vu!
 
Paul

=====

See
Dr. Hugh Ross PhD. Lectures on "Creation as Science"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1680357583183645446#

=====

>> what you have calculated is a probability, not a proof.   mathematical proofs have a structure but you use the structure for a probability calculation.
>>
>> the probability of me rolling a 5 on a dice 1000 times in a row is pretty large.   that doesn't mean it can't be done.  it would just take a long time.  14 billion years is a very long time - long enough for improbable things to happen.   you can't prove that i can't roll a 5 on a dice consecutively 1000 times.   you could probably calculate that it would take longer than a lifetime to have a reasonable chance to do that, but the next 1000 rolls could be consecutively 5's.    that's the thing about chance - you can't predict when or if it will happen and you can only calculate a probability.
>>
>> there are seven proofs of god's existence - probability is not one of them.   unfortunately, all the 'proofs' have logical problems and that is why there isn't a consensus that all religious people use on what the proof of god is.   it's only in recent times that there has been a resort to the probability 'proof' which is, of course, no proof at all.   it's no proof because all it is calculating is the probability that life didn't happen, but of course, it did, which could just show that improbable things do happen.
>>
>> joel

I replied:

>> The odds you would roll a 5, 1000 times in a row, is 1/6th to the 1000th power, which the computer calculator says is 7.0591045861652320868363416010892e-779
>> which is 7.059 etc. x 10 to the 799th power.
>> If all the atoms in the universe, at all time, even every possible slightest movement could represent a "roll of dice" (which is actually a rather lengthy multi second event involving many  millions of atoms) then you would have a maximum of 1 in 10 to the 142nd power number of chances.
>> So your odds of doing that event, in THIS UNIVERSE, under the best most optimal chances, would be 799 - 142 = 657, or 1 in 10 to the 657th power chance.
>> Any event that is less likely than one in 10 to the 50th power chance can easily be ruled out as totally impossible in this universe, or in any other.
>> To put faith in that happening is totally foolish, and shows a gross ignorance of the nature of the math, and the requirements of what needs to happen.
>> To put it more simply, it would be easier to believe in a natural rock formation that would look exactly like the White House the president lives in, with full polished marble columns.

joel replied:

> but - you missed the point about chance.   you can only tell me that it is extremely unlikely.  you can't say that it can't be done.   probability is NOT a proof.
>
> the point is:  extremely unlikely things can happen.
>
> dna did happen and it evolved from an extremely simple form into extremely complex forms over hundreds of millions of years.  that is pretty clear and the evolving of the molecule is not at all unlikely.   i think it is very plausible to say that dna was created by chance, even though a very unlikely chance.     i see no logical reason to say that since since dna's construction was very unlikely, there must be a god.  there are all kinds of chemical compounds being formed and the huge majority of them are not significant in doing anything.   it's an incredibly small random combination that is significant.  dna just happened to be one of them.  the elements are constructed by the destruction of stars.   you could say that god created silver by the star destruction process, but that's an unnecessary step.  god creating dna also seems like an unnecessary step when random combinations could explain it since there have been a very large
>  number of these random combinations over 14 billion years.
>
> darwin had no way to know how to prove evolution.   the basis of the proof wasn't found for a hundred years after the idea of evolution when watson and crick discovered dna.   dna is the underlying mechanics that explains the theory of evolution.    man is a very recent and very small part of the dna process and has only evolved enough intelligence to be dangerous - need i point out all the stupid stuff going on in the world?
>
> hopefully, there is intelligent life in the universe.    have you heard all the calculations being made about how many billions of planets there are which could sustain life and the very high probability that there are other life forms on some of them?
>

I replied:

> Clearly, you fail to understand the basic nature of my argument.  Perhaps you can get it, perhaps not.  Billions is not nearly enough chances for life to form.  Billions is 10 to the 9th power.
> I fully demonstrated that not even 10 to the 142nd power is enough chances for life to form.
> Yet, you insist that billions is enough. "because we are here".  That is circular reasoning, and invalid as a method of argumentation or logic.Furthermore, your theory is untestable, and thus, not scientific.  It is therefore a statement of faith, one that requires about 10 to the 340 millionth more blind faith than I need for my view.
> Thus, perhaps I can successfully conclude that you were simply not intelligent enough to comprehend the nature of the argument.
>

joel replied:

well, let's see:   i have degrees in philosophy, psychology and finance and an iq of 152.   i think i can understand your argument.  it's just wrong, so i'm disagreeing with it, but apparently i haven't done a good enough job at explaining my side so i'll try again.

if we randomly select a number between 1 and 1 quadrillion the chance of picking any particular number is one in a quadrillion, right?   can you prove to me that 555 won't come up if we start picking numbers?   that's exactly what you are saying.  so, go ahead and give me a proof that 555 won't come up in a hundred tries or even in one try.   yes, i'll agree that it is very unlikely - that's what probability is about.    what CHANCE is about is that it COULD come up.   it's the idea of random chance that you are not grasping.    you cannot prove that 555 won't come up because that would be a logical error since it is one of the set of possibilities, just as simple dna is random combination.

i disagreed with quite a bit about your probability calculation also (eg: it's only necessary to randomly construct a dna molecule, which is much more probable than a whole cell), but that really doesn't matter.    what matters is the idea of CHANCE.

your mathematical proof that god exists is based in the idea that events with a high probability of not occurring will not occur.   that is your unstated premise that i disagree with.   actually, anyone with much understanding of math would not agree with your premise either.   this unstated premise is how you beg the question that god exists.   you use a false premise to prove impossibility of denying your premise.   you then use the fallacy of single cause (assuming there is one simple cause when there may be a number of jointly sufficient causes) to assume that god must have created dna.   why couldn't aliens have brought dna here from some other part of the universe?  or a meteor brought dna from another planet or moon?   your assumption that god exists because some things are very improbable is also a regression fallacy in that it ascribes cause where none exists - it is only another assumption which is begging the question (one of the very common logical fallacies).

your argument is constructed from logical fallacies, that's why it is wrong.  your argument being wrong does not mean that god does not exist.   i have studied the arguments for the existence of god extensively and have not found one without logical fallacies.  if there were such a compelling proof, religion would be universal and without so many segments.   it's just that there isn't such a proof.    constructing a proof from logical fallacies is only an attempt from blind faith.   faith is blind because it only sees what it believes.   science believes what it sees and there is a huge difference between those two visions.

i spent the day working on our farm with my wife and one of the kids.   it was an absolutely great day partially because of the weather but also because we are working on becoming self sustaining and we appreciate that virtue.    you might be surprised how fulfilling a life can be without the dictates of a god.    it's a very tough choice to realize that we are each the makers of our own destiny.   i was raised as a christian and made that choice, so i know.    i find belief in life before death to be much more inspiring (and logical).

get familiar with the logical fallacies and you will find yourself having a much more coherent view by eliminating dead end positions.

I replied:

The primary logical fallacy in my argument is that I falsely led you to believe that there is a "dice thrower" in the example of life forming.  There is no dice thrower.  There is no number picker.  There is no chance of it ever happening by chance! 

My argument assumes  (too generously for the opposition) that the amino acids could form and that they could combine into incredibly complex structures all by themselves.  But they do not.   They break back down, such is the natural condition of decay.   Thus, there is never any chance that it would happen.

He replied:

1.   rolling dice, picking numbers, shapes of snowflakes, random combinations of molecules, etc - are you saying there are different rules of probability for chemical combinations???    that 'chance' has a different meaning in chemistry?   i haven't had organic chemistry since the 1960's, but i dont' recall any special 'mathematics' for chemistry.     please enlighten me as to why 'chance' is different for molecules.   you keep insisting that a small chance = no chance.    i just don't understand that whole idea.

2.   apparently many other people do not understand that idea either.   did you know there is a whole field of astrobiology?    there are many very smart people working in that field and many, many billions of dollars per year are spent in the study of life in space.    they have calculated the probabilities of life forming differently than you have and a person would need extremely good math skills to get into that field.      i googled 'life probability' and there are many 'faith based' sites who are saying the same thing you are saying.   apparently, that 'proof of god' is big on the churches 'talking points' agenda.   so, church math (and probability rules) are different than astrobiology (and astrophysics and many other fields of science) math.   since i don't have the months that it would take to thoroughly understand the two different calculations (and many variations) i would just circumstantially choose science math over church math.    church math always has an agenda with it - look at history where the church sees what it believes and where science is defined to believe what it sees.

3.   a little more circumstantial evidence is from meteors coming to earth with dna/rna.    how does that fit into your impossible/improbable calculation?    if you are unaware of this here's one of many links:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080618-meteor-earth.html

4.   i'd be very interested in how the churches reconcile the dna on meteors with the impossible calculation of life forming.    i've not heard how that is being addressed.   is it just ignored?

5.   besides the whole 'small probability = no possibility' problem, there is the 'single cause fallacy' of the 'proof of god' argument which would need to be dealt with in light of the dna on meteors evidence.

j-l


=====

Incredible!!!!!!! thank-you Jason love ya p

=====


Thanx Jason for another confirmation of what many believe and testify to, many in our own simpler way.
Many of us think the "issue of Gods existance" thro in our own way,and inevitably come to the same conclusion,He is REAL and we all will have to give an account for how we live and who becomes our LORD.Many of us had[and some still have]our idols,only to learn they "neither hear nor speak".Besides the "COSMOLOGICAL" argument[every cause must have an effect,either equal to or greater than the cause"[That is ie;if you walk thro a forest and come across a wrist watch,or a Macdonalds bag,you conclude that they were designed by someone equal or greater intelligence that the watch or bag demonstrates.] So when you look at creation the wise person[others are "FOOLS"]concludes that creation,seasons,nite and day,show order and intelligence.That is why Paul said in Romans 1";nobody can claim an excuse,because creation clearly reveals GOD".One other supporting witness in my mind is Israel.What the Books of Moses and the Prophets spoke has come to pass against ALL
odds.I visited Israel and it is an awesome demonstration of the integrity to HIS WORD.
Bless you Jason for your bold and uncompromising testimony.Revelation;"They overcame by the word of their testimony and the blood of Jesus". You are an OVERCOMER and may your tribe increase!
On your prayer Team,
Ray

=====

Jason :

Thank you !!!!!!  YOUR REASON BASED PROOF from the MATH is as EYE OPENING as it is EXHILIRATING!!!!!(sp or not)

I will share your article on my facebook page.THIS IS ONE FOR THE hall of FAME.and GOD WILLING .enough people will receive this CIRCULATION.and BEGIN TO LOOK UP .we could see some SPIRITUAL FIREWORKS in the WAY OF CHAIN REACTION OCCUR .where we won't need any silver.

when we are JOINED WITH HIM .

john bowe

=====

Jason. check out this vortex series. It has eleven sections, about 9-10 minutes apiece. They are all real good. Then, send it to your fam and friends, so they will have a clue. I think you will love this. short, concise, succinct. 'like, like, like, way kool dude'.
 
later Jason.
 
gene dorr
 
http://www.csper.org/renaissance-20.html

=====

Hi Jason I simply wish to say this is an exceptional essay and I have forwarded this to family & friends. Thanks keep them coming God Bless
 
Ben

====

That was great Jason, I sent it to my friends and family! :-)

====

Wow, what a great post! This is the best I have seen on the odds of God being real.

I am Christian in part because I discovered that the Bible was 100% true. Not a single verse (of the earliest known text) has ever been proven wrong. This is a amazing thing because the Bible is the most criticized book in history. Yet not one of the charges has ever been proven. If you disagree, I can be proven wrong easily, just show me the verse and the proof.  What do you think are the odds of every prophecy (over 100 just about the First coming of Christ plus many others), every scientific fact, every historical fact, and every writer of every book would be in complete agreement about the most controversial topic.

I know it would be very difficult to even figure out what the odds of that happening, but it too has to be so large that it is beyond possibility of coming from the mind if men.

May I use this illustration of yours with others?

Ward Lewis
wardrlewis@gmail.com

=====

THANK YOU JASON!!!!
I admire you and your walk with God!!! Keep it up brother!!!
As you have stated so many times, if someone does not like what you write they can 'Delete' or Unsubscribe!!
    I have been getting your Silver Stock Report now for some years and enjoy not just what you write about silver but your views about God, His Word and His world.

God bless you and your family,
Graeme Blake.

======


Dear Mr. Hommel:

Do you actually believe this nonsense? If you do then your clearly understand very little about math or biology. Was that astronomy or astrology that you studied?

Sincerely

Trevor Hearnden B.Sc. (Hons) Math London, MD (Queen's U, Kingston)

Hint: your whole arguement is based on the impossible (or at least highly improbable) spontaneous appearance of complex structures, evolution is about the slow aggregation of more complex benefitial traits from simpler structures. You are simply setting up a straw man to you can appear clever when you knock him down. So please restore my faith in human nature and tell me your post was a huge joke.

My reply:

There is not a single reference to astrology in my article. 

It is filled with basic math, no harder than algebra. 

There is no text on evolution that explains how amino acids can form together to make themselves replicate.

That is not observable, not testable, and not science.  It is faith.  If I misunderstand your faith, I apologize, but it's not science, that's for sure, and that's the point.

=====

ABSOLUTELY STUNNINGLY BRILLIANT !
WELL DONE AND SEND MORE AND MORE OFTEN LIKE THIS

=====

Jason:

I have no problem believing that "God" exists, just don't believe in the Bible version of it.

Bill

=====

Wow!  Very good article, Jason!

=====

I have intuitively known that it would be highly improbable for life to exist by accident. Thanks for putting numbers to the issue, I enjoyed reading this.

=====

Jason,
 
 Truly the best explanation refuting evolution that I have ever read or heard.
 You need to get this out to the whole world.
 
Bob

=====

Thanks from a non-believer. I admire that you have the courage of your beliefs.

Take care

Terry

=====

holy shit.this "argument" was debunked 40 years ago Jason.  How sad that it is still making it's way around to gullible folks after all of this time.  I'm literally flabbergasted.

My reply:

If the argument was debunked 40 years ago, before man knew how complex cells are, then the refutation is clearly invalid.

As I explained in my essay, Darwin thought cells were simple, and that was 150 years ago, and that has been continually debunked ever since.

=====

Thanks, Jason!  Excellent!
 
K O

=====

An excellent post, Jason.  It is refreshing to see that education does not always lead people further from God, although that seems to be the trend (an intentional trend, I believe).   God has been forcibly removed from secular education, and I think this has resulted in the downward spiral our country is in today.  I will save this essay of yours for future reference.  It is my position that no "proof" is needed to show that God exists and created all things.  That belief should be based purely on faith.   However, for those who feel the need for a mathematical proof, your offering does serve that purpose, and I applaud you for publishing it.  Keep up the good work.
 
Sincerely,
A L

=====

In case you want a nudge in the right direction, your numbers assume a "random" process of events. but the universe does not act under chaotic laws based on "chancE".  The process by which elements form and amino acids are created is CUMULATIVE.  tiny steps upon tiny steps.  The  "math" you cite completely neglects this basic fact.   Like all creation science arguments, it assumed "We have nothing. nothing. nothing.  randomness.  then BOOM!  Life is here!!"  It doesn't work that way buddy.  I could point you in the direction of several books on the subject but I'm sure you won't read them since they don't conform to your religious presuppositions. 


=====

Thanks Jason for the great article.  Sure is good to know the one who created all things.  My son just had a brain tumor operation, it was quite a spiritual experience.  He is doing well, Psalm 34 was my strength.  Thanks for taking a stand against all unbelievers who berate our Lord and your testimony for Him.   Hope I have a good year so I can buy some more silver.  Ron Halber

=====

Hello Jason,

Although not a Christian I am certainly not your opposition.

I am not going to criticize your writings but will make some observations.

Sometimes if not most times I think that believing in a Creator ( not necessarily the Christian God ) is easier than evolution!!

Astronomy: the Big Bang was an attempt by the Vatican to reconcile religion and science; this is impossible as Religion is faith based and science is hard facts, repeatable.

It is now in such a mess that the scientists can't believe themselves the garbage they come up with, read Kepler and be amazed, a humble man of God.

He who looked outside the Cave of Plato and enlightened us.

You talk about the entire Universe, it is not known to anybody but God, you treat the infinite as if the same rules apply there as in the finite, do they?

Planck?   God is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, to doubt or to try to prove that would be offensive to ' him ', I AM.

Be careful with Intelligent Design: it sets out to prove that scientists can follow anything to prove that an intelligent person could have made that; it certainly is not faith as you have, as my wife has.

Time is man's idea, it is a function of motion; at absolute zero ( -273 C ) everything stops including time.

Descartes says: cogito ergo sum.

Arrogance!!

How did he know that he was not a piece of brain floating in a jar of formaldehyde.

People don't know the difference between self confidence and arrogance: in the first you know you can do better but you respect your opponent, the latter you have contempt for him.

I am really sorry that there are people who willingly, consciously, subscribe to your email and then belittle your religion.

As you say, our time on Earth is trying to be happy.

Corollary: we must not make other people unhappy and certainly not on purpose.

Of course your essay raises many questions and diverse points.

As I said, these are just some observations.

There is no sense in going into deep discussions as there are other avenues.

Kind regards.

My reply:

Science is supposed to be based on observable, repeatable, testable concepts.

Clearly, life forming from amino acids is not one of them.

Neither is the concept of man made global warming.

Faith-based, earth-worshiping, man-hating religions masquerade as science, sadly.

I'll have to look up Kepler.

=====

Hi Jason,

I too find myself questioning established Darwinian doctrine, however while I agree with you that the time and probability of DNA and cellular material coming together to form a viable replicable organism is mathematically impossible, and that the inexplicable and
sudden appearance of modern man has no evidence within the fossil record, one is then left to wonder how then can modern man be explained.  While I love your method the conclusion still requires a large degree of faith in a creator who has not evolved past base
emotion, ego and histrionics. 

There are three men that have some interesting ideas and I think you may enjoy the interesting perspective they have.  One is David Wilcock and the other Ian Xel Lungold, who recently passed away, and the last is Neal Adams. 

