We have been doing a survey of the attributes of God, and have just begun to talk about God’s attribute of omniscience. We saw last time by looking at the scriptural data that

  1. God knows everything that happens,
  2. God knows the secret thoughts of every individual’s mind,
  3. God knows the future, and
  4. God cannot learn anything, indeed his understanding is infinite.

Then we began to construct a systematic summary of what it means to say that God is omniscient. We saw that typically omniscience is defined in terms of God’s knowledge of all truth – that God knows only and every true proposition and does not believe any false proposition. Therefore, God knows only and all truth. He has all propositional knowledge.

But we saw that even God’s propositional knowledge doesn’t exhaust the excellence of God’s intellectual attributes. We saw that in addition to propositional knowledge there is also a kind of self-knowledge that is non-propositional in character and that can only be accessed by each individual person himself. God has not only all propositional knowledge but he also has appropriate self-knowledge, appropriate non-propositional knowledge, as well. He knows “I am the creator of the universe,” “I have sent my Son Jesus to die on the cross for the sins of humanity,” and so forth. Finally, we saw that even having all propositional and appropriate non-propositional knowledge doesn’t exhaust God’s cognitive excellence. God has his knowledge innately. He doesn’t learn or acquire his knowledge from anybody else. Rather, God simply has as an essential attribute the property of knowing only and all truth. So God’s cognitive greatness exceeds even omniscience which is truly to me a breathtaking and startling affirmation.


There are Changing facts in this world, but the bible say that God Cannot change his mind, explain

Right. Now, I would qualify that in this sense. That doesn’t mean that God’s knowledge is changeless necessarily because if there are changing facts – for example, what time it is now, like it is now ten-to-twelve – well, God would know what time it is now if God is in time. So in that sense his knowledge could be changing but what I meant is that he doesn’t acquire his knowledge from anybody else. The minute there is something that is true, God knows it. He doesn’t learn it or acquire it from some other source.

Why does God’s knowledge Change with time?

Only in the sense, as I say, that if you think that God is in time that he would know, “It is now nine-to-twelve, it is now eight-minutes-to-twelve, it is now seven-minutes-to-twelve.” Then he would know “it was nine-minutes-to-twelve, it was eight-minutes-to-twelve, it was seven-minutes-to-twelve” as time goes by. So in that sense his knowledge could be changing, but it wouldn’t be as though there was something of which he was ignorant. Let’s put it this way. There would not be any truth of which God is ignorant at any time. That is what we could say.

Nothing Surprises God

Right. There are no real surprises, and there are no truths of which God is ignorant.

Why all these places where God Changes his mind?

Answer: There are several places in the Scripture where you have these stories that are told where it appears that God acquires new knowledge that he did not know or that he changes his mind. For example, the story of Abraham and Isaac – when Abraham is ready to sacrifice Isaac, God stops him and says, “Now I know that your heart is truly devoted to me.” Or God tells Jonah to go to Nineveh and say yet in forty days Nineveh will be destroyed. But then the people repent and so God doesn’t destroy Nineveh. Or another example would be God’s prophesy to Hezekiah where he says in fifteen days you will die. Hezekiah prays and asks God to extend his life. So God repents of what he was going to do to Hezekiah and extends his life and he doesn’t die in fifteen days. I think what we encounter here is a sort of fundamental principle of biblical interpretation, and that is what we could call the didactic portions of Scripture (that is to say the teaching or the doctrinal portions of Scripture) control what we can call the anecdotal portions of Scripture. You primarily do your doctrine based upon what is explicit teaching of Scripture. We’ve seen that Scripture teaches that God has foreknowledge of the future. It even has a whole vocabulary in the New Testament for foreknowledge – prognosis. There is a whole series of these words with this prefix pro: prognosis – foreknowledge, proorizo – foreordained, proorao – foresee, proereo – foretell. So the didactic or the teaching portions of Scripture are very clear that God has foreknowledge.

So when you come to these anecdotal stories where God says to Abraham, “Now I know Abraham that you are faithful to me” or he says to Hezekiah, “Alright I will extend your life longer even though I said you would die in fifteen days,” you have to interpret these anecdotal portions in light of the didactic portions rather than the didactic portions in light of the anecdotal ones. I think what this means is these anecdotal passages where it appears God doesn’t foreknow the future are stories told from the human point of view.

