Lincoln, Luther, and King

In my opinion, only if Genesis is literal. In that case, a created being made with a free-will must be able to obtain the consequences of its decisions. God did everything he could to prevent the wrong decision: He clearly explained the choice to his creation. He clearly explained the consequences that would occur from making the wrong choice (“On the day you eat of it, dying you shall die”.) And he clearly gave enough other choices so that idle curiosity or boredom weren’t a factor (“You may eat of ANY tree of the garden except one”). The Genesis account is clear that Eve did not take the forbidden fruit out of curiosity or boredom. She was presented with a challenge (which her pristine, fully-engaged mind would readily have recognized), and that challenge clearly would have led her to the logical conclusion, “either this snake is lying to me, or God is lying to me.” So who did she choose to distrust? God or the snake? The temptation was fair, in that it purely tested her faith in G...

Just when human arrogance has reached its height, and mankind's darkness of mind (the belief in evolution as our creator) has all but erased away any acknowledgment of the ingenious works of Jesus the true creator, science produces a new empirical observation that shocks us out of our drunken stupor with such intensity that we must again wrestle with the undeniable fact that we live in a world that was designed. In this case, it's an octopus. An octopus whose eyes are color-blind. An octopus whose eyesight isn't very sharp, even though its eyes are not "backwards" like the eyes of you reading this blog (Hmmm if you can read this blog, then "backwards" eyes must be a pretty good design, right? I'm a mechanical engineer, and my definition of a good design is a design that is functional.) But somehow, this feeble-eyed, color-blind octopus possesses a technology that the U.S. Military would pay billions to have: The ability to change shape, textu...