I first heard about David through the Project Camelot Interviews and grew very interested in his take on creation and random evolution and the existence of a consciousness field.

YouTube - 2012 Event Horizon: (1) Prophecies and Science of a Golden Age, by David Wilcock

David's website is: http://divinecosmos.com/

Ian, like you, takes a mathematic approach,  YouTube - Mayan Calendar Explained Part 01 of 18 Ian Xel Lungold  You'll love the way the
Mayans express the calendar using exponential math along with the metaphor of 7 days and 6 nights of creation.

Neal Adams, questions the current conventional science of subduction and plate tectonics not only of the earth but all heavenly bodies.
YouTube - Conspiracy of Science - Earth is in fact growing


Best Regards,

=====

Hi Jason—
 
C.U , huh!  Well,that explains why you would expect a normally literate person to understand this email.  You only forgot 1 point-you were the brainiest guy in the class, even ahead of the teachers, so if the brainiest person writes this, no normal person has a chance.  But then we take God on Faith, which is among other things, the evedience of things unseen.  that’ll have to  work for me.  [sorry I got lost-but I’m certain you proved it—and I’ll have to take that on faith too.  ha]    but at least you had some fun.  edz

My reply:

Funny guy!

When I write, I try to remember that most people are often drunk or hung over, or only half way paying attention because there are many other more important matters in their lives that distract their attention.

What can I say?  I can only help you understand if you can tell me where you got lost.

Jason

=====

Jason-- Anyone who doubts that God made the simplest form of life--{Jason Hommel - er sorry (quote)}---I believe it -HE made me. Simple- yes- complicated- no- In HIS likeness- yes- does He lie ?- no. If He did He woulnt be GOD. I love numbers -  numbers dont lie unless well there are tricks you can play to surprise people - But with NO TRICKS-numbers dont lie. However i learned along time ago i had to explain things so a 4 year old understood it . It works. What you say is true and I QUOTE- Anyone who doubts that God made the simplest form of life will change their minds--- I give them 2 seconds down there and they will change their minds- quote- Lloyd McClaren Pastor. see numbers work.------ This why it caught my eye .Funny how GOD can say things thru people. I had to laugh because this was a surprise conformation--  Thanks-IHS-May GOD Bless you and your house-Ed and PT  This was NOT intended to make fun of anyone. I just find GOD very fasinating numbers and all-


=====

Hi Jason,
 
I read that entire email. Wow. I got a "crink" in my neck from reading it. Probably should've printed it out instead of reading off the computer.
 
Great job. I haven't quite gone to that length to explain He exists, but I have told unbelievers He's the Greatest Mathematican and Scientist ever, and that's why mathematicans and scientists spend a life time trying to figure out how He "did it".  Since many of them can't seem to figure it out, they fall back on the "evolution" theory to explain it.
 
1Co 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
1Co 1:26 For behold your calling, brethren, that not many wise after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
1Co 1:27 but God chose the foolish things of the world, that he might put to shame them that are wise; and God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put to shame the things that are strong;
Thanks Brother for the message.
M in Oregon

=====

My observation:  Jason has too much time on his hands.

my reply:  It's also called "freedom".


=====

Jason: I DO believe in a "Creator" but his name is not GOD, nor is his Son's name Jesus Christ and you can prove that from the scriptures themselves, which have been highly tampered with and each supposedly new "translation" furthers the deceptions of modern organized religions claiming to teach the truths of the Bible.

Hint: The Creator challenges you in Prov. by asking whether you KNOW His Name and His Son's name , yes he has one and if you research the originals you will see that HE says His name is "YAH" and therefore since a son bears Ha father's name it should hardly be surprising that His Son's name is Yahshua which translates into modern English as the name Joshua! The hybridized Greek/Latin "Jesus Christ: is a fraud

I don't have the time to look up all the scriptures PROVING this right now but if you are really interested I can send you some research papers that prove the issue.

Since I have noted that you also believe some teachings of organized professing Christianity that are FALSE and come from ancient paganism rather than Scripture I challenge you to ponder the following scriptures: Rev. 12>9 and if the "WHOLE WORLD is deceived" then who does that exclude? Can not be confessing Christians as they come in thousands of guises with diametrically opposing doctrines and then in Rev. 18.5 the Creator addresses "MY PEOPLE" and tells them to "come out" of Babylon which means CONFUSION, and BOTh Christianity and Judaism are just that, divided into numerous sects and fighting amongst themselves.

Final scripture I will give you to ponder based on the erroneous teachings of evangelical Christianity is Rev. 5:10 oh, and by the way what scripture can you give me that unequivically states that believers go to heaven when they die, or for that matter than man has an immortal soul as millions falsely believe contrary to scriptural teaching.

I DO commend you for proving the falsity of evolutionary THEORY, but your mathematics does nothing for me, might appeal to a highly educated intellectual but there are much simpler proofs that an organized but dependable universe that operates by discernible LAWS had to have a lawgiver and sustainer, all of which the Creator is.

MY BEST TO YOU, MYRON

My reply:

Regarding your question:  "what scripture can you give me that unequivically states that believers go to heaven when they die"

1 Thess 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

John 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

Parallels between 1 Thess 4 and John 14:

1 Thess 4:13-17 ~ John 14:1-3
that ye sorrow not  ~ Let not your heart be troubled
For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again ~ ye believe in God, believe also in me
For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord ~ if it were not so, I would have told you
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven ~ I will come again
caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air ~ and receive you unto myself
and so shall we ever be with the Lord. ~ that where I am, there ye may be also.

Where the Lord went, is where he descends from, which is where he will take us: heaven.
The Lord ascended into heaven. This is where he said he was going in John 14:1-4, and where he said he would build a place for us, and where he said he would take us to be with him, "that where I am, there ye may be also".

Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Hebrews 9:24  For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:


Other scriptures show that Jesus ascended into heaven:  Acts 7:55, Acts 9:3-5, Ephesians 1:20; 4:10; 6:9, Colossians 4:1, Hebrews 4:14, 7:26; 8:1, 1 Peter 3:22

In John 14:1-4, Jesus said "I go" three times.  He went into heaven, where he went to prepare a place for us, our heavenly house.

2 Corinthians 5:1  For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2 Corinthians 5:2  For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

=====

Mr. Hommel
 
Have you ever listened to David Asscherik on You Tube.  He has many videos and I am impressed with how easy it is to understand the Prophecies of the Book of Daniel as he teaches it.  I am especially impressed with his teachings about Stephen the first martyr.  I find all his videos useful.
 
I.P.

=====

Thanks for the info.  I've read evolutionists that try and pull a fast one by saying that evolution is not dependent upon probability.  (It's interesting but isn't that an admission that pure randomness cannot account for life?)  Anyway, I enjoyed the article.  I love to engage with the "intelligent design, irreducible complexity" arguments.  They seem to me powerful arguments that are never convincingly answered.

Excellent, thank you.  Yes, they reply, but they do not answer.  You nailed it.

Jason

=====

Amen, the fact the Bible exists is proof of God. Thanks for sharing.
 
Love, peace, and joy,


=====

Thank you
Thank you
Thank you

For by Grace are we saved! I know we have never met and may never look upon each other here on earth
however I know I have a brother in Christ that will fellowship with me when Christ brings his children together in
Eternity.


Jason if you actually read this email know that I am doing all I can to share your wealth of knowledge with friends and family while bringing scripture into the discussion ever so discreetly as not to offend yet share my love of the Lord.

Your Letters are inspiring and help me stay focused when all I hear is noise from the media, co-workers, family and the like. Keep up the "good work" as in Philippians 1:6  "Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you
will preform it until the day of Jesus Christ" kjv and also Mathew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your father which is in heaven." kjv

My wife and I will continue to pray for you, your family and your mission!
M & J

=====

Hi Jason,
 
I am writing this because I am disappointed. I will outline my view and try not give you a hard time. First, I would like to say that I have been reading your email for over a year and appreciate your views when it comes to silver. I have been fully invested in physical gold and silver bullion for some time because I am fearful of fiat currency.
 
Before I comment on your email. I would like to put something in the air. Why can't god be the entire universe and not something that is separated from it? God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent. As you know this means that god knows every thing and can be and act everywhere. So in a manner of sound reasoning and logic. Would it not be wrong to suggest that god is the entire universe.
 
This is were it gets hairy for people of religion. It means humans are no more special than anything else. Your desk, a rock, your shirt, (albeit inanimate, though not at a quantum level), your dog and you are all apart of the great one big being called god. This is hard for some people to grasp because of the ego factor that dominates their lives. Buddhists, Native American Indians and even the Australian Aborigines arrived at the same conclusion independently 10's of thousands of years ago. Gave up their ego and lived in harmony with nature until white guys, like you and me, came along with our 2000 year old views and made them convert. Before 2000 years ago we had gods for everything (sun, moon, trees.), then science came along with thought and logic and created a Newtonian universe that explained almost everything except for what is god and what happens when we die. Science is young and always evolving (there is that word). Evolving yes, getting better and more sophisticated in tiny leaps as time goes by. This happens because each new advancement in science builds the base of complexity stronger for us to move forward to the next new and more complex idea. Also each new advancement enhances our lives and makes living easier thereby increasing our leisure time to thinking and also our population. This in turn provides more minds thinking longer on the next big step. In time this goes exponential (like the next silver bull will:) I will come back to this in regard to evolution.
 
I am not going to sit here and tell you that evolution is the ultimate theory to explain our existence because the beauty of science is that it can be proved wrong. If enough people try and can't prove it wrong it becomes a theory and even sometimes a law. Though ultimate that theory or law is and will always be encouraged to be subjected to and scrutinized under the scientific process.
 
The theory of evolution makes the most sense to logical thinkers so far. There is no magic involved. In regard to your ideas about the formation of a cell, this is why I am writing this letter. I finished a University degree in Ecology in 2005. Not once did anyone mention that the single cell was created spontaneously at one moment in time. Instead they taught a theory called 'Climbing mount improbable', you have probably heard of it because it the name of a popular science book written by Richard Dawkins.
 
Instead of looking for answers (and resorting to magic or faith) to prove a cell spontaneously fused together at one time. We look for an alternative theory, and the best theory so far is that it happened gradually. Lightning strikes the primordial soup and through a process of electrochemistry creates amino acids, simple proteins, sugars and other organic chemicals. These bump into each other and react or don't. Some decay back into their basic components and every now and then one reaction will form a more complex compound until there is finally a compound that acts as a catalyst that can make either copies of itself or copies of something else in great quantities. This process just keeps going with molecules becoming more complex as time moves on. The molecules that do change and produce no value do not get to continue and become basic fodder for the ones that do. This does take along time to happen especially for one lineage of organic chemistry to finally evolve into a single cell. There are many steps that have to be considered. The information that I noticed you did not factor into your logic was this. The actual amount of ingredients in the primordial soup to begin with (absolute oceans full of organic chemicals charged and bumping into other chemicals), and the power of exponential growth (or compounding). Once this process began like technology in the 20th Century, it ran away and was unstoppable, until 2.5 billion years later where you and I are typing these letters to each other.
 
I have read your mail (many) and I hope you read mine. If you are a smart and educated as you claim to be in your last email than I hope you will give my theory or opinion a brief 5 minutes of though. I am not telling you to stop believing or worshipping god or even believe what I am saying. I am just saying that there is away to meld everything together so it does make sense. The bible is a rough guide to life Jason, a book written a long time ago after Jesus died. No video recorders, no typewriters to record events, just stories told from one person to the next until someone got it down on paper. Which was then copied by hand over and over until a printing press was developed much later.
 
You are a successful man in business, I have looked you up and seen various other aspects of what you do. I am worried that you are becoming a tad fanatical with respect to religion and business. People should be storing silver right now and preserving their wealth. You have volunteered to spread the message and profiteer of it. That is ok. I just wonder how much business you are losing.
 
I look forward to a reply if you have time to write.
 
God be with you.
 
Regards, Alan

What you have described is EXACTLY what I have refuted. 

What you have described is not science, it is not even faith, it is pure fantasy.  It is demonstrably and provably not true.  Science proves it is not true.  The substances do not grow further unless they are all together in a living cell, within the cellular membrane, and with enough cellular structures like dna, to tell it how to make another cellular membrane, and with fully functional cellular structures like mitochondria.  Without that, they only break apart, they do not join together to form increasingly more complex cellular structures that require hundreds of thousands of amino acids in exactly the right sequence, with none of an entire class of amino acids present; like rolling hundreds of thousands of 6's on dice at one time; impossible, not improbable.  That is observable, testable, repeatable science. 

My math shows that there is not enough time to allow what you suggest, even gradually, to ever happen.  Even if the cell was "gradually" forming over 13.7 billion years, in every single part of the universe all at once, it would not nearly be enough time and places to remotely do what you suggest.

Your faith is badly misplaced in lies, and not on the reality of the situation.

Sorry, but you paid money to be told lies in your college.  Get over it.  I did.

Sincerely,

Jason Hommel

=====

Hi Jason,

When I say " I agree with you " I agree with you, full stop.

PAUL: " Examine all things and hold fast to the good ".

Since I discovered the meaning of that and found the courage to inform everybody that as long it is the truth I don't care where it comes from, I have lived by that. ( It was so easy in Dutch as I had a Christian education but in Australia it seems to be unknown ).

If I don't like the source I will fight it if necessary.

But I don't throw out the baby with the water!!

I have attached a Kepler file, unzip it and click on the 'Welcome.html'. N.B. I can't attach the file, it is too big but I leave the address.

I will also give an address below my name and for me it is delightful to the extent that I paid for a geometric drawing program and try to understand and copy.

Keep well.

H

http://wlym.com/drupal/

=====

You hit it out of the park this time.
Thanks Jason.
Hi to Mom,
C

=====

Thanks Jason,
                Ouch, and i thought Chuck Missler was bright (yeah, we listen to him in NZ too)
I'd love to see you two face off, except you are both on the same side.
 
Regards
Brent Goodwin

=====

Superb piece again thanks Jason!  Maurice Lea

=====

Jason,
Here is the creation described.
http://www.spiritualawakeningradio.com/anurag_02_creation.pdf
Enjoy!
Vladimir

=====

Dear Jason,

I started a reply to your email of several days ago in which you

revealed some of your readers don't like Biblical reference. However

Satan crashed my system before I could send it, As far as the

agnostics tell them we have a 1st Amendment in this country, that is

the freedom OF religion as opposed to the freedom FROM religion. I

am happy to see God is still prominent in the affairs of some men,

This time I feel compelled to reply when evolution was mentioned.

According to Genesis God completed creation in 6 days. However

accurate carbon dating and other techniques indicate the earth is

approx 14.5 billion years old. This creates a paradox.  But six days

according to what calendar? As we know Einstein developed his

theory of relativity and I believe this combined with stunning results

of Barry Setterfield which demonstrate the speed of light is slowing

and has been since creation. Perhaps that is the reason as we age

time seems to pass faster and faster. As you know the theory of

relativity depends on the mass, velocity and acceleration of the

observer.  Therefore at creation with a speed of light over 1000

times it velocity is today while slowing at a steady rate would have

created a first day of say 7 1/2 bllion years. The reason the

evolutionists will never subscribe to this and the reason for ridicule

of Setterfields work is it does not leave enough time, enough time for

things to mutate and evolve even if a generation of an organism was

only one second long. But besides the time factor  evolution violates

the entropy laws, that is things are moving from order to disorder.

Another solid case against evolution is the anthropic principle. That is

a math model of our universe which combines the effect of gravity,

light, heat, seasons. albedo(reflectivity), the thickness of our

atmosphere, the tilt of the earth and on and on. But changing the

numbers is any of a myriad of computations the whole system falls

apart and life as we know it would be impossible on this planet. Even

Einstein noted this and said "God does not play dice" The reason he

doesn't is he is outside of time and can see the ending and beginning

simultaneously, this is proven throughout the Bible by God through

his prophets recording history before it happens.

As far as simple cells microbiologists have discovered even the 

simplest of cells have error correcting reproduction systems and

consist of parts that could not have evolved or the cell could never

have been.

I found the easiest way to disprove evolution is ask someone to dis

assemble their wrist watch and put the parts in a paper bag. Now if

evolution were true one could expect the wrist watch to reassemble

itself if the parts were shaken in the bag enough times. Plus this

example was already provided for some highly designed and

manufactured parts necessary for it to work. Take the same example

and instead of watch parts throw in the raw elements that make the

gears, case and crystal. Now you will get the argument the watch is

a highly designed complex machine, but it is not as complex as the

wrist on which it resides plus the wrist can heal itself if injured!

But the reason my first message was destroyed is I wish to alert

you to the nature of the spiritual battle in which we are involved.

This explains the attack on God and his only Son our Savior Jesus

Christ.  It is well told in Ephesians 6:12

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities,

against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world,

against spiritual wickedness in high [places].

And those that don't believe conspiracy is because they have been

brainwashed for conspiracy is the way of the world. And the

conspiracy is against God almighty

Ezekiel 22:25

[There is] a conspiracy of her prophets in the midst thereof, like a

roaring lion ravening the prey; they have devoured souls; they have

taken the treasure and precious things; they have made her many

widows in the midst thereof.

You may find this short read of a one time Russian atheist, Ivan

Panin, who studied the Biblical text in it original Hebrew and Greek

forms for close to fifty years rather interesting.