It is very interesting that the Bible is not a book of theology, especially not philosophical theology. It is a book of stories. It tells stories about people’s relations with God – his actions and interactions with them. It is the story of the people of Israel and then of Jesus in the New Testament. These stories are told from the human perspective. So they have all of the color and vividness of a human storyteller. So I think the storyteller will tell it in such a way from the human point of view that God says to Abraham, “Yes, now I know that you are faithful to me.” Well, I think God knew that all along but he was testing Abraham to show Abraham’s true medal so to speak. I think God knew that Hezekiah would pray and so God would extend his life, but he tells Hezekiah “Yet fifteen days you are going to die” so Hezekiah will, say, pray and seek the Lord’s face. So I think that these anecdotal portions need to be understood in light of the didactic portions as simply stories that are told from a human point of view.

This is also born out by other passages where you have very anthropomorphic descriptions of God, that is to say, God is described in human terms. For example we saw cases where it speaks about the face of the Lord or the arm of the Lord was with them or God’s hand was upon them. Those aren’t literal. Those are metaphorical. So you have to not let these anecdotal stories control clear teaching of doctrine. That would be how I would handle those kinds of passages.

Now even if you do not agree with my description, we are yet to talk about the hypothetical knowledge of God. You can say that God foreknew that if Hezekiah did not pray, that there CERTAINLY existed a world line, where Hezekiah actually dies in 15 days. In physics, its knows as Everettes Many World Interpretation, but here in theological call, we call it, God’s hypothetical knowledge and God foreknows which subjuntive counterfactual will be realised.

Does God know about all lies as well?

I think you are correct in what you said. The question was, “Does God know about all lies as well?” When I say that God knows all truth, what I mean is that God believes every truth with 100% degree certainty. To some extent the notion of understanding the propositional order comes out. Consider this logically; if I said, “Can you have your cake and eat it?” The answer is yes – a cake can be given to you in your hand and you can eat it. But still thinking about this logically, if I asked again, “Can you eat your cakle and have it?” Well, the answer is “No”. For once you have eaten your cake, you cannot have it, but what you can have is a vomit lol. That was a small demonstration of But if I a Clearly he doesn’t believe lies. He doesn’t believe falsehoods. But he knows about them. For example, take some falsehood – “Pastor Mrs Adewoyin is a male.” It is true that that statement is false. Well, God knows that truth. God knows the truth that this is a false statement. See what I mean? So in that sense, yes, God knows all lies, he knows all falsehoods, in the sense that he knows that they are false and that it is true that they are false. or you can say that it is false that, that statment is true. But saying this does not necessarily mena that God now knows a falsehood. You could just say that it is true that God knows that it is false that, that statement is true. This is why I define a proposition as Syntax + Semantic. You need to watch the order of the formation of your information; that is why it is called “in-formation”. It’s all about the proporsitions. But apply Occam’s Razor, we can avoid an unnecessarily ad-infinitum over explanatin of the truth by merely pointing out the necessary explanations that aims to communicate knowledge to the recepient. So in knowing all truth he would be aware of everything that is false, but he doesn’t believe the falsehoods as he believes the truths as explained above.

So God knows the actual-hypothetical (or worldline subjunctive counterfactuals) of telling lies?

Right. He would know the truth of the consequences of lies. He would know that because of this lie these consequences will ensue because it is true that those consequences will ensue.

What is God’s Hypothetical Knowledge and doesnt this erode free will?

We are going to talk about this later – what I am going to call God’s hypothetical knowledge. In other words, what I think you are saying is this: God know that if Abraham were to be tested in this way he would sacrifice Isaac. But by actually putting Abraham through the process God can say, “Now I know that you actually do this thing.” In a sense, he is actualizing the situation which he knew would come about. Is that what you are saying?

 Yes, I think that is true. It is testing Abraham and showing Abraham’s true faith. But I think all along God knew what Abraham would do in response to that test. There are 2 responses that come out from this and this is one of the reasons I was afraid to teach theological class. This is because if I am not careful of the way that I teach you, I can be in serious trouble. The bible says that teachers would be held to a higher standard.

  1. Granting that God’s foreknowledge has no bearing on my freewill, Why has God chosen to put me in this his foreknowledge when there are better hypothetical worldlines he could have dropped me in?
    • God kept Abraham under a test that Abraham passed (Gen 22:12)
    • God spoke to Moses in such a way that Moses asked God knows HE will not to destroy Israel (Exo 32:10)
    • God spoke to Hezekiah in such a way HE knows that Hezekiah will pray and choose life (Isa 28:1-8)
    • God speaks to Pharaoh in such a way that pharaoh’s heart is hardened (Exo 7:3, 9:12, 14:4)

      In fact, it seems like God, being all-intelligent, being omniscient, is able to choose and know what your freewill is going to be and HE is cable of keeping you places where HE get’s HIS outcome. Well, this is not true – not all of the outcome in this universe is God’s desired outcome, just becuase God foreknows somethngs does not mean that HE is powerless to change it or that HE desires it. God allows things to happen that are not of HIS desire. God tells us to choose between life and death but earnest desires that we choose life.

      I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: _Deuteronomy 30:19

  2. Another emotional argument could be made that God is all-loving (omnibenevolent) and why would loving Father choose this kind of world where HE foreknows that someone will go to hell – such as hitler – and still allow them, by not putting them in situations that will make sure that they pass the test. This arguments assumes that God can make all situation favourable towards you, and that you will still choose HIM. This arguemnt fails to recognise Lucifer. Lucifer was put in all the best situation and still chose to sin. There are definitely people that God foreknows will sin despite all the best situations arranged for them. This is an arguemnt that actually reinforces human freewill.

Some logical Problems of Divine Omniscience

Let me go ahead to talk about two problems that are related to divine omniscience. I wanted to recommend some resources to you if you are interested in these topics. The first one is this book The Only Wise God which is on the compatibility of divine foreknowledge and human freedom, then this little booklet from RZIM called What Does God Know? which is on the same topic. If you are interested in seeing a debate on this whole issue of God’s foreknowledge of humans’ free acts, here is a book published by InterVarsity Press called Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views which has four different positions laid out on God’s knowledge of future free acts of human beings. So those three are available if you are interested.

The first issue we want to talk about is the compatibility of divine foreknowledge and human freedom. If God knows everything in advance that will happen – if God knows every choice that you will ever make – then isn’t everything fated to occur? For example, if God knows in advance that Peter will deny Christ three times before the cock crows then isn’t it necessary that Peter denies Christ three times before the cock crows. Given that God’s knowledge is infallible – that God is never wrong – that prophesy cannot be mistaken. It is true. Given that Jesus has said, “You will deny me three times” isn’t it necessary that Peter denies Christ three times? How could he do anything else? And if he does it necessarily then how does Peter do it freely? Isn’t it incompatible with Peter’s freedom? So doesn’t God’s foreknowledge of the future annihilate human freedom?

In response to this problem, some Christians would agree with this. They would say that by virtue of foreknowing future acts of people, God in effect foreordains them. So on this view (which was held by people like Jonathan Edwards, for example) foreknowledge equals foreordination.[3] Simply by knowing that something will happen, that thing is foreordained to happen and therefore human freedom is effectively removed. On this basis, even the fall of man into sin was foreordained by God. It was necessary and predestined.

This view however not only removes human freedom but it also rests very uncomfortably with the idea that God is the author of sin. God is not the author of evil, yet on this view it would seem that by foreknowing Adam’s fall into sin that God in effect foreordained it. Really, sin is the result of not Adam’s choice but God’s choice, which I think ought to make all of us somewhat uncomfortable with this view.

Rather, I think a better response to this problem is to deny this equivalence. To say that foreknowledge does not equal foreordination. I think it is better to say that God knows in advance what choices people will freely make and that the free decisions of human beings determine what foreknowledge God has of them rather than the reverse. The foreknowledge doesn’t determine the free decisions. Rather, the free decisions in effect determine the foreknowledge.

Here we can distinguish between what we might call chronological priority and logical priority. Chronological priority would mean that one thing comes earlier in time than something else. God’s knowledge is chronologically prior to the event that he foreknows. But logically speaking the event is prior to God’s foreknowledge. So God’s foreknowledge is chronologically prior to the event but the event is logically prior to the foreknowledge. In other words, the event doesn’t happen because God foreknows it; God foreknows it because it will happen. You see, the event is logically prior to the foreknowledge. He foreknows it because it will happen even though the knowledge is chronologically prior to the event that God foreknows.

So foreknowledge on this view would be sort of like foreshadowing of something. When you see the shadow of someone coming around the corner – you see their shadow on the ground before you see the person – you know that person is about to come around the corner. But the shadow doesn’t determine the person, right? It is the person who throws the shadow, who determines the shadow. Foreknowledge is sort of like the shadow – the foreshadow – of future events as it were. By seeing this foreshadowing you know the events that will happen, but the shadow doesn’t determine what the reality is. It is the reality that determines the shadow. So if you think of God’s foreknowledge as sort of the foreshadowing of things to come, I think you can see that just because God knows something will happen doesn’t mean that therefore that foreknowledge in any way prejudices or removes the freedom of that event that will happen. In fact, if the events were to happen differently then God’s foreknowledge would have been different.