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/panin2.htm

regards and God bless

Larry Stagg

=====

Dear Mr. Hommel,
From my Toledo, Spain, listening post, I read everything you pen out and find you a very agreeable person, subscribe everything you say in the realm of silver investments and would indeed carry on through you all my silver deals were it not for the obstacles of international trade in such a delicate stuff, all to say that you are for me a law-abiding, trustworthy agent.  But, in my opinion, you disgress a little bit in your evangelical disertations, especially when trying to demostrate the existence of a supreme entity via a theory of probability, something that even the great genius of Saint Thomas failed to include in his 'Five Ways'. In all kindness, I back my antagonistic argument on the simple fact that while it is extremely difficult to guess who will be the next national lottery winner, it is the easiest thing on earth to ascertain that someone or, still better, anyone of the ticket buyers will, as far as we are not forced to say his/her name. Similarily, the work of creation is one of aimless direction and the final result of it, when contemplated from any given time-spot, could not have been predicted a moment before. In other words, the shapes of life we can now contemplate were never designed before to be such, this according to the Principle of Objectivity laid off by another great scientific mind, that of Ernst Mach, according to who/which, Nature has neither a prior purpose nor a will.  Physiology Nobel Price Jacques Monod expounded all this in his memorable book 'Chance and necessity', just to mention a couple of references from people who, like you, also got high marks at college, I guess.  According to them both, the world we have today is not the result of any preordainment but one sprung from the interaction of blind forces.  Should have that result been other (e.g., people having senses we cannot imagine but perhapas no eyes or ears), we would still call it divine inspiration.  When the forces of Nature started shaping up our world nobody could have predicted where it all would lead to, therefore destiny was a wide-open thing, meaning by that that anyone could end up holding the 'winning' ticket, rendering void all your careful probabilistic caculations.
Affectionately yours,
G S-V

I replied:

You failed to comprehend the nature of my argument, and you fail to comprehend that your example of the lottery is invalidly applied.

In the case of the lottery, all the tickets are issued.

In the case of evolution, this universe has much less than 1 times 10 to the 142nd power number of lottery tickets, but needs up to 10 to the 340 millionth power to have a reasonable chance of winning.

Or, in other terms, there need to be "about" 10 to the 340 million universes all like ours, in order for life to form.

The concept that there needs to be that many universes, that we cannot observe, means that this is not a testable scientific solution to the problem of the complexity of the simplest cell forming from chance.

Your response is thus unconvincing.

Sincerely,

Jason Hommel

=====

Peace be to you,

Thank you for the very thoughtful and well written argument. As a believer myself, and as a Muslim, I appreciate the importance of believers coming together and confronting this 'so called' rational thought of atheism.

I'm just curious to know, have you read the Quran (Koran)?

Peace,
O K

I replied:

Yes, I have read parts of the Koran, for a few days.  I've read enough to determine that the book is not compelling enough to continue to read.

=====

Good morning Jason,
Thank you for the email!  I believe in our creator, and the argument for macro evolution does seem pretty ridiculous and outdated.  I wanted to first of all thank you and encourage your work but also to tell you about a book I am reading "the Science of God" by Gerald L. Schroeder
http://www.amazon.com/Science-God-Convergence-Scientific-Biblical/dp/076790303X 

By applying the mathematics of Einstein's relativity, universal expansion, and density, he makes a very convincing case that both the 6 literal days of creation and the apparent 15 billion year age of the universe can both be equally true.  I have had a struggle with the 6 days 6000 year thing for a long time, but this made a lot of sense.  I am not highly educated and would love to hear what you think about the subject some day.  I believe that the bible is the inspired word of god, but after a lot of evil leaders throughout history I needed to be sure that it had been divinely protected.  I believe that it was and is reliable!  Thanks again Jason, Keep up the good work!

My reply:

Thanks for the link.

Interesting.  Yes, I believe it is possible for the speed of light to be faster in the past, and thus, the measuring stick changes.

I get it.

J

=====

Dear Jason,
I would actually like to have a face to face discussion about god and evolution with you on a nice table with a good tea and cookies nearby. However, as this seems to be unlikely to happen very soon I want to mention a few things.

Your mathematical elaborations about chances in life are at first glance simple and easy to follow, but they completely ignore some important details. (Famous saying here: "the devil is in the details!") So in order to know the "devil" you have to investigate thoroughly the details to be able to develop something that is for you own good. For the sake of avoiding lengthy wordiness I just want to point out that different atomic states (electron states/excitations) between elements already exclude the interaction with certain other elements in a defined state (simple chemistry and physik school book 7th-10th grade), on a next higher level and therefore, the different mechanisms of interaction between different elements, on an even higher level, the sum of atomic combinations to larger molecules enabling only a certain set of atomic arrangement in a molecule, and last but not least another even higher level, the combination of these molecules to form not only primary, but secondary, tertiary and quaternary structures, e.g. proteins, with defined molecule pockets that determine enzymatic activity. These conditions are generating a statistical environment (up to university and professional research level) that already exclude ~99.999% of the possibilities that you were trying to demonstrate with your mathematical elaboration. Your mental experiment is too shortcoming on the true measurable nature of matter, matter that is touchable with hand or with machines (if too far, too big or too small). Hence, there is not such a simple mathematical proof for god like you tried to show to your readers if you are only including a tiny fraction of our physical and biological universe.

I am not saying there is no god, but i dont agree with your argumentation with which you proclaim to have proof for god and thereby disrespecting the work of so many good people working hard their entire life by deriving hypotheses from the observation of nature and trying to falsify them with experimental setups! If you have a good reason why this would be stupid let me hear it!

Undoubtly, the question of the origin of life is still a central point in many debates. What will be your notion if indeed mankind finds extraterrestrial life in our lifetime? However, this is just a theoretical question with not much practical relevance, but interesting to play with one self's mind.

The first steps for creating life completely out of the reaction tube has been undertaken, but is is certainly not truly artificial life yet.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/science.1190719
In case you cannot access the paper I attached it for you.

There is also an interesting concept for all biological life called convergences, here in your often used information source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_evolution

And other, also good scientists have written very good and exciting to read books:
http://www.amazon.com/Lifes-Solution-Inevitable-Humans-Universe/dp/0521603250/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277469271&sr=8-1
from Simon Conway Morris, Life's Solution. And as the rest of the title says: "inevitable" this refers also the most basic building blocks of life. the atoms, there are some reaction that are inevitable to happen if these two "particles" happen to met each other. Other particles with different properties will inevitably not react with each other, greatly increasing the chances of the existence of a so called life-continuum that is constantly changed in our lifetime by evolutionary processes which you are so furiously trying to refute. (I can forward you documented examples of evolution of species in our lifetime if you are interested, these species have changed their character over the last 2-100 years, e.g. mesurable change of enzymatic properties and average body length under ever changing environmental conditions.)

You are trying to teach your readers about silver and how this is truly solid and ethical good money that promotes the well being of mankind, so i ask you know to be a student again and also try to have at least a glimpse into the only two sources I present you here.

You mentioned that the bible is the most printed, most world wide distributed and read book and therefore it has some eminent authority that one should not question. No doubt, this book is truly important for mankind in many aspects, but if you argue with the bible and taking help from its age and radiating authority, than you should be fair enough not to forget about many old philosophers in the ancient Chinese and Mediterranean societies already crafting and building concepts of scientific theories.

You should know both sides truly and deeply, otherwise you are just an advocate and follower of one "dogma" and you are not seeking out what is true and what is not.

I urge you again to be a student with all decency like your readers are students of your silver reports and take the chance to have a look at the references i send you and, given the time, forage the literature on the basis of these and compare with the literature you already had!!!

Learning and science are hard work and they take their time, otherwise we would have flying jets, computers and advanced medicine 6000 years ago already.

I even dont know if these words reach you and have an impact. I was meeting many people who were trying to preach and were on a missionary trip. They simply stopped communicating after some time and i felt i was treated by a stubborn child, but stopping communication is not supposed to happen if people want to prosper on each others experience, as you may very well know with your silverstockreport!!!!

I think your mathematical/philosophical/religious approach combined with for instance the concepts I highlighted above will give us a lot better concept about how to think about nature/god and lead us ultimately to a better place and time for mankind than having these two approaches standing alone.

Have a nice day and good luck,
Hendrik Wünsche

I replied:

Thank you for the links and the kind comments.  I appreciate the humble spirit in which they are given.

Regarding your statement:  Hence, there is not such a simple mathematical proof for god like you tried to show to your readers if you are only including a tiny fraction of our physical and biological universe.

I did not include only a tiny fraction of the physical universe.  I included the entire thing, all atoms everywhere, and all times everywhere.  There is just not nearly enough time or molecules to make the theory of life forming randomly ever happen.

=====

A:- Jason,
Your words about God and the Bible are welcomed.
My 2nd cousin is James Dewey Watson, who was awarded
the Nobel Prize for discovering DNA. He, and his
partner, Francis Crick, say that they were trying to
prove that there is no God - but what they found is
so eligant and so precise, there MUST be a God!
The Bible:
66 Books, written by over 40 authors over a time
period of 1500 years, and it is TOTALLY integrated!
It does not conflict, or contradict itself, anywhere.
There is only one way that that can be possible - it
comes from an "extra-terrestrial" source which has
a totally different view of Time than we do.
Yes, there MUST be a God.
Bless you,
D E

=====

Jason,
That is some of the most idiotic huff and puff clap-trap I have read in years. What is does demonstrate is the power of human imagination. including the invention of God(s) to explain what we do not understand. The bible is a book of myths, and like any book of fiction, it does have some facts and truths in it. No big deal. You are just another huckster using religion for personal advantage.
    Norm

I reply:

Given that you fail to articulate that which is idiotic specifically, you fail to convince me of anything other than your own idiocy and inability to understand the argument.

=====


Dear Jason,
since you are good with numbers I attached another small tid bit of info regarding numbers in biology. Look especially at the genome size of various organisms, mutations rates and misincorporation rates and do the math! I hope you will appreciate these numbers.
http://www.rpgroup.caltech.edu/publications/SnapShot2010.pdf

Hendrik

I reply:
This is excellent:
How Many Carbon Atoms Are in a Cell?
A cell with a volume of 1 µm3 and a density of about 1 g/ml has a total mass of 10-12 grams. From the formula C4H7O2N1 and the weights of the elements, we derive a carbon content
of about 12 × 4/(12 × 4 + 7 + 2 × 16 + 14) = 48/101 or about one half of the dry mass. With 30% dry mass (70% water), we obtain ?10-13 gm of carbon. Next we transformed
the number of molecules using Avogadro’s constant: 6 × 1023 × 10-13/12 = 5 × 109 carbon atoms per cell. To verify this, we have done the calculation in a different way: assuming
there are about 3 × 106 proteins, each one consisting of about 300 amino acids, we get a total of ?10 to the 9th amino acids. An amino acid has about five carbon atoms, so we arrive at a similar value. Both estimates depend linearly on the cell volume, which can vary significantly based on growth conditions.

Also,
This is outstanding:

Conspiracy of Science - Earth is in fact growing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ


=====

Hello Jason! Nice to hear somebody talking that God is real. I know this from experience with the Lord Himself and the funny thing about my experiences with Him started in 1998.
And ended in 2002, but it was 2001 that the Lord manifested Himself to me here in Grass Valley one beautiful summer day in the sky and only about two hundred foot away from me.
He manifested Himself to me to show me that it was He that has been making all those miracles, wonders, visions and oddities happen in my life.
I sent you a writing that I had done about a year ago, yes this is the guy that sold you the fake paladium to show in your case in your new mint.
God is real, He is here now in spirit!
Take Care, Jason and may God always be with you!
 

=====

Jason,

Please get back to the silver issues.  Your God issue is tiring for those who already believe and irritating to those who already have a relationship with their "creator" and a waste of time for those who don't care.  Thanks, JJ, Wyoming

=====

Dear Jason

You obviously need to grow up.   Here's a tip for you.   If you didn't volunteer or sign-up for something then you cannot be mentally bound by it's rules.   They way to live life is "do no harm to others"   So as you didn't volunteer or sign-up for this life on Earth you are not bound by silly religious rules or belief in a "big daddy" in the sky.  Above all respect your fellow man.   You obviously do not not have respect for others as you seem to be the type that wants to ram down others throats the fact that they should follow your nonsense Bible.  If you had been born and lived in Iran you would be trying to ram the Koran down our throats.   I signed up for Silver not the ramblings of a deranged mind.   Imagine if I started writing to you about the perils of religion without you requesting I do so.  You would rightly say I had no respect for your religious feelings.   Do something that no religious person seems to be capable of. keep it to yourself.

Doug George

I replied:

That's right, you signed up to my email list, and thus, by your own admission, you are bound by my rules.  That means I get to write the reports.  Grow up, or get lost.

You are free to unsubscribe at any time.  I'm not cramming or ramming anything down your throat. 

In fact, I'd rather not share any wisdom with people like you, so it's up to me to purposefully offend your sensibilities in order to keep real wisdom available to the people who deserve it.

Here's a tip for you.   If you want to get into heaven, you are going to have to learn God's rules, and follow them.  Otherwise, learn to enjoy your own hell.


He replied:

How childish you are.   "If you want to get to heaven"    You have no idea what "heaven" is or where it is.   You also believe you have to stick to someone's rules to get to a better life after you die.   You promote this nasty person God who holds out a promise that if you don't stick to his rules he will make sure your afterlife is a Hell.   What a charming guy he is.  Why not enjoy this life and help others out of your own goodness rather than doing it because you will be punished and stop worrying about the next life.   If there is another life after death it will be interesting.   If there isn't another life then you won't know about it.   Don't get so touchy when people question your faith.   \it's a sign of weakness.

I replied:

Follow your own rules before you preach about them.  You are the one who started getting touchy, oh weak one.

I got touchy, not because you "questioned my beliefs", but because you slandered me, saying I'm cramming stuff down your throat.  You are FREE to unsubscribe at any time so that my messages do not offend your touchy feely sensibilities.

You are right, the Bible says I don't know what heaven is, for

1 Corinthians 2:9 says, “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.”

You also don't know what hell is either, do you?  So what makes you think God is bad for having created it?  You created your own hell yourself, and you don't even know it!  The trouble is, you don't even know you are already in hell, as you are dead in spirit, dead in sins, loathing and condemning yourself because you can't even follow your own rules, full of hypocrisy and foolishness.

According to your own rules, since you did not agree to be born, you are not bound by anything.  Well, according to that, you are also free to check out at any time.  And likewise, God is not bound to grant you eternal life, since you so openly despise his gift with your very mouth and doctrine. 

I should stop arguing with you, otherwise, foolish people won't be able to tell the difference between us.

8-)

J
=====

I found this to be very enlightening Jason - thank you so much for sharing it with me!   I have always believed in creation, but had never seen it explained mathematically before.   I have heard for years that the eyes of all living creatures
would have taken more time to evolve than time exists.   And, since God has a plan,
and this plan existed even before He created the universe - isn't it wonderful just
to realize you and I are part of that plan?   Again, thank you Jason and may God
continue to bless you - you do good work. J C (I'm 70 yrs old).

=====

Good job Jason, even I could understand most of the math. I have always understood in simple logical faith that God exists by simple young boyhood prayers that were answered. I was raised Morman and figured out that fantasy at age 18. As a result I am the black sheep of my earthly family. It is good to know that I am a part of a much bigger family with my Christian brothers and sisters. I pray that more and more people will realize the logical truth of the existence of God.
 
As for Silver and Gold, I wish that I had a job to be able to buy more. It was good to have bought the metals early (when I had a job) and then to be able to live off of it for over two years. Now it is gone again and if I get back to work I shall set aside at least 1 forth of my earnings to purchase silver and Gold. One should be careful not to worship the stuff though. You have done a great job in that area of trying to explain the physical value and rarity of the stuff and yet not worship it. 
 
I know Construction like you know Gold, Silver, and Math. My problem is there is not enough to go around right now, especially if you are my age. At 56 I am old enough to have a great knowledge of how to put together dwellings and workplaces of every sort, however I am also at the age where I am bypassed in the selection process of being hired. Such is my delima at the present time. Such is the reason that I am not placing an order for many ounces of silver and gold.

 Thanks for your newsletters and insight on God. I am personally happy that you wrote this. Even though I would like to buy silver and gold at this time and I would really love to have a job, I do have a faith that cannot be taken away by anyone or anything.
 
God bless,

=====

The big lie of religion is not that there is a god (obviously there is some force that created the universe) but that you can influence this force with barbaric rituals, chants, incantations, begging and pleading, a wishin and a hopin. Not a shred of evidence supports that childish belief. To the contrary. Churches don't suffer any less damage (from hurricanes, fires, floods, etc.) than other structures, Christians are no more immune from accidents, illness, misfortunes, lost fortunes, etc etc etc etc. Religion is the biggest scam in the world. It's all a pack of lies, fairy tales and superstitions to convince the gullible that for a few bucks and a prayer they can get you an inside track with the "big guy". Bullshit. Grow up already will you.

I replied:

So, you apparently have actual facts and proof then that God has never answered anyone's prayer anywhere all over the earth?

Well, to have that kind of knowledge, you must have already heard everyone's thoughts at all time, and you must be God yourself.

Clearly, you are not God, and thus, you are placing your hope in a false fantasy, something that you cannot possibly prove ever.  Foolish man.

God is clear in some ways.  He said, "seek me, and you will find me".  Test him out on this. 

Of course, without faith, you cannot possible even begin the seeking, and you have just said God can't hear. 

Maybe your problem is that God does not answer YOUR prayers?  There is a specific reason for that.  Maybe you will discover it.  But you'll have to search it out.

Here's a hint:  you have not, because you ask not, or you ask amiss to spend the gifts on your own pleasure, rather than for others.
=====

Dear Jason,

Check out a guy named Barry Setterfield. www.setterfield.org. I learned of Barry through Chuck Missler at khouse.org. Barry has proved that the speed of light is slowing down. He has found some way to measure the speed of light through experiments that were done over the last few centuries. Albert wrote the equation for time which includes the "fixed" speed of light at 186,000 miles per sec. With this information (i am way over my head talking about this)  he created a math formula that predicted what the speed pf light was 10,000 years ago. Using the information that our universe is about 16 billion years he run his math backwards and found that the amount time 16 billions years represents with the real speed of light is 6 days. The speed of light changes the time formula.