One way to think about this (again to try to give you an illustration) is that God’s foreknowledge is like an infallible barometer of the weather. Whatever the barometer says, because it is infallible, you know what the weather will be like. But the barometer doesn’t determine the weather, right? The weather determines the barometer. God’s foreknowledge is like an infallible barometer of the future. It lets you know what the future is going to be but it doesn’t in any way constrain the future. The future can happen however free agents want it to happen, but you just can’t escape this infallible barometer – God’s foreknowledge – tracking which ever direction the future will take.

So those who think that God’s foreknowledge serves to remove human freedom, I think, are simply quite mistaken. They posit a constraint upon human choices which is really quite unintelligible. Let me just give you an illustration. [Dr. Craig draws a diagram on the board] Suppose we have a time line and let’s mark some event E on the time line for the sake of argument. Let’s suppose God is back in time, and by his knowledge he foreknows that E will happen.[4] Will we let this dotted line represent God’s knowledge. God knows that E will happen. Well, let’s suppose that E is a totally uncaused event; maybe it is the decay of a radioactive isotope or something on the subatomic level. It is an uncaused event; it is not causally determined. How does God’s merely knowing about E in any way constrain E’s happening? How can God, simply knowing that E will occur, make E occur as it was? If you were to have erased the line and say God doesn’t have foreknowledge of the future, how has anything changed? How would E be affected if you erased God’s foreknowledge of it? It seems E would just occur quite the same. It wouldn’t effect anything. So the presence of God’s foreknowledge simply doesn’t prejudice anything about whether E will occur or not.

So it seems to me that those who think that foreknowledge is incompatible with freedom are simply quite mistaken about it. What we simply need to understand with respect to something foreknown by God, say E, is this: if E were not to occur then God would not have foreknown E. As long as that statement is true and E can occur or not occur then God’s foreknowledge simply doesn’t prejudice anything with respect to E’s occurrence.


Question: [inaudible]

Answer: Right. It would mean that God permitted it to occur but he didn’t foreordain it and that it was the result of Adam’s own free choice. Adam had the ability to sin or not to sin. It was entirely within Adam’s freedom to sin or not sin. So the Fall isn’t necessary on this view. On the other view, the Fall was necessary. But on this view the Fall is not necessary, but God would just know which ever way Adam would choose and permitted it. That gets into a different question about why would God permit sin but it doesn’t make God the author of sin and it doesn’t remove human freedom, which is what we are talking about right now.

Question: Is this middle knowledge?

Answer: No, it is not. This is just foreknowledge of the future, and whether or not God’s foreknowing what will happen somehow robs us of freedom. That is the question we are dealing with here.

Question: [inaudible]

Answer: I think it is. Jonathan Edwards, the great American theologian, believed that foreknowledge implied foreordination, but hardly anybody else did. Augustine didn’t think so; Aquinas didn’t think so, Boethius didn’t think so. Even Luther, who has a very strong view of God’s sovereignty, thought that the reason we are not free isn’t because of God’s foreknowledge but because of his providence – that God makes everything happen. Same with Calvin. The Protestant Reformers believed that everything happened under God’s sovereign control. But it wasn’t just because he knew what would happen that everything happened necessarily. For Luther and Calvin, it is because God providentially orders and ordains everything to happen that it happens necessarily. But there is scarcely anybody, I think, who thinks that just by knowing about the future the future is somehow fated to occur. Edwards would be one of the rare exceptions, I think.

Question: [inaudible]

Answer: Right. I don’t mean to imply that someone like a Jonathan Edwards would say, therefore, human beings are not free. What he would do is redefine freedom to make it compatible with being determined.[5]But I am using freedom here in a sense that is incompatible with being determined. We are not quibbling over the semantics of freedom. We just want to ask, “Is everything determined because God knows about it in advance?”

Question: [inaudible]

Answer: All right. Notice that all I have said here is that foreknowledge is not synonymous with foreordination. But that doesn’t mean that foreordination doesn’t exist. It could be that Calvin and Luther are right, that everything is foreordained and therefore everything happens necessarily. All I am arguing is this very limited and modest conclusion: foreordination doesn’t follow from or isn’t synonymous with foreknowledge. Now, we will have to talk about foreordination later on. Does God, in fact, predestine or foreordain everything to happen? That is a different and independent question. You are quite right that the Scripture does have a very strong sense of God’s sovereignty and foreordination. But what I am arguing against is just this limited question that arises in the context of God’s omniscience that some people think that if God is omniscient, if he knows the future, then everything is deterministic. The bottom line of this is that that conclusion is so unpalatable that there is a whole new school of theology arising within evangelicalism called “open theism” which on this basis denies God’s foreknowledge of the future. Open theists like Gregory Boyd or William Hasker or John Sanders says that because foreknowledge would imply foreordination and therefore deny human freedom God must not have foreknowledge. So this whole new movement in evangelical theology has arisen denying God’s foreknowledge of the future and therefore denying God’s omniscience. I think that is a very serious theological mistake because omniscience is one of the perfections of God. Therefore if God isn’t omniscient it means he is imperfect. He is ignorant of truth. There are an infinite number of truths that God doesn’t know.

Question: [inaudible]

Answer: I think what you could say is that everything that is deterministic causally could be inferred by God on the basis of present causes. He knows that E1 causes E2 and E2 causes E3 and then E3 would cause E4. So if everything is causally determined then on the basis of his knowledge of the present God could infer the future. You will remember Pierre-Simon Laplace’s statement in response to Napoleon who said “Where is God in your physics?” Laplace said, “Sire, I have no need of that hypothesis.” Because Laplace claimed that given knowledge of the present and all of Newton’s Laws he could predict everything that would happen and everything that had happened in the universe. So a deterministic universe you could know simply by knowing the present and knowing all the causal effects. But we are talking here about events that are not determined, that are free choices, or if there is indeterminacy on a quantum level, something like that.

Question: [inaudible]

Answer: I would have to look at that passage again more closely. In any case, we will talk about God’s permissive will versus his directive will. It could well be that a passage like the sparrow falling to the ground without your Father’s will would speak of God’s permission – that he allows this to happen – rather than he makes the sparrow fall to the ground. That gets into foreordination that we will look at again later.[6]

Question: [inaudible]

Answer: No. I denied that. The question is, “Did I say that Adam’s free will made the Fall necessary?” No, I was denying that. Because of Adam’s free will, the Fall is not necessary. Whereas on the view that if God knows about it in advance then it is necessary that would make the Fall necessary because God would know about it in advance and therefore the Fall would be necessary. But on this view it isn’t.

This has real interesting implications, some of which are discussed in the book The Only Wise God. It means that I have the ability to act in such a way that if I were to act in that way the past would have been different. Say God knows that I will lift this paper up in the next second. By refraining from lifting it up I could act in such a way that God’s knowledge in the past was different than it was. It has the same sort of implications that time travel would have. The time traveler has the ability to act in such a way that if he were to act in such a way the past would have been different than what it really is. That is the same with foreknowledge and free choices. It is an interesting conundrum but I think it is quite reasonable given that God is omniscient.

Question: [inaudible]

Answer: I don’t think that that is too intimately connected here. Dispensational theology does believe that God deals with human persons in different ways in different eras. But I don’ t think it has anything to do with this notion that I have the ability to act in such a way now that if I were to act in that way then the past would have been different. I don’t think that that is what it is affirming. That is really quite a different subject, I think, this idea of dispensationalism. So let’s just leave that one aside.

Question: [inaudible]

Answer: It is true that the past is constant in the sense that the past cannot be changed. But in the same sense, the future cannot be changed. The question is whether or not you can determine freely what the future will be, or whether or not you can determine what the past has been. I would say that if God has foreknowledge then you can do things, say, at E4 that will, because of God’s foreknowledge, bring about things here in the past at E1. For example, suppose God knows that if Pilate were the governor of Judea and Jesus were delivered up to Pilate that Pilate would send him to the cross. Well, because God knows that he ordains back here that Pilate will be born at a certain time and place in history and will rise to power and become the procurator in Judea, and so forth. Pilate has the ability here not to send Jesus to the cross. He could say, “No, I’m going to let him go free. I am going to send Barabbas to the cross instead.” Maybe if Pilate were to act in that way, God would not have had him be born at this time and place and become procurator. Maybe he would have had somebody else. So Pilate has the ability to act in such a way that, depending on how he would act, the past would have been different perhaps because of God’s foreknowledge, which is really strange! It is really strange. But I think that it makes sense once you have a God who has foreknowledge of the future. But what it doesn’t do is it doesn’t remove human freedom. Pilate here has the freedom to send Christ to the cross or to let Jesus go. It is up to Pilate. But he just can’t escape this infallible barometer back there knowing which way he would choose.

Let me go ahead and introduce the next problem then.[7] This is the problem of what I call God’s hypothetical knowledge. A lot of times people will ask the question, “Why did God create the world if he knew it would be such a mess?” Why did he do it if he knew it was going to come out like this? What this question raises is a very important distinction between foreknowledge and hypothetical knowledge. Foreknowledge is knowledge of what will happen in the future. What I am calling hypothetical knowledge is his knowledge of what would happen if something else were the case. So foreknowledge is what will happen, but hypothetical knowledge is his knowledge of what would happen if something else were the case.