You can find my small contribution to Yahweh's Creation at http://conspiracyhub.com/membershares.php?id=41

Keep selling the Lord Jason. He can be proved with Math and Science. Missler is the Best at that, that I found. He has a free online Bible School that is superb or you can download it at the above link.

YBIJesus,
Mickey Theade

=====

Wow! What a stunningly facile attempt at a mathematical proof that God exists.  You claim to be a critical thinker yet your reasoning is so linear that you fall into some of the most basic logic traps.
 
See this link for logical fallacies, http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
 
Or this for critical reasoning and a description of egocentric tendencies, http://www.criticalthinking.org/articles/natural-egocentric.cfm
 
Also, read Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s book, “The Black Swan – The impact of the highly improbable”
 
While your math may be correct, you ignore the effect of randomness and the impact of observation.  Let’s take this as a thought exercise in probability and randomness.
 
Suppose I take those 6 dice that you talk about (I believe you intended a roll of 6 dice although you don’t explicitly state that in your ‘proof’) and have 46,656 different people rolling 46,656 different sets of dice.  They are only allowed to roll the dice once every week.  Once they roll 6, 6’s in a single roll, they must build a house.  Furthermore, there will be 46,656 observers whose job is to evaluate the likelihood of a house being completed and who are completely isolated from all other informational inputs.
 
Statistically speaking, one of  that first group (maybe none, maybe 3 or 4 or 400) will roll 6, 6’s the first week and proceed to build their houses. One or several or perhaps hundreds will never roll 6, 6’s and will die before building a house.  The observers of those people will conclude and perfectly rationally so in the absence of any other information, that it is impossible to build a house in one lifetime.
 
Do you see the error you make?  You cannot use mathematical computation from inside the machine because you cannot assess the starting point.  Gaussian randomness means that it is possible that the very first interaction that you talk about produced the necessary conditions that brought forth life.  Stated another way, if there were an infinite number of parallel universes, each depending on an evolutionary path, they could range in age from perhaps millions of years in age to trillions, quadrillions or they may never produce life capable of observing and asking, ‘how did I get here’?
 
Furthermore, both scientists and creationists run up against the same hard reality, though neither readily admit it. In the end, either matter has always existed or God has always existed.  Neither can be explained in any satisfactory way.
 
You use the bible and state that you believe it is the word of God, yet any objective reading of the bible has to conclude that it is a primitive historical record of the observations of the men at the time. Women were referred to as unclean during their cycle because tampax hadn’t been invented and things would have been, well, messy.  Pork was unclean because refrigeration hadn’t been invented, there was no understanding of bacteria and therefore when pork was handled improperly, people got sick.  This is how people empirically dealt with the world.  Before an understanding of electricity, people felt that lightening was the anger of the Gods.
 
I’ll use just one story from the bible, the story of Noah and the ark.  The bible states that Noah was instructed to take two of every living thing and 7 pairs of clean animals onto the ark.  It further states that God flooded the whole earth.  The problems with this story are many.  The space issue is obvious.  If you calculate the space requirements for the animals, their feed, the prey for the carnivores, etc for the duration of the flood, it is absurd to contain it in the size of vessel that Noah built. There are however, subtler and more difficult issues.  If you don’t believe that life evolves, that speciation takes place, then you must conclude that any living thing currently on earth today was taken onto the ark.  Consider the clouded leopard.  Recent genetic studies have concluded that the clouded leopard neofelis nebulosa has a genetically distinct cousin neofelis diardi that was heretofore believed to be the same creature.  Did Noah know enough to grab a pair of each?  Did God say, “no not that one, that one over there”.  Did he drop the one pair in Thailand and the other in Borneo after the flood? What of extremophiles that are still being discovered in caves and on the ocean floor?  What of the symbiotic cases where species exist only in micro-climate conditions (a single cave system or a single river or forest)?  Did Noah get a pair of these creatures as well?  How would he have managed to re-create the exact necessary environmental conditions to ensure their unique survival?  How long would it have taken him to round up a pair of every creature on earth when new species are still being discovered now in the depths of jungles?  What of insects that depend on vegetation? What of birds that eat insects? How many mosquitoes would he have had to stock to feed the bats which can eat their own weight in insects each day?
 
No, the story, while a nice fable, is clearly preposterous and gets more so with each scientific discovery. Science does not have all the answers, but it is seeking them.  It is unraveling the mysteries about the physical universe.  It is subject to constant challenge, defends itself or is defeated and replaced by better understanding.  Darwin’s musings were regarding speciation and differentiation and were grounded in 19th century understanding of the physical world.  Much of what he observed has held up to rigorous questioning and debate. The principles of survival of the fittest and adaptation are well proven in bacterial and viral mutation and survival against antibiotics. Some of his theories have not.  The difference between science and religion is that one is progressive and moving forward and the other is stuck relying on a manuscript based on a world view from  thousands of years ago before they understood much about life or death and everything was mysterious.
 
Ultimately I believe science will fail to explain everything, because as I noted earlier, you would ultimately arrive at the same point of not grasping infinity, but I am a lot more confident that progress will be made by scientists than religious thinkers.
 
Ultimately, I don’t need to know how everything works to be able to align myself with natural laws and live in harmony with the universe. What is simply required is an empirical mind and a willingness to say “I don’t know”.  Douglas Adams, author of the widely read Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy series, asserts that the human mind typical requires meta-structures to create certainty where there is none.  Thus, the unexplained becomes “God”. I think it is much more likely, based on observable phenomenon that man created God than that God created man.
Regards,

I replied:

So, instead of believing in the invisible creator God, you, instead, MUST believe in the infinite number of alternate and invisible universes that all must exist in order to generate the probability that life did evolve.

That solves nothing, is not a superior view, has no proof for the view, is not scientific, is not testable, is not repeatable, does not fit the observable facts of the situation here on earth that clearly point to a creator.

That is extremely egocentric of you, to think that your view is superior to the logical viewpoint that a complex design requires a designer. 

It is also rather hypocritical of you to slam my view for the flaw you see, when your view contains more flaws than mine!

I don't see the similarity of saying "matter always existed" vs. "God always existed".  The problem with matter always existing is clear; since the matter of the universe is moving, and the universe is expanding; that points to a beginning, not a perpetual existence.

God always having existed poses no such problems.

About the ark.  God said that the animals would reproduce after their kind, not after their species.  Noah only needed to take some of each kind, not species.  That greatly reduces the number to take.

Funny, you think blood is not "unclean"?  It is, now in the day of AIDS. 

Funny, doctors were killing birthing mothers with infections from sepsis barely over 100 years ago because they refused to wash their hands after touching dead bodies.  Had they more respect for the Bible, that would never have been an issue.

Many people today don't eat Pork because of the risk of trichonosis, still a present danger, but I do believe we are no longer bound by the dietary laws.

So you don't think the inside of a large box (ark) is enough like a cave to house bats?  What a reason to deny the truth.  That's got to be the most idiotic thing I've ever heard.

I find you to be millions of times more preposterous than the Bible, which I find to be quite reasonable, inspirational, and very logical, and yes, miraculous.

So please understand why you remain as unconvincing as ever.


He replied:

Why MUST I believe in an infinite number of universes? That was simply an illustration to show that whatever conditions you exist in are what you would consider the norm.  If you lived in a universe where everyone had three heads and ate sand you would observe that to be normal.  The point I was making was that you are making incorrect mathematical assumptions that an event only occurs at the end of a sequence when in fact Gaussian randomness shows that even an improbable event can occur.  The probability of any one individual winning a lottery is very, very small, however someone generally wins it and they don’t have to have played for a million years.
 
I am not the one exhibiting egocentrism as I freely stated that I do not know how the universe came into being.  You on the other hand are stating that you are in possession of knowledge of events that you can’t possibly know for sure in any empirical sense.  You BELIEVE in a story.  You have faith that you are right, but neither of these things is based on logic.
 
In fact belief in God is the opposite of logic. God is the ultimate cop out because it allows you to pull out the trump card; what I refer to as, ‘the-mysteries-of-God-bucket’.  Can’t explain something through rational observation? Just toss it in the mysteries-of-God-bucket and forget about it because that explains anything.
 
The Big Bang theory states that matter existed, there was a big bang and the universe was born.  The universe is expanding and will eventually collapse in on itself and eventually produce another big bang. Sequence repeats.  Thus matter must always have existed.
 
Where did God come from?  Oh, there’s that convenient mysteries-of-God bucket again. Ironically, in theater, there is a term Deus ex-machina, literally a God outside the machine, which refers to any situation where a difficult or seemingly intractable problem is suddenly resolved using some improbable plot device that ties everything up in a neat little bow.  In other words, the mysteries-of-God box.
 
So if you believe Noah only took certain kinds of animals on the ark, how do you account for post flood speciation? Did God promote the evolution of additional species after the flood?
 
My comment about bats was not related to the habitat, it was a question of how many million mosquitoes Noah would have had to lay in as provender for the bats.
 
I honestly don’t care how solidly you cling to your irrational beliefs.  No skin off my back.  I’m sure I will not convince you and you certainly won’t convert me ( I grew up in a very fundamentalist Christian household and have thoroughly repudiated those teachings intellectually as an adult).
 
The only reason that I even responded was that I feel that views like yours simply have to be challenged when you torture logic so badly to try to prove a point.  I have no problem with someone believing in God but when you start trying to use math or logic to PROVE God exists then I have to push back.  Belief in God can only be based on faith.  I don’t see why you would even try to prove it based on facts unless it was to attempt to ensnare weak minded people into buying into your so-called logic.
Cheers,

=====

Jason,

What an incredible argument. Thank you for all you do!!! We are blessed for your service many times over.

A
Ft Myers

=====

Jason,
 
.well that's easy for you to say!   Maybe you mentioned it ( I got lost somewhere in the middle) but it seems you left some things out of your calculations.
 
1)  If you are trying to create a single cell, first of all, where did the raw materials come from?
 
2)  If you were able to get all these "accidental" components to meet at the same time, in the same place, in the correct sequence, totally omitting the ones that don't belong, (we all know how much errent material is in the average puddle of sea slime, right?)  .even if you could perform this incredable feat.the magic ingrediant called "LIFE" would be missing.  Who would be there to breath life in that special sea slime cell?  Where did he come from?  What kind of animal is only made up of one cell???  I imagine even the average cockroach has millions (but they would be living.just look in my basement!).
 
The chances of this happening by chance, I believe, would be a number so large, that the world couldn't contain it.  I may not be an egg-head like you Jason, (thank God for people like you though) BUT God did give me a pretty good portion of something called "horse sense", and it is telling me you are SO right!!
 
Another thing.if evolution is how we got where we are today,  WHY DID IT STOP?  If this process has been going on for billions of years, there should be transitional stages of animals absolutelly everywhere, even in the fossil evidence.  But all we see are distinct life forms.  Yes, I know about the bird with claws on it's wings.so???  Darwin didn't know much about genetics.
 
Jesus has chosen to remove the scales from my eyes so that I could see him in his creation.  I stand before him in awe, that he would consider me worthy of this revelation.
 
Thank you Jason, for being faithful to Him, using your position and platform to try to reach folks.
 
If there are those that don't believe you, and wish you would refrain from the Biblical stuff.let them by stocks!!!!!!!!!
 
 
-B D-

=====

THANKS JASON.
 
You are the best.love you.
 
Remember.race mixing [mamzers] is a very high crime against GOD.and. the 3rd generation of mamzers will be subject to all the curses in THE BOOK.
 
I am a MENSA [ a gift from GOD before I left Heaven to come here in this 2nd Earth Age]  member.however, you are a lot smarter than I am.
 
SEMPER FI.

=====

Thanks Jason
Very well put, keep up the good work.

=====

Simply expounding the Lord's Loving sound: Yeah! Thank you for sharing this. The other angle is that of a Creatorless Big Bang; as though a Universal Drum can "boom" without a 'Divine Banger', so to speak. Thanks for the break down on this. Your thoughts on "Galactic Superwaves" (ref Paul Violette), Norway Blue Beam Spiral (ref youtube), and even Blackholes would be most fascinating. Also, curious how you "understand/percieve" the Rapid Creation by God in a Literal Period. Is it related to having Inconceivable power? Aside: have you read the Bhagavad Gita or the Srimad Bhagavatam? (Ref sacred-texts.com) the siva sutras and upanishads (or was it puranas) give accounts of Immaculately Powerful Creator creating inconceivably fast.

Always Blessing YHWH;
To Him Belong the Most Beautiful Names; such as Tzabaoth: of Sevens, or Hosts; meaning planetary hosts: which is reference to their fixed orbits; a subtle ref. To the fact the God Most High has established and maintains the Real Order of the UniverseS and Sun-sys's by literally Maintaining things like orbits Via Gravity, etc.

Peace be with you and yours. May Mashiakh come again quickly. The Kingdom is in our hands: bear your light nobly brother and dearest Yesua-I_Am will bear witness of you on The Day.

Ps: I do find that the Quran is a miraculous counterpart to the Torah; and mathmatically speaking have you discerned the "Mathmatical miracle of the quran via 19"? Google and see, there is a couple in depth studies, you may be able to appreciate the implications of such drastic numerals. In Yeshua Hamashiakh, Ruakh HaKodesh; by/for YaHuWaH, Blessed be His Name now and forever: peace be within you.
Khy'em Y. M. Amri

=====

Jason. I greatly admire your zeal for the Lord and your courage and willingness to share it. I basically believe most everything you believe. The Bible is the true Word of the Lord and is perfect (Ps. 19). He created everything is 6 literal days some 6,000 years ago. I hold to your eschatology as well. We are brothers in Christ. I would just like to point out a couple of things. In the first paragraph you say. "I found Him.". In fact, you did not find him; rather, HE FOUND YOU !!!. Remember, Jesus said: "You did not chose me, I chose you."  No one can come to Jesus unless it is granted to him by the Father (Jn. 6 x two). Toward the end you talk about the "fools" who won't believe, and indeed the Bible calls them that. But the fact is they CANNOT believe.( I Corinthians 2:14): "But the natural man (unbelievers) understandeth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned". Without the God given discernment nobody can know God. No matter how smart they are or how good their math is. One can only know God if He chooses them. I hope this is helpful. God Bless. Ferd Becker, www.ffbeckermd.com

I replied:

What about "seek and ye shall find"?  What about finding the voice of the Lord in the "still small voice"?

Yes, God does choose us.  Did he not choose us all?  I think he did.  But not all respond, I know.  Not yet, anyway.

It is our response that makes the difference. 

And it is when we respond that also makes the difference.

Those who respond after the rapture will have a different fate will they not?

=====

The privileged planet documentary. I came to the same conclusion after comparing the geological periods against genesis (also while at Boulder).

http://www.privilegedplanet.com/

=====

Hi Jason! Here's a comment on your thesis from a smart (ex hedge fund) philosopher friend of mine!  Cheers, Rick
 
From: L O
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 7:00 AM
To: Richard Redfern
Subject: Re: Silver Stock Report: Mathematical Proof that God Exists
 
I agree with the basic premise.  There is no way that a land mammal could evolve into a bird within the Darwinian paradigm.  It would require billions of "random mutuations" and in the interim none of these changes would have survival benefits.
 
Clearly some intelligence created this universe.  However, I believe that the nature of that intelligence is beyond human comprehension.  In other words, I think that most "religions" make the error of anthropormophizing God.
 
If anyone were to study the intricacies of DNA and many other things he or should would be a moron if he or she did not believe in some form of intelligent design.
 
If you went to a planet in another galaxy and found a semiconductor chip and analysed it you would know there was an intelligent design.  Likewise if you examine life and even non-life it could not be just random.
 
A famous physicist said the chances of our planet and life being random is about the same as a tornado blowing through a junkyard and building a Boing 747.
 
That is what I think.
 
I don't know about the specific math in this, but in terms of order of magnitude etc. it is in synch with my thinking.
 
I do not believe that the universe was formed 6000 years ago.  I will go with the aproximately 14 billion year number.
L

=====

HERE,
HERE
THAT WAS MOST ASTOUNDING READING BELIEVE ME I READ ALL OF YOUR LETTERS TO THE END AND THAT WAS A GOOD ONE
THANKS               K

=====

freakin awesome. i love checkin my emails and seeing one from you. keep it up

=====

Hi Jason,  I probably got lost with the word ‘math’  But I do hope there are those who don’t bye into creation, and will take the time to understand why evolution can mathematically be proven wrong.
I gave up on darwinins and big bang theory so long ago, it seemed to me it took more faith or intestinal fortitude to believe all that would have to come together just to make a single cell, and then for those to grow, divide, make brains, self healing, blood that regenerates and all the intrasincracys to become a human that way than to take it by faith that God breathed into dust and formed man.  Then when we do die, guess whats left-a hand full, or a little more, of just dust.
 
You are terrific, and in the enviable position of being in a position where millions read-or at least- are exposed to your words.  What a tremendous feeling.  God works in so many ways, and some have huge audiences, some just a few-but HE DOES the work, we just have to ge available to be the vessel.
 
Good dahy, brother.  ed

=====

Well done!  And you can bet that I'm going to refer people to this essay.
Al DeNeve
 
PS:  The English teacher in me just can't resist: "besides" is usually an adverb or subordinating conjunction, while "beside" is a preposition; thus, the expression is "beside the point," and not "besides the point."

=====

So many errors!

Astrology does not teach that God does not exist.  You merely assume it does.

Whatever your marks in other classes, I would have failed you in English grammar, spelling and punctuation.  I'm not going to go into this, your many mistakes are obvious - two of the innumerable errors: it's college, not collage; there is no such word as "discernment," etc., etc. You need an editor.

I cannot believe you made high marks in philosophy since you never learned that probability cannot logically be used to prove anything - let alone the negative of something. The appeal to probability is itself a logical fallacy. Brush up on the conjunction fallacy. You are saying that evolution does not exist because probability forbids it. Do you actually believe such a foolish statement carries any intellectual weight whatsoever?