These are quite distinct. Foreknowledge would give God knowledge of everything that will actually happen in the future, but hypothetical knowledge would be knowledge of what would happen if something were to occur. For example, does God know what would have happened if Barry Goldwater had been elected president in 1964? Does he know what would happen if Hillary Clinton were elected president in 2008? Does he know what would happen if George Bush were elected president in 2004? These are questions not about foreknowledge but about what would happen – hypothetical knowledge of what would happen – if something else were the case.

These are quite different because in the case of foreknowledge, if God knows that something is future then by definition it will happen. If it is a future event then it will happen. So it wouldn’t make any sense to say, “If God knows that this is in the future – if God knows this will happen – then why doesn’t he intervene to stop it?” See, it wouldn’t make any sense because if he intervened to stop it it wouldn’t be in the future, it wouldn’t be what will happen. So given that he knows it will happen, it doesn’t make any sense to ask why doesn’t he intervene to stop it.

The issue here is really hypothetical knowledge. If God knew this would happen under such and such circumstances then why didn’t he intervene to stop it? Do you see? The issue is not foreknowledge, it is hypothetical knowledge. If he knows something will happen then that already implies he doesn’t intervene to stop it otherwise it wouldn’t be the future. It is really hypothetical knowledge – he knows it would happen so why doesn’t he intervene to stop it?

I think one of the greatest illustrations of this is in Charles Dickens’ wonderful story The Christmas Carol. When Scrooge is confronted with the Spirit of Christmas-Yet-To-Come, the Spirit shows Scrooge all of these horrible things – Tiny Tim’s death, Scrooge’s own grave – and Scrooge is so shaken by these visions, these shadows, he falls at the Spirit’s feet and he says, “Tell me Spirit, are these shadows of things that will be, or are these shadows of things that might be only?” Now, what the Spirit was showing Scrooge was not shadows of things that will be. We know from the end of the story that Tiny Tim does not die, that Scrooge repents. So the Spirit was not showing Scrooge shadows or visions of things that will be. He wasn’t showing him the future. That is clear. But neither was he showing Scrooge merely things that might happen. He wasn’t showing Scrooge just possibilities. Anything is possible. Scrooge might have opened a flower shop in Coven Garden. That is possible. What the Spirit was showing Scrooge was hypothetical knowledge of what would happen if Scrooge were not to repent. That is what he was giving him. He wasn’t giving him foreknowledge of the future; rather, the Spirit was imparting this hypothetical knowledge of what would happen if Scrooge were not to repent.

The question we want to ask ourselves is: does God have this kind of hypothetical knowledge? Did God have hypothetical knowledge that if he were to create Adam and Eve and this sort of universe that it would turn out this way so that God could be held responsible and we could say that if God knew it was going to be this bad why did he create the world this way? Does God have hypothetical knowledge of how things would turn out if such and such were the case. That is the question that we want to raise, and that is the question we will address next time.[8]


7 Ways To Become a Better Negotiator


You can become a better negotiator. Why does this matter? Well, let’s just say that by following these techniques and starting to implement these in your life,

  • you’re going to save money.
  • You’re going to save time.
  • You’re going to really save a lot of your scarce resources when you’re out there and
  • you’re not afraid to start using this stuff.

It’s true that there are a lot of myths out there, a lot of misconceptions, and I’m going to try to give you some timeless, proven techniques so that you can become a better negotiator.

Most People Aren’t Very Good At Negotiations

Image result for Most People Aren't Very Good At Negotiations

The number one thing you need to understand about negotiations is that most people aren’t very good at it. Why does this matter? Because if you understand that, you realize that by making a small investment in upping your negotiation skills, you’re going to be able…

View original post 1,912 more words


You Are Not Alone – Manuscripts of God – Inspirational Bible Verses

Darrell Creswell - A Study of Christian Grace

God Philippians 2 13 you are not alone

The more “spiritual” that I think I become, the more I realize that the less spiritual I really am.

Allowing God to teach us to grow helps us realize how vulnerable that we really are. It is in realizing this that we must simply give everything over to God and quit struggling to do things on our own. God requests nothing special of any one of us. He requests nothing we are to do by ourselves, and nothing that we are to do without Him. He with His blood atonement is both the work and feeling.

It does not matter what the situation is; if your marriage is a disaster; if you are broke and jobless, or if you feel as if you are standing on the edge of a cliff – feeling like you want to jump. There is no situation that you can encounter that He is not…

View original post 450 more words


Response to “I Stopped Believing In God After Pastoring A Megachurch” Buzzfeed

The Domain for Truth

There’s a video titled “I Stopped Believing In God After Pastoring A Megachurch” that went viral posted by Buzzfeed.

The original video is here:

I wanted to write a response but I see there’s no need to reinvent the wheel since there’s a Christian video response already out there:

I thought the response did a good job pointing out the incorrect transactional model of God that led this “pastor” to atheism.  But that’s not the Gospel nor biblical Christianity.

For those interested in the past I wrote a post titled Apostasy and a Biblical View of Life’s “Problems”

View original post


Christianity and Tattoos

What does the bible say about tattoos? On the one hand, we see in Leveiticus 19:28 that Tattoos are vehemently disallowed in the bible. On the other hand, we see places where God/ Jesus seems to have a tattoo (Revelations 19:16, Isaiah 49:16). So what is happening here?

There are several answers to this:

  • no! Tattoos are bad! …. well, are they that bad? What of those who were not christians in those days and then got a tattoo and after that, then they became a convert into Christianity. Are they not allowed to be Christians anymore because they have tattoos? Are they to be labelled as “fake christians” just because they have tattoos? … I do not think that this is the way that we should treat other Christians who have a tattoo. But are we also going to discourage others from having tattoos? Well, this is the subject we’re going to discuss about today.

Here in the @rccgpal, we do not advise that tattoos are acceptable. For because of how “in the grey areas” this doctrine of tattoos are, it is better to stay far away from what seems to be sin than to toy with it. We do not want to use the liberty by whihc God has saved us by to willfully commit a sin.

However, we also believe in the distinction between God’s Grace and God’s Law. In the Law of Moses, we know that Tattoos are wrong. So what of outside the Law of Moses? What of other nations that have tattoos as a culture? What of other Tribes and Cultures that tattoo such as the traditional people of New Zealand? How does Church Syncretism work in this case?

Image result for new zealand haka tattoo

This is why I am referring to a denominational solution. Let God talk to you. Let HIM tell you if tattoos are alright for you or not. Tattoos or no tattoos will not make you miss your salvation in heaven. People go to hell for not believeing in Jesus, for not having faith in Jesus, not because they have or not-have a tattoo.


Christian Laziness VS Christian Rest

Over the past few months – if not years – I have noticed in myself the presence of work, a lot of work, and hard work. Work that seems so insane to do – that requires a lot of skills and quick thinking. For example, moving things away from the Church, regulating people together so that they are able to work well and produce a desired outcome – to move towards a common goal.

One of the biggest challenges facing @rccgpal right now is looking a place of worship for ourselves right now – and we are marching forward and doing that by the special Grace of God in Jesus’ Name. But I want to point out my appreciation of all those who have worked with me – Go bless you all in Jesus’ Name. In this article, Titlted Christian Laziness VS Rest. There is a very thin line here. The thin line is in obeying

Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

Hebrews 4:11

and then

He who has a slack hand becomes poor,
But the hand of the diligent makes rich.
He who gathers in summer is a wise son;
He who sleeps in harvest is a son who causes shame.”

Proverbs 10:4-5

And sometimes, under this dispensation of Grace, one may need to find the middle ground between “resting” and “not being lazy”. When you rest, as a Christian, because you have the Grace of God there with you, helping you and seeing you through out your life, you have peace, true peace in your heart. But that does not mean that you ‘re not going about doing meaningful things to the glory of God. It may as well mean that you’re working very hard. For example consider Lionel Messi secret to success in football

He knows how to balance out the complexity of having a calm mind and being agile at the same time. So it is with we Christians too. We need to be able to balance out havign a clam mind with being agile. I know that theb confusion is that there is a thin line between being “not lazy” and then “restful” and striking out that balanace is very important.

Jesus was full of rest HIMSELF – even though HE was alwasy going about working. Many people wanted to hear HIM speak. Many people wanted a piece of HIS healiong action – it was so much for HIM that many times, Jesus had to sneak out in a peaceful part of the dark to go and pray to HIS Father because HE had to.

We too, we should endeavour to be not-lazy, to be hardworking, while maintaining our rest at the same time. That way, we can achieve so much, keep on burning for Jesus and never burn out.


Social Media and Church Growth

Image result for Social Media and Church Growth

Social Media and Church Growth is very important for Churches to have. We @rccgpal believe in the utilisation of social media, or ANY KIND OF MEDIA to propagate the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. I mean, we just want you to hear it, to hear HIM – HE must be heard, seen, related to… by any means necessary.