The theory of evolution suggests that small changes take place, step by tiny step, slowly over long periods of time; that life adapts itself to local conditions; that forms and structures progress from simple to complicated. It's just a theory, but there are many demonstrations to back it up (race horses, Charolais cattle, Jersey cattle, fox terriers and Irish wolfhounds etc., etc., etc.) It certainly makes one hell of a lot more sense than your half-baked mathematics.

I replied:

I never used the word Astrology in my letter; it is never referenced.

My Astronomy course, and textbook, and entire college were anti God.  Yes, not collage, thank you.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/discernment  I spelled it correctly, and used it correctly.

Yes, there are typos.  It happens.  Thank you for pointing them out.  I rely on the spellchecker too much.  No, I don't hire an editor; they cost money.

If probability cannot prove anything, please go to Vegas right away, and hit the blackjack tables, and never take a card.  Let me know when you go broke; it will be very fast, because you are very wrong.  We all use probabilities to make wise decisions every day.  The probabilities are used to "prove" conviction in court cases, and to determine every sort of truth that we know as true.  If probabilities cannot prove anything, then according to that, there is no such thing as a proof, period.  But yet, the word exists, and it is commonly used.  Hum.

The philosophy of the history of science shows that nearly everything man knew at one time was wrong, and that our knowledge is only being refined, and this, only sometimes, and it is likely that current thought about many things will be proven wrong, and refined once again.

The uncertainty principle shows that we can prove nothing, but only "get close".  Close enough to use the word "proof" still, in its every day meaning.

You have completely misapplied the conjunction fallacy.

I have applied it correctly in my article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunction_fallacy

Correctly speaking, yes, if there are more than two items required, probability goes down, as I discussed.  There are many parts to a cell, all needed at once for life, and if one tiny part breaks, such as a large hole in the cell wall, the cell dies.  Thus, you need all parts at once, hence the very low probability. 

If cellular life did not form out of amino acids in "plank time" and if it took longer, then there are even fewer times from which to have the chance of it ever happening, because there are fewer moments in time that could be representational of it happening.

Clearly, you didn't understand a single thing I wrote.  

Thus, I don't think anything you wrote remotely classifies as a rebuttal, let alone a refutation.

=====

Dear Jason:
 
I agree.  God exists.  I am an old retired physician much closer to meeting his maker than you are.  I also have training in science by virtue of a B.S. degree in chemical engineering.  It was clear to me, even as a pre-medical student, that the simplest cell could not have evolved by chance, as it is not simply particle-wise of enormous complexity, but its intricate systemic functionality eliminates any possibility of a spontaneous generation.  This is compounded by the fact that we are completely ignorant of how an organic plasma mass is infused with the life force.
 
You obviously have a high power mega circuit brain, superior to my lesser, though I think well imbedded, circuitry I would say.  But your thinking is compartmentalized.  For example, you dismiss evolutionary theory by pointing out that Darwin was mistaken in his assumption that the most elementary cell could be created by a chance spontaneous generation.  No argument here, but given existing life forms, however they were created, the preponderance of evidence for ongoing evolution is convincing.  Biological evolution is "The theory that all forms of life originated by decent, with gradual or abrupt modifications, from earlier forms, and so backward to the most rudimentary organisms (already existing)".  This, of course, is the rub, as it eliminates man as the special creature of God.  If you are able to contemplate yourself dispassionately, you  could not deny that you try to intimidate with an unabashed arrogance by reason of your strong intelligence.  In this way you dismiss evolutionary theory by the fact that it does not apply to the origin of life.  You also intimate that there is a valid argument for the Biblical stance that the earth is only 6000 years old.  The solid science of carbon dating and the precisely calculable radioactive degeneration of isotopes documenting the billion year something age of the earth irrefutably negates your compartmentalized thinking on this issue.  It is also important to recognize that "time" is merely a hypothetical concept, for all that exists in reality are particles in motion.  But even the great Isaac Newton, childishly envisioned time as a sort of great river flowing throughout eternity. 
 
Perhaps, as you say, other dimensional, intelligent beings created life.  But the eternal question remains:  How did this/these first cause(es) come into existence?  No one, not even the Bible, can offer a believable answer.  Why?  Because  there is none for the human intellect.  This is the one great unknown that is beyond human  comprehension.  Here, we are in the realm of the Gods!  When poets speak of "the human condition", it is to this heart-rending fact of our individual mortality in a world allowing free choice between good and evil with the realization that "all is vanity" without reward or punishment beyond the brief span of our years.  Curiously, it is this "unknowable" that inspires the "faith that all is as it should be".  The mass populace bases its faith on the promise of reward or punishment in an eternal life, in an ephemeral spirit-place called "heaven".  The realist has as much or more "faith" in an unknowable God that promises nothing, but gives and retrieves the miraculous gift of life in an eternally changing universe.  This view of the world is unacceptable to the masses and no acceptable religion could be founded upon such a view.
 
Lastly, in theoretical proposals we should keep in mind "The Law of Parsimony" which states that "the hypothesis that explains all the facts with the fewest assumptions is most likely the hypothesis closest to the truth".  Therefore, an elaborate mathematical proof for the existence of God is superfluous.  "God" exists because the eternal mystery of life and material existence remains unknowable and unexplainable to the human intellect.  In Churchillian terms, "it is a secret inside an enigma wrapped in a mystery" or words to that effect.
 
In any case, that is my view of the matter.  I suspect it will bounce off of your heavily armored compartments.  I understand that my view provokes mental indigestion.
 
All best,
P G   

=====

Mr. Hommel

I find it amazing the lengths to which some people will go to create ever more sophisticated  delusions in their frantic efforts to reassure themselves that they are not deluded.

In your case, whether intentionally or because you don't know any better, you attempt, using your own statistical contrivances, to overwhelm and thereby obfuscate what is in essence an extremely simple concept -- randomness.

You begin with a description of the odds of turning up 6 sixes in one roll.  You should have stopped there because it has been done innumerable times, making the odds on each occasion 1/1.  You go on to extrapolate absurdly impossible odds for abiogenesis, inferring that only the last of all possible combinations would be successful.  Irrefutably, albeit just once, it HAS occurred as a purely random event, rendering your supposed mathematical proof against it a pointless waste of time.

Typical of religious apologists, and again, either intentionally or because of your lack of knowledge. you ignore the fact that the science of evolution has NEVER claimed to explain abiogenesis or the origin of the universe.  The origin of life remains an ongoing debate between philosophy and theosophy, and if you choose to accept the "leap of faith" as a condition for your world view that's your prerogative.  However, since you seem to have a fervent need to proselytize, you might at least have the integrity to learn about the difference between the science of evolution and your theosophical view of abiogenesis and stop confusing the two in your sermons.

J P

=====

Hello Jason,

I happen to believe in God, but I also believe in evolution.  I don't think there's any contradiction in that.  Evolution just makes sense.  Just look at the different races/colours of people on earth. We can all interbreed, so we are also obviously related genetically.  Humans and apes have  99% similarity in their genetic makeup. How everything started of course is the real question.  Just my opinion.  I enjoy your column, with or without religious views.

C C

=====

Jason,
 
I love your views on investments and silver but I especially appreciate your boldness for Christ.  Keep it up and thanks for all your help.
 
S D G
A C

=====

Jason.
 
Can you resend that astounding original e-mail to me again, PLEASE: Mathematical Proof That God Exists
 
I tried to archive it in my yahoo folders and POOF!!! It was zapped into cyberspace.
 
Thanks so much for all you do as a beacon out here in the really scary God-less world around us.
 
Trying to keep up with the devious and deliberately destructive inflationary policy of this country.
 
 
KG

=====

Jason, to make any statistical analysis of stuff like this, you need a control group. something to compare it to.  In other words, we need to survey the surface of other planets in the universe to determine the likelihood of complex elements forming. to determine the distribution of the building blocks required for life.   There are 300 billion stars (suns in the milky way alone), and an estimated 200 billion galaxies in the visible universe.   Multiply 300 billion by 200 billion.  I have no idea what the number is called with that many zeros.  That is the number of solar systems out there, all with their own planets surrounding them.  Are you going to take such a petty and earthbound view of creation to think all of this was manufactured so that YOU could be reading this email?  Do you hold your god in such low regard?

"How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, 'This is better than we thought!  The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant'?  Instead they say, 'No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.'  A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths." - Carl Sagan

=====

Hi Jason, this was an interesting email.  I am an ex-physicist who definitely believes in God, that He is ultimately responsible for creating all life, and in evolution.  However, I think your argument has two flaws.
1) An extremely small, nonzero probability of an event does not mean that it can't, or didn't, happen.  It simply means that it was extremely unlikely, from a mathematical point of view.  This does not constitute proof.
2) I stopped reading when I ran across the following: "(I actually believe the Universe could have been, and was more likely formed, in 6 literal 24 hour days, about 6000 years ago, but that's also besides the point, and not required to get into for the purposes of our discussion here.)"  First of all, the concept of hours or days could not have existed at the dawn of creation.  To interpret the Bible literally in this fashion makes no sense.  Further, it negates the concept of the "Big Bang", which goes a long way toward explaining the universe of today.  If you claim that it did not happen, what is your alternate explanation that is consistent with the laws of physics?  If you are even a bit familiar with physics, you must know about the formula for radioactive decay.  This law enables us to identify fossils and "rocks" that were in existence many millions of years ago.  You must explain this away in order to accept your view of creation.
An alternate argument you could make is the amount of information contained in our DNA.  However, even this is not proof per se, only an extremely strong probability that there was an  intelligence behind it's creation.  As I said, I believe.  If you want to reach more people, please don't mention the universe might have been created about 6000 years ago.  This is a turn-off to an intelligent person.  Thank you.

C


I responded:

Facts are always a turn off to people who have paid to learn lies.  That's not the fault of truth, it's the fault of people who tell lies, and the fault of people who believe them, nor should you ask the truth teller to not tell the truth; that's not scholarly, and not healthy for scholarly debate, nor healthy for discerning the truth.

Now, as for 6000 years vs 13.7 billion now is it?  See, it was 15-25 billion when I was in school; we already know who the liars are; they can't get their own story straight.

The bible says that those men who scoff at the flood believe that all things have continued as they are, from the moment of creation.  The scholars of today call that idea "uniformitarianism", that means that rates of change we see today, were the same in the past.

For example, rates of sediment deposit today, must have been the same in the past.  But that ignores the change of the global flood does it not?

Another example is the speed of light.  It is assumed that is a constant.  But modern science is recognizing it is slowing down.  Faster speed of light in the past means that the universe was created more recently than you might have realized.

If the speed of light is not constant, then your assumptions about the age of the universe are not true, or must be significantly revised.

God says he stretched out the heavens.  Seems to me I have no reason to disbelieve it from science, and it appears to me as if science is catching up to the Bible, not the other way around.

A reader submits:

Check out a guy named Barry Setterfield. www.setterfield.org. I learned of Barry through Chuck Missler at khouse.org. Barry has proved that the speed of light is slowing down. He has found some way to measure the speed of light through experiments that were done over the last few centuries. Albert wrote the equation for time which includes the "fixed" speed of light at 186,000 miles per sec. With this information (i am way over my head talking about this)  he created a math formula that predicted what the speed pf light was 10,000 years ago. Using the information that our universe is about 16 billion years he run his math backwards and found that the amount time 16 billions years represents with the real speed of light is 6 days. The speed of light changes the time formula.

You can find my small contribution to Yahweh's Creation at http://conspiracyhub.com/membershares.php?id=41

Keep selling the Lord Jason. He can be proved with Math and Science. Missler is the Best at that, that I found. He has a free online Bible School that is superb or you can download it at the above link.

=====

The writer, C, responded again:

Please be assured that we do not differ in our belief that there is a God and that he created the universe.  We differ only in the method of creation.  You have come back with what you consider to be more facts to prove your point.  However, I think your facts are incorrect.  First of all, as the accuracy of measurements increase, the results of those measurements might very well change.  This is the reason the calculated age of the universe might "change".  Second, it is not correct to say that the speed of light is not a constant.  It is more correct to say that, in a constant medium, the speed of  light is constant.  As light goes from air to glass, for example, the speed changes depending on the index of refraction of the glass.  But in each medium it is constant.  Third, you completely ignore my point about radioactive decay and fossil identification.  For me, this is one of the strongest reasons for believing the earth/universe is significantly older than 6000 years. If you can prove this fundamental law of physics is incorrect, I will concede your point.  Finally, as a Catholic/Christian, I believe there is no inconsistency between religion and science.  But, where physical laws have been proven to be valid and have been independently verified over and over, I think every thinking person is obligated to accept them.  If there is a seeming discrepancy between these laws and the Bible, I think we should recognize that the Bible has, after all, been written by human beings many centuries ago.  When you write something, you use the language and concepts with which you are familiar.  We are much more knowledgeable today than the Bible authors were and should recognize this fact and take it into account when interpreting this Book.

Thank you for listening.

=====  After this, I mostly stopped responding, due to lack of time, and it was already 2 days after I wrote my article.  There were 40 more comments.  --Jason.  =====

Pity your Spanish got lost. Let me clarify mi posture by resorting to a well-known fiction, that of a monkey in front of a typewriting machine and the probability of him ever writting Shakespeare's Hamlet by chance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem.) ¡No way!, you'd say.  And I'd concur. Lets accomodate with something humbler than that, say the lyrics of  Bob Dyland's 'Blowin' in the Wind'. Same impossible result and same agreement. Provided that the Universe and indeed life in it are preconceived realities, you are right in your assumption and related argument. Now imagine (and accept) that all we expect from the same mokey is for him to write something intelligible, just a line or two that make sense to us, otherwise we wouldn't be here asking ourselves all these questions. My assertion is that he would eventually end up delivering. It all boils to accepting we live in the only possible world because God wanted it to be like it is or, on the other hand, ours is one of many possible worlds, Jacques Monod's forces of chance and necessity at work.  Then, trying to figure it out is a matter of metaphysics, not of numbers, even if they belong to the sphere of probablity calculus, so dear to me.
G

=====

Dear Jason,
thank you very much for your two answers, this is very nice.

You said:
"There is just not nearly enough time or molecules to make the theory of life forming randomly ever happen."

I completely agree on that, and there is strong doubt that all the possible combinations leave enough room for chances to happen to create life during the time the universe existed (be it 6000 or 13billion years, doesn't matter here).
I just wanted to point out that it is not necessary to theoretically play through all the possible combinations of all atoms in our universe. Chemical and physical properties simply make certain reactions of large groups of atoms with each other in our universe very very very unlikely.

So you would have to dissect and separate all different atoms (the periodic system of the elements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_system) and atom groups (because combinations of atoms restrict even further likely combinations with again single atoms and molecules (three examples: argon dos not react with oxygen, double or trible bonds between carbon atoms in unsaturated fatty acids (a major component of our cell membranes) are more likely to be opened up and saturated by e.g. other acids or reactive oxygen species such as the hydroxyl radical or the superoxideanion than by another unsaturated carbon-carbon moiety, or lignin is simply not reacting at all with keratin. you gotta have to exclude these reactions or at least address its severly diminished chances to happen)) and than group all this in less likely or more likely to happen reactions (and this throughout the entire likelihood continuum of all reaction types). This will give you some kind of a frame work (like a complex network) to use it for your calculations about chances and time, but this is a gargantuan task. impossible. Only the universe itself can do it, where people bring in the idea that it is actually a huge "quantum computer". It is actually truly exciting to explore this plethora of possible and impossible reactions that determine the living and the dead matter around us and in us.

In short:
You forgot to include chemical and physical attributes of the elements which restrict by default all atom combinations in our universe and they are obviously promoting life (not talking about life's genesis) on this planet with this distance to the sun (this now goes further into thermodynamics) and this stock of minerals. The chances are not equal, and that is why i said your interesting example (it was not ??? including radiation particles such as photons with all the different energies that can have a distinct impact on different molecules, not sure) is a bit shortcoming.

I really dont want to crush anybody's believes, as i think each and every person is entitled to have his/her sacred believes. This belongs to being a human, but we have to separate believes and reasoning (on the basis of our ever growing knowledge e.g. about the silver market) in order to thrive successful on this planet. This is an art and we have to master it!

Thank you again!

Have a nice weekend,
Sincerely,
H

=====

Hahaha - what a funny article - calculate the number of atoms in the universe to justify being a creatonist.

Well Jason - time to get a serious academic degree or continue to playing on clown grounds.

It needs not much to argue.
For beginners start to learn more about
- development of viruses
- ssRNA
- Mandelbrot

. or simply do what you can do best - moneychanger . very biblical indeed.

_

G

=====

Jason. I love you brother, I love your zeal for the Lord. I to have that kind of zeal. "Zeal for Your house has eaten me up; the reproaches which fall of You, fall on me."  Yes. I know "seek and you shall find" ,but Romans 3 says "None seek after God: no not one." None seek for God; only if he allows the scales to fall off of their eyes. He chose all who are "in Christ" and the present time and all who will be in Christ in the future. We don't know who they are. That is why we give the message of the Gospel to all. Obviously, He did not chose everybody because most are not going to heaven. Jesus said in the Sermon of the Mount: " Enter by the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction and many are they that go that way, but small is the gate and narrow is the way leading to eternal life and few are they who FIND It. Think about that. few even find it, much less go thru it. It is not our response that makes the difference, but God's EFFECTUAL CALL. Without that we would never even consider making a decision for Christ. Those who respond after the rapture will surely have a very different fate. I don't want to discourage you in any way. Keep up the good work for the Lord. Lord knows you are reaching many more than I am. By the way, I have bough silver for the last 20 years off and on. I still consider it the most undervalued asset out there. I am gone on a trip to see my grandchildren for the next week. God Bless! Ferd B

=====

Jason, Great report it is all mind blowing. You put a lot of thought into it. And if I understood it I'm sure you are correct. I have always believed GOD existed, even before I had faith. Just look at the complexity of an ear or an eye,could they have been made in an ammino acid soup and then exectly hooked up to your brain and installed where they need to be to be of use. I think THEY have evidence that the last ice age was about 10 to 12 thousand years ago. So I think your 6000 thousand year universe birth date is off. But I enjoy and learn from your letter so much, and I Thank you for your service. Joe

=====

Jaon,
Hi! I have enjoyed reading your emails for several years now. I appreciate that you are getting the word out on silver.
 
Your most recent article on the existence of God and origin of man was most interesting. Since you have undoubtedly done much research on this topic throughout many religions, you may possibly have researched the Sacred Scripture of the Baha'i Faith as well. If not, I hope the following excerpt from the book "Some Answered Questions" will provide further useful information on the topic of the origin of man:
 
"THE UNIVERSE IS WITHOUT BEGINNING; THE ORIGIN OF MAN
 
"Know that it is one of the most abstruse spiritual truths that the world of existence—that is to say, this endless universe—has no beginning.
We have already explained that the names and attributes of the Divinity themselves require the existence of beings. Although this subject has been explained in detail, we will speak of it again briefly. Know that an educator without pupils cannot be imagined; a monarch without subjects could not exist; a master without scholars cannot be appointed; a creator without a creature is impossible; a provider without those provided for cannot be conceived; for all the divine names and attributes demand the existence of beings. If we could imagine a time when no beings existed, this imagination would be the denial of the Divinity of God. Moreover, absolute nonexistence cannot become existence. If the beings were absolutely nonexistent, existence would not have come into being. Therefore, as the Essence of Unity (that is, the existence of God) is everlasting and eternal—that is to say, it has neither beginning nor end—it is certain that this world of existence, this endless universe, has neither beginning nor end. Yes, it may be that one of the parts of the universe, one of the globes, for example, may come into existence, or may be disintegrated, but the other endless globes are still existing; the universe would not be disordered nor destroyed. On the contrary, existence is eternal and perpetual. As each globe has a beginning, necessarily it has an end because every composition, collective or particular, must of necessity be decomposed. The only difference is that some are quickly decomposed, and others more slowly, but it is impossible that a composed thing should not eventually be decomposed.
It is necessary, therefore, that we should know what each of the important existences was in the beginning—for there is no doubt that in the beginning the origin was one: the origin of all numbers is one and not two. Then it is evident that in the beginning matter was one, and that one matter appeared in different aspects in each element. Thus various forms were produced, and these various aspects as they were produced became permanent, and each element was specialized. But this permanence was not definite, and did not attain realization and perfect existence until after a very long time. Then these elements became composed, and organized and combined in infinite forms; or rather from the composition and combination of these elements innumerable beings appeared.
This composition and arrangement, through the wisdom of God and His preexistent might, were produced from one natural organization, which was composed and combined with the greatest strength, conformable to wisdom, and according to a universal law. From this it is evident that it is the creation of God, and is not a fortuitous composition and arrangement. This is why from every natural composition a being can come into existence, but from an accidental composition no being can come into existence. For example, if a man of his own mind and intelligence collects some elements and combines them, a living being will not be brought into existence since the system is unnatural. This is the answer to the implied question that, since beings are made by the composition and the combination of elements, why is it not possible for us to gather elements and mingle them together, and so create a living being. This is a false supposition, for the origin of this composition is from God; it is God Who makes the combination, and as it is done according to the natural system, from each composition one being is produced, and an existence is realized. A composition made by man produces nothing because man cannot create.
Briefly, we have said that from the composition and combination of elements, from their decomposition, from their measure, and from the effect of other beings upon them, resulted forms, endless realities and innumerable beings. But it is clear that this terrestrial globe in its present form did not come into existence all at once, but that this universal existence gradually passed through different phases until it became adorned with its present perfection. Universal beings resemble and can be compared to particular beings, for both are subjected to one natural system, one universal law and divine organization. So you will find the smallest atoms in the universal system are similar to the greatest beings of the universe. It is clear that they come into existence from one laboratory of might under one natural system and one universal law; therefore, they may be compared to one another. Thus the embryo of man in the womb of the mother gradually grows and develops, and appears in different forms and conditions, until in the degree of perfect beauty it reaches maturity and appears in a perfect form with the utmost grace. And in the same way, the seed of this flower which you see was in the beginning an insignificant thing, and very small; and it grew and developed in the womb of the earth and, after appearing in various forms, came forth in this condition with perfect freshness and grace. In the same manner, it is evident that this terrestrial globe, having once found existence, grew and developed in the matrix of the universe, and came forth in different forms and conditions, until gradually it attained this present perfection, and became adorned with innumerable beings, and appeared as a finished organization.
Then it is clear that original matter, which is in the embryonic state, and the mingled and composed elements which were its earliest forms, gradually grew and developed during many ages and cycles, passing from one shape and form to another, until they appeared in this perfection, this system, this organization and this establishment, through the supreme wisdom of God.
Let us return to our subject that man, in the beginning of his existence and in the womb of the earth, like the embryo in the womb of the mother, gradually grew and developed, and passed from one form to another, from one shape to another, until he appeared with this beauty and perfection, this force and this power. It is certain that in the beginning he had not this loveliness and grace and elegance, and that he only by degrees attained this shape, this form, this beauty and this grace. There is no doubt that the human embryo did not at once appear in this form; neither did it then become the manifestation of the words “Blessed, therefore, be God, the most excellent of Makers.” 1 Gradually it passed through various conditions and different shapes, until it attained this form and beauty, this perfection, grace and loveliness. Thus it is evident and confirmed that the development and growth of man on this earth, until he reached his present perfection, resembled the growth and development of the embryo in the womb of the mother: by degrees it passed from condition to condition, from form to form, from one shape to another, for this is according to the requirement of the universal system and Divine Law.
That is to say, the embryo passes through different states and traverses numerous degrees, until it reaches the form in which it manifests the words “Praise be to God, the best of Creators,” and until the signs of reason and maturity appear. And in the same way, man’s existence on this earth, from the beginning until it reaches this state, form and condition, necessarily lasts a long time, and goes through many degrees until it reaches this condition. But from the beginning of man’s existence he is a distinct species. In the same way, the embryo of man in the womb of the mother was at first in a strange form; then this body passes from shape to shape, from state to state, from form to form, until it appears in utmost beauty and perfection. But even when in the womb of the mother and in this strange form, entirely different from his present form and figure, he is the embryo of the superior species, and not of the animal; his species and essence undergo no change. Now, admitting that the traces of organs which have disappeared actually exist, this is not a proof of the impermanence and the nonoriginality of the species. At the most it proves that the form, and fashion, and the organs of man have progressed. Man was always a distinct species, a man, not an animal. So, if the embryo of man in the womb of the mother passes from one form to another so that the second form in no way resembles the first, is this a proof that the species has changed? that it was at first an animal, and that its organs progressed and developed until it became a man? No, indeed! How puerile and unfounded is this idea and this thought! For the proof of the originality of the human species, and of the permanency of the nature of man, is clear and evident."
1. Qur’án 23:14. 
 
The above is just one of several related chapters from Part Four of Some Answered Question. If you'd like to research them, please follow this link:
http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/
I hope you find this interesting.
Best regards,
G

=====

The idea that initial cell creation happened by chance in the manner of a bag of watch parts being shaken until they magically fall together as a watch is a false comparison. Current theory suggests that certain components had inherent qualities that facilitated pairing up with other components and continuing to combine in what became a self-organizing system. You can’t talk about odds in a rigged system.

=====

This means that the creator would have to have miraculous powers to totally suspend the laws of physics to do and effect absolutely anything he wants to in our dimension, therefore every miracle in the Bible is easily seen as possible.  Furthermore, if the creator can violate the laws of physics, he might have also created the laws of physics, which hints at the creator actually sustaining the laws of physics, and also sustaining the existence of all atoms and even all wavelengths of light and energy that were also created.

In order for a law to exist there must be a law giver.

=====

The current best evolutionary based theory is that the maximum age of the Universe is 13.7 billion years, so let's go with that.  (I actually believe the Universe could have been, and was more likely formed, in 6 literal 24 hour days, about 6000 years ago, but that's also besides the point, and not required to get into for the purposes of our discussion here.)

The Earth was formed in 6 days NOT the universe.

=====

Hi Jason,
I have been reading your reports for a couple of years now. You touched on my favorite topic now. And I also can prove the existence of GOD. It is quite simple. Through Geometry. Using "Correlation" which states: Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. Now we know that Energy exist. According to the Laws of Physics: 1] The law of conservation of energy is an empirical law of physics. It states that the total amount of energy in an isolated system remains constant over time (is said to be conserved over time). A consequence of this law is that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only be transformed from one state to another. The only thing that can happen to energy in a closed system is that it can change form, for instance chemical energy can become kinetic energy.
2] There is an infinite amount of this energy, and there is nothing in the Universe that does not contain this energy.
Lastly if reduced to it's smallest particle and broken open or split  you get Light.  The idea of duality originated in a debate over the nature of light and matter dating back to the 1600s, when competing theories of light were proposed by Christiaan Huygens and Isaac Newton: light was thought either to consist of waves (Huygens) or of corpuscles [particles] (Newton). Through the work of Max Planck, Albert Einstein,Louis de Broglie, Arthur Compton, Niels Bohr, and many others, current scientific theory holds that all particles also have a wave nature (and vice versa).[1] This phenomenon has been verified not only for elementary particles, but also for compound particles like atoms and even molecules.

Sound familiar?  GOD is Light and there is no darkness in HIM/Her/IT. GOD is Infinite, exist everywhere. And GOD cannot be created OR destroyed.
Well that's all we need 3 Correlations. So now we know that GOD is Energy, but so what we still don't know GOD;  Which is the purpose of Human Existence.
So now we have to look further, to actually know GOD as opposed to know that GOD exist. To be in denial of the entity of GOD is absurd. Just look around, up or down and it is so obvious. So we need to take one more step but not forward but inside ourselves because that is where the KIngdom of Heaven is and where GOD lives--in our Heart of Hearts
Check out "WOPG.ORG" is this sounds intriguing.
Lots of Love and Gratitude.
I

=====

Hi Jason,

I know I described what you have refuted and will agree to disagree on this. You're view is so strong that even if you could be PROVEN wrong you would not accept it.

Is it contradictory that you use science in the form of maths to prove that science is wrong? You call my liking of science, my faith. I did not attack your faith, I just tried to show you that what you are refuting may be actually possible (not, is absolutely possible). Faith is not science, it is just a confidence or trust in a person or thing. Therefore faith can never prove anything. This means that god can never been proven to even exist (although both you and I feel there is a higher order). Therefore if we can't prove that. How can we prove what the guy did or dies?

I really do not think you understand the points I have provided below. I did not dismiss the notion of god, though tried to bring both god and science together in a theory.

I just wanted to say that - A complicated self replicating system can be far less complex than a complete cell and does not have to be sentient. Therefore a cell does not have to be complete to have workable, self sustaining and replicating parts, as long as conditions are right and they have been on earth for a long time. Correct distance from the sun, the availability of water in all its 3 phases seasons due to the tilt of the earths access, Etc, are all proponents that may be responsible to help make it happen.

I wish you the best.

Regards,

A

=====

Jason,
I'm sure you must receive piles of email responses on a daily basis. Negative and positive.I just want to encourage you to keep doing what you are doing! I'm a fan of your silver report, almost as much as the real thing.tangible, physical silver! I buy physical silver every chance I have! I also believe in a real, physical and tangible God.The One responsible for holding all things together by His awesome power! You did a great thing by writing 'the mathematical proof that God exists'. I know that your math lesson and a copy of C S Lewis 'Mere Christianity' should be required reading by all.
There are only two meaningful truths in my life!

1) there is only one God
&
2) there is only one sure investment

I try and spread the word on both without loosing focus on number 1)

Keep up the good work!

Will see you 1) day.

Cheers!

R

=====

Hi Jason,

Probability theory may be easy when studied but the application of it can be bewildering even to a professional.

If it were that easy more people would win at races or never buy a lottery ticket.

I have taken the liberty to draw your attention to the application and have attached a file.

Scary!!

Regards.

H

=====

Jason,
 
Good Sunday morning to you! In all do respect, your talk about chances do not really mean a thing. Like you said, they are chances. The chance could be a billion to the billionth power, however that single life forming cell could happen on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. try. How can you deny that? Life DOES find a way. Just look at the Galapagos Islands, a perfect example of evolution at its best. Can you deny the Smithsonian Museums and the carbon dated artifacts? I know I can't!!! On another note, love the silver articles. Keep up the GREAT work!
 
Respectfully,
 
J

=====

Kumusta, means hello how are you, or in Guam, Hafai Adai,
I am on your side, I knew up to 10-12 years ago that gold would climb($300).
I simply didn't have the money, I have a couple ounczes, but not what I want.
i am a Catholic, I bought a few pieces of
 1981 Pope John Paul II gold, 9 pieces of 1,000 mintage to be exact and am thankful for this!!!!!!!
I have suffered mental illness over this period of time and still do, though I am now able to do some things. My study room is a mess, but I am cleaning and painting it up.
I am both excited and mad simultaneously.
God has promised me, you can have your land , you can have anything you want.
I was once shivering and homeless, it taught me a valuable lesson, what would you carry on your back literally, a Bible and some gold and silver, yes my silver is small too, but it is probably 100-200 ounczes because I also collect coins.
Talking about numbers, (I love numbers and Gods' math too)!!!!!!!,
12 years times 12 months = 144, if my room became a mess in 144 months, is one, two days of recovery/ month a reasonable time to correct the problem, I think so!!!
So, I am trying my best & also simultaneously trying to be patient, it simply takes time, time to do, but not time to waste, because we are but  a vapor, here today gone tomorrow.
My wife says, sale your collection, I say "why", it's only paper!!!, paper to replace what I have, she means well, but I believe her to be mistaken.
I am currently residing in the Philippines, the church I go to the people, some,, have nice enough vehicles for a poor country, God blesses the faithful, my wife thought I give too much for an offering, I told her you can't give too much, not more than what you have been given, I think she now  realizes that we have been blessed, God rewards our faithfulness, I try not to worry about what others give, but what I know to be right for me, voluntarily, our youngest daughter gives too different times!!!
So, anyway I try to be patient, I always wanted some land, here in Philippines or Canada or michigan or nevada I like, maybe God wants me to wait, either the good deals get snatched up quickly, or people want more than its' true value, so I think to myself, God will open it  if, when He wants, I figure I can buy coins, silver and gold in the meantime.
I simply have not had the resources in the last 5 years to buy very much, a little, but before I bought some and am happily categorizing them now, God Jesus has truly blessed me too!!!
I  certainly do not want to boast, it says in the Bible that discernment is a gift, and I believe God has given me  my share of this, I am so thankful and grateful.
Thankful for a second marraige, 15 years on Sunday, a beautiful wife, two beautiful sons, two beautiful daughters and for five beautiful sons from my first marraige. My first wife found someone else, I forgive her, she really did me a favor, it hasn't made me financially  richer, though my life has been made richer in the fact I have lived in two cultures, not everyone can do that even if they have a lot of "paper"-money!!!
So, now I can have anything I want, I simply want to be of maximum service to God and my fellows, the silver, gold riches willl follow, I know this to be true!!!!!!!
I am a recovering drunk, alcoholic, I am thankful to God for this, most don;t make it, it's not how good I am or how hard I work, but because God loves me so much & He loves you so much too Jason, my God  bless you abundantly too!!!!!!
Respectfully, D

=====

Reading sometimes solicits a response in me. It is like saying there is no sense required but the sense the Creator granted us. If education woulf just get out of the way of teachers who want to open the door way to higher consciousness and independent thinking. GOD and English word I think derived from German I heard, but have not studied, is a word that if spoken in another language word or might have the same definition. I like Creator, because over 80 cultures in the works have a word that translates into Creator and all the people know through their own self expressed intuitive knowledge passed orally or other wise that a Creator MADE them or they came form their creator. There are no measurements to my knowledge with an understanding of planks, quantum's and/or atoms. It simply is and taught is that. All of these 80 stories go alone with a belief system and  people to communicator the story and share the belief system if not practice it in the name of their creator. We have those practices today and he stories are written in books from those who know liter and figurative meanings and have measured time  down to a finite number to proved the existence go GOD. I read recently that there is one microbial “element” that is a part of ALL cell life and exists in the gases of bursting stars. Bursting stars are “measured” in past time by light years in man’s finite mind. The Event already happened and the light is now only catching up with us. In fact this happens every morning we wake up The sunlight that Is 93M mile away already happened. We are actually late Our life already happened for that day. On to then next. This is an interesting phenomenon to me. Life already happened. The universe is old yet new. Go figure. Why does man consistently try to time the creator with instruments? It still takes time and we still cannot measure six or seven days of it in light years even. We plod along with any interesting debate and mising th epoint of hwy we are here as something created in the image of our maker, regardless of what time it is. We are late to the party.

I think Pythagoras said GOD “expressed” and/or “reveled” himself through mathematics and geometric shapes and geometry in the the turning of the spheres


=====

With all due resspect, I think all religions are based on mythology.  The study of the history of religion shows that clearly.  The bible is but a book based on mythology, has had many authors over the years and has been rewritten many times to reflect the thinkers of that time.  The discussion contiues

=====

Hi Jason
 
Great read mate. cheers
 
When you have silver at home, is there any time you will sell it?? ie when it gets so high to then maybe buy real estate for cash??
 
cheers

=====

It is difficult to believe you would deny evolution when every farmer knows that you can improve stock - animal or vegetable - by selective breeding. It should not be difficult for you to extend that knowledge to the wild and the theory of natural selection.

It is difficult to believe that a super intelligent person, as you say you are, believes the world is 6,000 years old when there are so many records (deep sea sediment, geological formations, tectonics, ice cap research, the evidence laid down by ancient volcanos etc etc) that prove otherwise.

It is difficult to believe that a fellow as smart as you claim to be, believes you can prove that God exists because the chance of amino acids combining and replicating is too improbable to have happened, and then arguing that profitability of casinos proves your point. The fact is that, improbable as it may seem to you, gamblers do occasionally win big at casinos.

A man of your prideful (isn't that one of the 7 deadly sins?) self-professed superior intelligence you should know that because an event is improbable, is not a proof that it didn't happen.

Improbable things happen every day.

=====

Hello,

I'm doing quite a bit of surfing on silver and came across your web site.

I was looking for a bunch of material on precious metals to see where I should put my self directed 401k but was thrilled to see an article at the top of the list about our creator.

God bless you a whole bunch for doing that Jason!

B

=====

Jason;

Your reasoning is impeccable as to there being a God and Creator. I’ve also read your e mail below and your website links.

As the Psalmist wrote: “The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.” (Psalm 10:4. KJ) So it is clear from scripture that the wicked do not believe in God and that is their decision. I’m happy you saw the light.

But humans are not the only ones involved in believing in God. James, Jesus half brother wrote: “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.” (James 2:19 KJ) Yes we do well if we believe in God. But the devils, or as all other English Bibles translate this word “devils” as “demons”, they believe and tremble at God. They have epitomized what took you 8 pages to explain when they traveled throughout the billions of galaxies into God’s own very presence. Job 2:1,2

Job 2:1,2 reads: “Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.”

So the demons not only know the size of the universe but how to travel it. They may also understand the words that we humans use for ‘Quantised and Planck time’ and possibly the age of the Universe.
Yet despite all their understanding of the Universe and knowledge of God they shudder. Why? When Jesus was on earth and one demon or an unclean spirit identified Jesus. That is something the religious leaders and the majority of the people of his day could not do.  This demon said two things: “art thou come to destroy us?” Us is all the demons and “I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.” (Mark 1:23 – 26 KJ). 

 So first demons know they will be destroyed by God in God’s due time yet they do not know when that time is. Secondly they know Jesus is the “Holy One of God.” So clearly their knowledge of God and the universe is not enough, nor is knowledge from the scriptures. How do we know?

Jesus once told a young man in his day there is more involved than just knowing the scriptures.

This is means more than “Remembering that there are all forms of different ministries, and all kinds of different preaching” as you remind your readers in the: “How to let God will bless your ministry”. When you urge your readers to: “Understand the kingdom.  Preach the kingdom.  Live the Kingdom.”, as you bring out under “How to let God will bless your Ministry.” How can they “understand the Kingdom” with no clear explanations? It is as Paul said “For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” 1Cor 14:8 KJ) In fact how can they “preach the Kingdom” or even “live the Kingdom” if they do not understand it?

In this case your understanding of the Kingdom is like an indistinct trumpet sound. 

The prophet Daniel prophesied about this about this Kingdom. “And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. (Daniel 2:44 KJ) Did Jesus agree with Daniel? Absolutely!

Jesus not only preached the Kingdom but he gave us a clearer understanding of when it would come, where it would rule, who would be in the kingdom and what action it would take.

Jesus prophesied: “And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.” “And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.” “And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.” (Revelation 19:13, 19, 21KJ) Yes Jesus as King of the Kingdom will meet all the kings of the earth in war with all their armies to destroy them. Is that not going to be a huge battle? Jesus referred it to as “the battle of that great day of God Almighty” or simply “Armageddon” (Rev 16:14, 16 KJ)

You should be preaching what that crushing action so people who listen to the Kingdom message will have real hope. Like for those affected by Gulf Oil Spill. The kings of the earth today fuddle and duddle while people and animals die.  At Rev. 19:17, 18 KJ the Apostle John said: “And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.” Yes it is not only the all the rulers of the earth including their armies but also the small and the great.

You should be telling people when the Kingdom of God began ruling so they can prepare themselves. “Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ:” (Rev 12:10 KJ; Matthew 24:3 also 24:34KJ; 2 Tim 3:1 – 6 KJ; 1 Thess. 5:3 KJ)

Who will rule in that Kingdom? What hope is there for those who do not rule with Christ?

People should know that the Kingdom is for a limited number as Daniel foretold. Jesus later explained how many would rule. Daniel said: “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.  And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.  And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him. (Daniel 7:13,14, 27 KJ)

Jesus expounded on Daniel’s understanding stating in Luke 22: 29 KJ: “And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;” and (John 10: 16 KJ) “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” At Matthew 5:5 KJ Jesus expounded further saying there would be a second hope: “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.” Therefore people need a clear understanding of who the King, co rulers and subjects are.

People need to know where the Kingdom will rule from.

Jesus added more proof to the understanding of the kingdom when he told Pontius Pilate a very distinguishing mark of the Kingdom. He said:  “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.” (John 18: 36 KJ) So it is obviously set up in the heavens. (2 Tim 4:18 KJ) So how can a person “live the Kingdom” if Jesus Kingdom is not of this world?

Furthermore if the Kingdom if it is not of this world how can it be a condition of the hearts of men? “Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. (Luke 17:21, KJ): [also TEV, Dy; but “among you,” KJ margin, NE, JB; “in the midst of you,” RS; “in your midst,” NW].”  Notice that, as shown by verse 20, Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees, whom he also denounced as hypocrites, so he could not have meant that the Kingdom was in their hearts.

The young rich man Jesus spoke to came to Jesus and asked him how he could receive everlasting life. Jesus asked him if he followed scripture. The young man replied yes and said he followed those scriptural commands – yes “from my youth up”. (Matthew 19:20 KJ)  It was obvious what the young man believed the scriptures as you do.

Yet Jesus told him in Luke’s parallel account: “Yet lackest thou one thing” (Luke 18:22) It is clear from your website and your e mail below that you also ‘lack one thing’ which is the theme of the Bible. That is paramount amongst many other things.

You have concentrated first and foremost on the rapture of which the great multitude who survive the great tribulation (Rev 7: 9, 14 and Matthew 24:21, 22 KJ) and will not need to participate in the rapture. Jesus said they, the meek would inherit the earth. They have no reason to go to heaven as the Kingdom saints will rule. Rev 5: 10 KJ

The young rich man had to become a follower and to preach the kingdom to inherit the Kingdom of God. Jesus had given clear instructions to the apostles, early disciples and consequently all Christians about how to preach the Kingdom. (Matthew 10: 1 – 14; Matthew 9:35; Matthew11:1; Mark 1:38, Mark 6:56; Luke 4:43 KJ) You have clearly misunderstood the scriptures as the rapture is not paramount to the Kingdom. When people hear the truth and understand their error they “feel cut at heart” and repent. That means their salvation.

The scripture says the young man: “was very rich” and “he had great possessions”.  (Matthew 19:22 and Luke 18:23 KJ) “Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 19:23 KJ) That appears to be your problem even though you understand the Bible to some degree.

While your e mail below states: “Therefore, I will no longer tolerate fools who berate me for believing the Bible is the word of God…becaus, clearly, they believe that on far less grounded faith than my mathematically based reason. From now on, I will refer them to this page: www.silverstockreport.com/2010/god.html 

No one should berate you for believing the word of God. However it is apparent that the message you preach and how you them relate to this website is for a monetary purpose, otherwise you would direct them to the scriptures about how to preach the Kingdom or help them as Jesus did the young rich man about the Kingdom as Jesus did the rich man.

Yet as you quoted: “But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.” (Matthew 6:33 KJ)

In Matthew 25: 34 Jesus promises said that after all the nations have been preached to the nations are gathered into two groups, - sheep and goats. This is the most critical event of mankind and is related to the Kingdom preaching to all the nations. This is why you must seek first the Kingdom to get a correct understanding of it and then expound it correctly.

Will the people of the inhabited earth who have received the witness in all the nations act in harmony of the Kingdom, its King, its co rulers referred at Matthew 25:40 as Christ’s brothers make disciples who will also preach the Kingdom and make other disciples? (Matthew 29:19, 20 KJ) This involves judgment of life or death “these [goats] shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous [sheep] into life eternal.” (Matthew 25:46 KJ) You have this opportunity now and any others who may read this.

Jesus gave this clear command. “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” (Matthew 24:14 KJ) So the before the rapture comes, - true Christians must be busy preaching the Kingdom and all that it entails unto all nations or in every country true Christians live or can move to, to spread the witnessing and the details of the Kingdom. It is not a message of simply a variety of ministries as you state there in your website.

You encourage and I quote from your website: Some ministers in developing nations have discovered that it is best to provide people with a service first.  Likewise, I provide a free investment newsletter.  Later, I may introduce people to my Bible studies, or ask them for money to subscribe to "look at my portfolio" of investments. And then your very next sentence says: As Jesus gave His life for you, while you were still a sinner, likewise, you should start giving first, but not by giving money. You received free give free. etc…

That is a clear contradiction. How can people who have no money invest in something they can’t? Jesus Instructions were and are clear as to how we should preach.

This Kingdom preaching and witnessing is part of what you call the pre-tribulation rapture. The scripture states that when the preaching of the Kingdom is done for a witness “unto all nations” then the end will come. “He shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” (Matthew 24:29 KJ)

This worldwide KINGDOM witnessing must be very important. Why? Before he sends out his angels to sound the trumpet for the elect “the King shall answer and say unto them” that is those who do not help Christ brothers and who “shall go away into everlasting punishment”, “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me” (Matthew 24:40, 46 KJ)

Again help given to the brothers of Christ to preach the good news of the Kingdom in all its details unto all nations, or even to your people in your city is of life or death importance. Jesus foretold that while they were making disciples in all the nations he would be with them to the very end to help them. “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations… Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” (Matthew 28: 20 KJ)

At that time Jesus and his angels that are accompanying him tells the elect “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” Those Kingdom preachers will now inherit the Kingdom they’ve been preaching.

However what good is the rapture if we are not preach the truth of what “the Kingdom” is or “bear thorough witness of the Kingdom explaining it in detail?

Yes the work of witnessing about the Kingdom in all its detail will give people time to understand what the truth is about “this gospel of the kingdom [that] shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations.” (Matthew 24:14 KJ) Today you have received a witness concerning the Kingdom in this time of the end.

If Christ is now ruling as King of the Kingdom and about ready to go into action to destroy kings and armies and divide sheep from goats what must you still do? You still need a more thorough witness.

What value is there to preach ‘the rapture’ if one does not know what it is for or for where they’re going?  It’s like planning a trip to a country without knowing where ones final destination is. What’s the point of the trip if there is no destination? One would drive aimlessly all over the world not going anywhere. The elect must indeed be clearly preaching what the Kingdom of God as that is their hope. (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:20; Acts 5:42; Acts 20: 20 KJ) You need to preach the two hopes.

It is a difficult thing for the rich to enter into the Kingdom of God and do the ministry that young man should have done and to be willingly to give all his material things up. So his/our riches should be sold to join or follow Jesus into all the cities and villages today to preach with the Kingdom of God. They should not be used to buy ore encourage others to buy silver and other precious metals.

As you know at Matthew 6; 19, 20 KJ Jesus said : “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Yes the young man’s heart and its intentions were put to the test and became evident as he went away unable to give up what he had to follow Jesus. What is in your heart?

Being honest in “weight” and “measures” is not about amassing wealth by silver or any other precious
metals as your website encourages and I quote: Visit my other website: The Silver Stock Report where I'm actively putting into practice the Christian lessons regarding "honest weights and measures". Unquote.

The Biblical command about “weights” and “measures” was about being honest in our business dealings. That is clearly different counsel than buying silver because it is a good commodity.

If we have the silver then we should be selling it not buying it, as the young rich should have, - to join with Jesus Christ in the greatest preaching campaign of the Kingdom the world will ever witness before the end comes. You should be preaching the Kingdom and not encouraging people to go to a website to become wealthy. Or get your investment portfolio that costs money. Their spiritually is of ultimate importance as it means their very lives.

The young rich man had too much and went away in sorrow. Will you? He was very rich and had many possessions. You must focus on the Kingdom message and all that Jesus taught as he will destroy this wicked world. If you qualify to receive the Biblical rapture then you would clearly be preaching the Kingdom hope and much more – not just focusing on the rapture.  (1 John 2:15 – 17; 1 Cor. 6: 9, 10; Rev. 21:8; Eph 5:3 – 5 KJ) 

Again as you so clearly stated in your web site material: “And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence. And when ye come into a house, salute it.  And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.”

Did you notice the emphasis on calling people at their homes? That is what Jesus taught all his disciples to do with the message the Kingdom of heaven. Both the apostles and the apostle Paul set a sterling example and obviously joined in that work. (Acts 5:42; Acts 20: 20, 21 KJ)

Your emphasizing silver is merely a reflection of 1 John 2:16, 17: “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.”


Sincerely
T

=====

Jason,

Hi, and thanks for the email and sharing some of your spiritual journey. I was brought up Baptist and when I was a young adult (25) I became Catholic convinced by "the numbers" (as you put it) of proofs that the Catholic Church was the first and original Church started by our Lord Jesus. If you are interested I can send you my journey of faith.

Also, I just recently bought my first silver (American Eagles) as I was convinced from what I have read from your site and emails. The dollar can not keep its value while precious metals will continue to increase in value. I hope to continue to convert dollars to silver over a period of time as the future is so uncertain. What do you suggest as far as silver to buy or should I just get a variety of different silver coins?

Thanks for your help,
Jason

=====

I may need to reread this a couple of times.  Lots of numbers to digest.
But,  like you, I enjoy looking at the evidence of God,  so I have two recommendations for you:
 
THE PROOF that God exists and the Bible is true by Dennis Marcellino
I found this to be a wonderful book where he uses logic, science, philosophy, and much more to prove the existance of God.  I love it.  Check it out on amazon.
 
The other is something I've seen on TV.  I've only seen parts of it but what I see is great.
I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Norman L. Geisler, Frank Turek.
This is a book, but Turek does a video presentation to a live audience.  They demonstrate how the belief in God makes much more sense than being an atheist.  Its a strange title, but they really do an awesome job.
 
Both of these I consider to be atheist busters.  Neither of them uses circular logic like "The Bible is true because the Bible says its true."  They take all that out of the equation and use other means to prove the Bible is the true word of God.
 
Regards,
K

=====

Thank You Jason for a wonderful and inspirational e-mail.
 
I will admit to not being as mathematically minded as you are, and did not fully comprehend your very articulate appraisal of the probabilities of life evolving rather than being created. However I did kinda follow your efforts to explain the complex formulas to substantiate the evidence in favor of Our Lord Father. Although I will say, I need no such confirmation.
 
I can imagine the flack you must receive from your audience. I try to bring God into my conversations with friends and family, purely because I want them to share the joy I have from such a close relationship with Him. But it seems you can talk about anything except ‘religion’ even though I belong to no religious organization or church, I am viewed as something abhorrent by wanting to discuss anything from the Bible or about Jehovah. Sometimes I feel rather alienated, but am comforted by the Bibles consolations.
 
Jason, we really are living in Godless times. Even the so called religions of the world seem to be all ruled by the prince of darkness, and have been cleverly used to direct people away from God. I would so like to know which church or ministry you attend. All the ones I have looked into have been unsuitable for true worship.
 
Anyway, it is always great to hear from you, I do enjoy your mix, and admire your effort in proclaiming Gods truth.
 
I do buy Silver, I have quite a collection, but as I am in the UK JH Mint were unable to supply me. If ever you think of opening a branch in the UK maybe I could help.
 
All the best.
 
P

=====

>>(I actually believe the Universe could have been, and was more likely formed, in 6 literal 24 hour days, about 6000 years ago, but that's also >>besides the point, and not required to get into for the purposes of our discussion here.)
But it is required because that statement take credibility away your discussion. Your silver argument is a good illustration. Better not to have mentioned the 6 days and left that for another day. Either the 6 days is correct or the 13.5 billion years is correct, but  certainly not both.  A close study of the bible refutes the literal 6 days theory and such a view would invalidate current accepted scientific teaching.
D

=====

There are many mathematicians who tried to prove the existence of God.  Here is one that is easy to understand

I forget who (pascal) but in the 1700's  one mathemmatician decided to prove God.  He reasoned before the universe was created, there was a void.  He numbered the void the number zero since obviously a void is empty.  God, on the other hand is everything.  So he numbered God as "1"
The moment God created the universe it because number 1.  That is because 1+0=1.  And so the universe is everything and God is also the universe.  What happens if you add another universe?  you get 1+1 or 2.  But in this guy math system you can only use 1 and zero.  So instead of 2 you get 10.  And so you can add, subtract, mulitply and do any math equation you can think of. 

This was interesting and fun math but useless.  Until,.
The 1940's.  Computers had been invented and needed a new way of counting.  Computers cannot count 1,2,3,4,5 etc.  But the can count, add subtracts and do all mathematical functions  using the numbers 1 and zero.

Be aware this only makes the existence of God more possible.  It does not prove the existence of God.  There are some logical flaws, basically the same made by economics and thinking it is a pure science.  The same logical flaws exist in physicists who tried to prove the existence of God and your example saying this world could happen by sheer chance because the size of the randomness factor.  So I'm not saying God either exist or doesn't  because you can prove it mathematically.  It does however give you a much stronger argument God does exist

Thank you for your Silver Stock report

=====

Dear jason hommel,

Thank you for your email's.Your emails enlighten us about financial situation.and your final email about mathematical proof that god exist.I would like to tell you a turkish guy name harun yahya.you can research this guy,he always telling that evolution is ridiculous with proof of qoran.

=====

My whole point is thanks for addressing any issues non believers have in you email - I rather enjoy your writing.  Good Job.

 
Hey Jason - I read an important statistic at some point about 3 years ago.  I too become frustrated with these Illuminati lead, serving people.  It is after all "whom they choose to serve"  It seems we beat our heads against the wall sometimes - since that is who we are speaking to without knowing.  I take some things you have written as very good and well researched.  

Here is  something to keep your sanity about - I read "2 in 5 people need some sort of medical pharmacological assistance, in terms of their mental health".  I did consider it might be written by the big Paharma - but I notice a pattern with non believers(and some believers) - so I always try to firm my information with sources, like for those who argue about the existence of and those who hide his name like Jews (God) YHWH written on the Stone on line 18 by Israel's and Judah's enemies, I refer them to the Moabite Stone, or better known as the Meshe Stele, which is on display in the Louvre in Paris.  It is a stone carved by the Moabite king who sacrifice his son (the heir apparent) in front of the Israelites on the Battle fields.  The Kingdom of Judah and Kingdom of Israel were so appalled they left the battle field.  When was it created? It was carved in 840 BC.   on display in Paris in the louvre museum.  google it if you like.  Meshe Stele or Moabite Stone.

This is just but a sample of what I use to show people (much like the mathematical and other proofs you always offer people each time you write) - I especially liked the "why paper money Violated the Ten commandments" article.  I found this interesting concerning the math - I have some atheists that I speak to in blogs at times - can I quote your work or add it to what I write? I always will add your name "written by" in parts I tell them. 


I like this article you wrote.

Where 2 or more are gathered I am there.   you have enough listeners and readers to affirm your position as being all of us together.  Your writings are a gathering.

Ciao !

=====

Hi Jason.

Not to rain on your parade or anything, but the fallacy underlying your reasoning, below, is failure to recognize that chemical evolution precedes cellular evolution. Evolution did not start of the individual cell. The cell was itself the product of a lengthy process of autocatalytic evolution. An autocatalyst is a chemical molecule which speeds up a reaction which produces other molecules like itself. In short, it is a chemical molecule which reproduces itself. There are literally tens of thousands of autocatalysts, and there were doubtlessly multitudes of them present in the primordial ocean that formed on Earth, billions of years ago. Naturally, due to the vicissitudes of existence in that chemical soup, not all of the products of a given autocatalytic reaction would be identical. Some of the deviations, of course, would be dysfunctional: they would no longer be autocatalysts, hence would no longer be able to reproduce themselves. However, some of them would, and among those, some would be more effective in that regard than their "parent"--which means: they would have a reproductive advantage within that chemical environment. And, as their numbers increased, the process of chemical natural selection would continue: eventually another change would occur which conferred yet another reproductive advantage; and on, and on, and on. The end result of the process, over thousands of years, would be the first cell. And, thereafter, cellular evolution would continue the process of improvement, eventually producing you and I, so we could argue about how it all began. :-)

Bottom line: the appearance of the first cell was not due to an immensely improbable accumulation of fortuitous accidents, like flipping "heads" ten trillion times in a row, but rather was due to the operation of an inexorable causality--i.e., to the fact that autocatalytic chemical reactions undergo the same process of natural selection as biological cells. A biological cell is just an immensely complex autocatalytic molecule--as, in fact, are you and I.

Regards,

MJ

=====

Jason,
I would appreciate it if you would answer the following questions, please.
1.  What is the probability that God created the universe at the big bang and it evolved?
2.  What is the probability that God created the single cell in his own manner and it evolved?
3.  What is the probability that God parted the Red Sea allowing  a bunch of unarmed slaves to pass through, then destroyed the greatest military force on earth, and created Isreal which is evolving today?
4.  What is the probability that God (1) created a God/man, (2) was pleased to see him die on a cross which from man's perspective destroyed his creation, (3) resurected him to eternal life and sharing our lives with us, (4) and creating a church which let's say is a billion souls strong, each made from material totally unacceptable to God, and (5) this church started as a single person (cell) has evolved to today totally acceptable to God and is still evolving.
 
Jason, I don't asking questions like this without having my opinion of the answer, and my answer to question 1 and 2 is 100% if he chose to do so.  Question 3 & 4 is 100% for certain.
I do not think we should ban God from evolution.  Can you think of one reason why he can't use it as a tool?
I enjoy your writings, thanks a lot.
 
Jim Keffer

I replied:

Your questions, each of them, contain many assumptions.

I believe God created the Big Bang about 6000 years ago, so that's a yes/no kind of answer because virtually nobody else believes that, except for an ignored researcher that I've recently discovered who argues that the speed of light was infinitely fast in the past compared to today, as it's slowing down.

There are numerous theological reasons why God did not create animals to evolve.

1.  6000 years is not enough time for the evolutionary theory to work.
2.  There was "no death" before Adam sinned 6000 years ago according to Romans, and after Adam's sin, then death through sin.
3.  Animals reproduce "after their kind" according to the Bible.

That being said, I do believe that that's God's process of natural selection keeps the strongest and most adapted alive, but that keeps strong animals strong, it does not make them into a new kind.

J

=====

Hi Jason
One indirect thing you learn from the Bible is that God talks to Man.
Secondly we can change Reality.
You see sub nuclear force cancels gravity and all becomes nothing.

Another is FAITH. This is a deep spiritual interface with Eternity.
Eternity is where time ceases and 3 dimensional space no longer exists
. more later

In other words  - we can change reality. My wife had a spiral fracture
of her Tibia. (Non slip tennis shoes on a non-slip surface)
It was so shattered they overlapped the shards making
the tibia bone over an inch shorter.
Plus the swivel bones at the ankle were shattered so it was held with
wire, pins,screws,nails.
A year later - and 2 weeks after all the hardware was removed we went
out for dinner with no crutches or anything.
Arriving home a few hours later the ankle was blue and swollen.

As she was happy to be independent she was making a cuppa and me
looking down at her ankle, saw it was blue and swollen.

For months the physiotherapist at Redcliffe hospital (north of Brisbane)
kept saying she has one leg shorter than another. We Ignored the warning.

I got her to sit down and put her leg up in my lap to reduce the swelling.
She said that feels good and put her other foot up too.
Something a wife is allowed to do anytime.

It was a good inch or more longer than the other.
Aligning her knees (done a number of times) we saw why she limped.

Now the Bible says "BEFORE you call I WILL ANSWER".

Was it my love for my wife?  Who knows?
I was about to say "Lord you don't want this to be short" I knew Gods will.
I was about to lay hands on the leg.
BUT BEFORE I COULD DO THESE RITUAL CRAP THINGS
GOD LENGTHENED THE LEG BEFORE OUR EYES IN ABOUT 3 SECONDS.

No pain, no bullshit religious rituals. Just don't tell your church. We were so
reviled the church went from over 380 to about 30 in a few months. The hatred was
unwarranted and we had to leave. Endless preaching against us." We should have
let the pastor do it." Our son who worked the sound system and wanted to stay -
was kicked out of the Christian Outreach Pentecostal Satanic church.
Thank God he is an unbeliever now. Its a first step to God.

MORE NOW
The world is STUCK in Einstein.

Why is the speed of light constant or relative when it is not.???

Why is the speed of light related to time?

What is time?  .It does not exist.

Why is the BIG BANG ?.simple.  it happened in spite of relativity.

So what is God doing?

A  new Heaven and a new Earth.  ?   Of course.

WHY?

Rebellion and evil in the Spirit. This is absolutely abominable in eternity.
God had to show eternal beings the result of rebellion,
I did it MY WAY. Sinatra"s way is the way of the lost.
It would mean eternal evil and destruction.
We are the terminators of it.
We are a race to understand and terminate evil for eternity righteously.
Please understand the reality and importance of free will.
It will never be repeated in eternity. It will be the measure forever.

Have you ever seen a sine wave?  OK so its a joke on us.

NOW  rule a line horizontally  "X"  and call it ZERO SPEED
Through the centre a vertical "Y" axis is "0"  to +/-  infinity - infinite speed
A single sine wave.

At zero zero there is no speed limit. that is 3 dimensions do not exist as all is unity.
In the earliest  exit, the universe expands at just sub infinite speeds The Big Bang.

This continues till the speed limit is infinite at the top of the sine.
This is the maximum size of the universe.
Then it all collapses thru the sine to an anti universe.

However at the inflection point 0,0, .
the speed limit is zero
time is not exist
distance is not exist
3 dimesions is not exist
THIS IS ETERNITY.

then when God is ready

we get the balancing half of the sine wave where .
sin is no more

=====

hi Jason, here I am on  vacation in Park City and reading your report.  I know God exists.  I have my own proof.  For example, "in the mouth of two or more witnesses".  The bible tells about Christ and what he did for us.  He stated He had other sheep (John 10:16).  When he visited them he told them they were the sheep he was talking about 3 Nephi 15 (i think verse 21). 

The Book of Mormon is a 2nd written witness for Christ.  It is a marvelous book of scripture.  I have read it several times and found that the reading of it increases my testimony of Jesus and my desire to do the right thing in my life.  There are many additional testimonies of Christ.  Joseph Smith saw Him and His Father and they spoke to him.  Joseph Smith brought forth (with their help) the Book of Mormon and other scripture and restored Christ's church with apostles and prophets.  That church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the hope of the world today.  No other church is taking the gospel to the world like we are--for example, my 20 year old son is doing that very thing as one of over 50,000 full time missionaries serving for 2 years at personal (not church) expense.  My son Michael is in the Philippines and loves the work.  A miracle takes place in the lives of these young missionaries as they serve.

I really appreciate your courage as an example of the believers.  I am certainly one--a believer. 

Sincerely,

D

=====

Hi Jason,

I have a bit of a problem with your logic. To simplify your argument, it is that life is too improbable to have happened by chance, so you can assume it was created. The leap you make is that it was your God that created the universe (the one from the bible I assume). You could use the same logic to prove how Zeus created life, or how Buddha or aliens or the flying spaghetti monster created life, billions of years ago.

I suppose if you don't believe in evolution, than you believe that the world is 6000 years old, and you can mathematically explain away all the logical problems with Noah's arc, a woman getting created from a rib, a man living in a giant fish, a talking snake, and so on.

If you want to believe in all this, I will certainly not try and convince you otherwise, but you should accept that logic and science are not going to support Christianity. It is faith based, nothing more. There's no way to prove it as true. That doesn't make it false, but it means you need faith to connect the dots.

Keep up the good work with the precious metals stuff (maybe take it easy on the non silver and gold rants)

A

=====

Dear  Jason Hommel
 
I am but a fool
as you have said in a clear way
if I do not agree with you.
but this letter below was one of your best.
 
You are one hell of a mind
and I can see you are terrific on numbers
Probably no one can match you
 
and you are balanced
you know both sides of the story
 
You are very intelligent
and I admire you for your deep thinking.
 
Unfortunately you say if I dont believe
then I am excluded.I am a fool
well If I was that smart I would probably agree
that others were sort of blind
Unfortunately I am deaf.
 
Maybe you won't have time to read my letter to you
But I do have a question.?
why after all your studies
do you suggest god can do anything
without regard to the laws of Physics
and that the whole of the universe was created in 6 days still?
after all your studies?
After all you are a super intelligent human being
are you not?
absolutely !
 
and the next question is
if god and his son did all this creating
why didnt god show up
right after he built it
instead of waiting say 4000 years?
and then with no real knowledge of the cosmos
as one would have expected if he built it
admit it, jesus was pretty old fashioned,
I mean if you can ignore physics
obviously you can go forward in time
a teensy 2010 years and have a better idea of the universe
that he/we had when he was born?
 
Surely if he was the creater he could have written out copies of the bible
right then and there Instead of making us wait till around.
 was it 333 years later.
 
Look I love your maths exercise
it is very convincing
Yet to tell me god can say travel from one end of the cosmos
to the other in no time at all and also create infinite numbers of animals, insects
and people in 6 days.
which means rocks that have been there for millions of years
so that things like oil, gold and silver can be dug up.
 
I'm sure you have the answer but you havent been totally forthcoming
and probably because of your faith.
I have many friends That would feel quite lost without their faith.
Would you be the same?
 
Jason I do want to get some silver rounds someday
I like your logic and powers of reasoning
but at the same time you confound me.
You are fully aware the universe is about 13.5 billion years old
but all your beliefs are based on the written word over the last say 1,700 years
Thats not a lot of star light
The stars in the sky or their glow began a long time ago
And you know all this.an A grader
I really admire your studies.
yet .you are probably not going to like me
you may well hit my kill switch.
I think you are afraid that creation didnt happen by god, a super computer
but if it did only you would be able to calculate how many would be needed
to do the job he has done.and store the information so he wouldn't forget
some of the names.
 
and now my last question
Believing in god
is believing in after life.
correct?
 and so there is heaven for the lucky souls
correct?
So why isnt any name/soul in heaven just yet?
why is it that they can only begin their journey to heaven.
the dead ones of course
when the world expires, breaks up or becomes uninhabitable.
where are all the dead souls waiting and of course building up?
If God can do anything without regard
why not open the gates now ?
 
a million years is a long wait for a lost soul wouldn't you think?
and another billion or two is pushing it for sure.
and also all those souls lost their identity
not jim jack jenny or jason any more
just a soul.
now that is a worry.don't you think?
 
now I am going to paste
a part of a blog on the courier mail today 04/07/2010
that i was reading
I do appreciate how difficult your position must be
sincerely
Stuart f MacDonald.
 
ps."
" Oh hang on, you believe that God manifested himself in human form and killed himself to appease himself, in order to save you from a punishment that he himself imposes, but only if you hear about it and choose to believe it will you be saved, wow, common sense is obviously not an option ".

=====
=====

Jason,
 
As a fellow believer, this could be a valuable tool to share with those who see Christians as the “fools.” Fools is the term you used for those who believe there is no God. Obviously there is no way I can give your missive to someone to read who is, as you put it a “fool,” as you name call in your opine.
 
As a brother wanting to see all given the redemptive message that only Christ can give, can I humbly suggest withholding name calling? I will copy and edit your piece down so that a very intelligent evolution believer I work with will want to read all, not just the first paragraph or two before he is insulted.
 
Grace to you,
 
Jon

Having been on the receiving end of insults from fools for so long, perhaps I have foolishly copied their style.
 
Furthermore, I have copied the style of the Bible, which says, "The fool in his heart says "there is no God".
 
Sincerely,
 
Jason Hommel

You have accurately quoted what David wrote in the psalms, but he did not call those people fools to their faces. This was my point. What you wrote could not win a “fool” to His saving knowledge. David seemed to be pointing out the “fools” had a hardened heart that would not change. As believers, we don’t want a hardened heart towards the non-believers, do we?
 
Consider the verses related to loving others as more important than ourselves, and dying to ourselves daily as Jesus told us. The Christian walk is not easy… if it is, Satan has given the best of lies to that person.
Grace to you,
Jon

My best friend, an unbeliver, once told me, "you lazy sack of shit get it in gear", and I started working out again.
 
If there is no incentive to better yourself, there is no reason to change.
 
They are fools, it's what they are called, and it needs to be pointed out to them, they need to be shamed and humiliated in public if need be if they don't change.  This rebuke rebuked nobody in public.
 
See here:
 
1 Timothy 5:20  Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.
 
If you know anything at all about prophecy, you know that which is coming is far more harsh than little old me calling a fool a fool. 
 
They will ultimately suffer horrible agonies at the hand of God punishing them during the tribulation. 
 
Rev 16:8The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was given power to scorch people with fire. 9They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him.
 
To not warn them would make me guilty before God.
 
Sincerely,
 
Jason Hommel

Enjoy Jason,
 
I do believe in Love, Christ’s love for us and the non-believer, we can point out their foolishness and they will likely reject us and God… or better put, God can point out their foolishness, at which point, if they reject Him, they have rejected their Creator but we can still communicate with them Christ’s message.
 
While the topic is vast, the points you made in your email would not convince someone who has “faith” in evolution at the higher degree. I work with men with acumen that far surpasses average intellect which makes for interesting conversations where never is the word “fool” used out of respect for one another. Dr. Hugh Ross presents arguments far more intricate and more clearly for me, though I liked the math side you presented, thanks. Keep on fighting the good fight in love. Several years ago we had a brief dialogue that covered the same topic, or lack thereof… that being love… which we are told is most important, by Christ.
 
In love “yelling” a point doesn’t make the point right.
Turning people away because of a lack of desire to love them as Christ would; a person will also be accountable for, no?
 
For my personality, type A, I can be exactly as you seem to be demonstrating. I’ve learned that turning God’s truth into a question for the non-believer, allows the Holy Spirit to act in their heart and mind as God puts the thoughts into proper alignment for His glory.
 
Being right can make the two of us “click.” But being right doesn’t always bring people to Christ… especially if we are offending them. Doing what is right can require patience in some cases. Did Jesus call the woman at the well a “fool” for sleeping with everyone? While some would argue she was a fool, Jesus pointed out the hypocrisy of those who wanted to kill her, in their own lives.
In an email blast, we try to reach readers with varying intellect. Maybe if you are going to use the term fools for being anything that does not align with Christ, it might come off as God calling them fools if the verses are presented in a clear way, as what God calls those who believe in evolution… then you are not calling people fools and the message might be better received because it is more accurate.
 
If though the Bible calls them fools, doesn’t mean we call them fools to their faces. I did not receive Christ the first time I heard the message, but several days later. Had I been called a fool for not believing at that fist moment, would have been a poor choice by the other person, and likely would have turned me away from my now Savior.
 
As to prophecy, when do you think the second crossing of the Red Sea will take place? Is 11:11 to the end of the chapter.
Grace to you,
Jon

Thank you for patiently explaining my foolishness. 

In one of the most successful sermons ever, Peter called his audience worse than fools, he called them murderers, and he converted thousands, though the power of the Holy Spirit.

On another occasion, no words were ever said, and a man was converted on the road to Damascus. 

Perhaps I will successfully experiment with making the message more palatable with age, perhaps not.

This weekend, I have been considering how to make the message the most readily acceptable by the human brain.  It seems if you can get your audience laughing with you, then it really sticks the most.  Also, people love to re-tell funny stories.

I understand that how you present something is important.  Very important.  My ten years of writing has surely taught me this.  I also love to see the growth in the success of public speakers who do it regularly, especially with Ron Paul.

But you actually have to have content to express.  This is the "first time" this content has gone out from me to a mass audience.  Obviously, it will be refined as time goes on.

Sincerely,

Jason Hommel

Jon replied:

Blessings Jason,
 
I will continue to learn with and from you then as iron sharpens iron.
 
Grace to you!
J





!