Social Media Belongs to God

We do understand that the devil is trying to use social media to lure in our Children. We hate this. We do not want this. We reject it in Jesus’ Name. But just like sex, we know that God created social media because HE, HIMSELF, is the very foundation of “socail”. God is social. God looked at Adam and said:

The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

Genesis 2:18 NIV
Image result for trinity

And by that same logic, God is Good. If God is Good, then God is not alone. This is what is seen in the complexity of what we know as the Trinity which likewise fits very much, very well into the philosophical idea of “love”. Love, by definition, if it is primarily selfish, is not really love. So, God loves HIMSELF, but not primarily. The Truest sense of the word for love and how God loves, is that the Father Loves the Son and Spirit; the Son loves the Father and Spirit and the Spirit Loves the Father and Son. Love, by philosophical attribution, at a primary fundamental level, is always outward to another subject. Hence, this is what makes God, on a fundamental level, to be to be a Social Being. This is why I said that God is social.

This is why I believe that God wants us to be social. God wants us to grow our sphere of social influence as big as possible because we are Christians. This is why the bible says

For all creation [κτίσεως (ktiseōs) ] is waiting eagerly for that future day when God will reveal who his children really are. 

Romans 8:19 NLT

The bible tells us that all creation is waiting eagerly for that future day where God will reveal you, HIS Child. And Jesus told us:

And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation [κτίσεως ( ktisei ) ].

Mark 16:15 ESV

The greek words ktisei and ktisei both form from the same originative greek word ktisis which means creation (the act or the product). In essence, God is sending us to all and sundry with HIS message. I always say, “If it has been created, then preach to it“. Living and non-living. Even the earth too needs you to preach to her. Bless this earth, say that the boundary lines of this earth will fall for you in pleasant places (Pslam 16:6). Say that you will eat the Good of the land (Isaiah 1:19). You need to get into a habit of preaching to yourself too, of preaching to inanimate earth too and of preaching to all and sundry in the social world of men.

So how does social media help? Well, for one, you can ADD prudence to your physical movement – that is, you can add a virtual movement. As said earlier, the devil wants to take over the earth, the earth does not belong to the devil. The devil wants to take over social media, social media does not belong to the devil. What belongs to the devil? Nothing! The devil is a liar, thief and murderer (John 10:10). All keys – authorities have been given to Jesus (Matthew 16:19). So, this uis what makes me believe that SOCIAL MEDIA BELONGS TO JESUS – Not the Devil.

Ecclesiology and Social Media

So, how can social medai be used in our Ecclesiology? Well, the word “social” connotates some sort of complexity. There is no “one size fits all in socialising”. As much as socailising indicates “relationship”, “interacting”; The people of Japan would not want us to relate to them as we would, the people of china. And neither would the people of China require us to interact with them as we would, the people of Zimbabwe. You see, everyone is different. And even in those “national groups”… not every individual is the same when interactingf with them. Eveyone has their own individual backgrounds. This is why the bible says:

The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and he that winneth souls is wise.

Proverbs 11:30 KJV

It takes the wisdom of the Holy Spirit to win a soul. And its not just winning souls in terms of bringing them to a saving/ repenting knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is also, winning souls in the present continuous tense … going on and on, today, tomorrow and forever. That’s how you show that the wisdom of God is with you – hey! even if you do not show it, the wisdom of God is STILL with you – have faith 🙂

How does interacting with and relating to people on social media actually help church growth? As we learnt in one of our theological classes titled: Incorporeality and Omniscience, we saw that

persons are the locus of value whether these be the divine persons of the Trinity or human persons created in God’s image. Persons are the locus of value. Therefore, one single person is worth more than all of the material universe combined. Think of that. That means that you as an individual person are worth more than the entire material universe in God’s economy. Things have value only insofar as they serve the purposes of persons; only insofar as they are useful to persons…. 

Persons are the locus of value. And the more we relate with other people, the more we bring out values. This is how the secular world works especially in capitalism and currencies. However, we are a chosen people, a royal priesthood who believes in the ideals of God’s economy. We are the ones who are supposed to know how to do social media very well – not worldly people.

Now we know that people are complicated and people are qunique and different. There are people that no matter what you do, you will never be able to be on good terms with them. There are those that you don’t even have to try, you find out that you just magically click. IT TAKES THE WISDOM OF GOD TO DEAL WITH PERSONS. When you know this, you will stay in the presence of Jesus. In fact, there are many things that Jesus has taught us that really helps us to deal with people.

  • turn the other cheek
  • go the extra mile
  • bless those who curse you etc

we know that dealing with people in the ideal ways that Jesus has taught is not gonna be easy expecially towards many kinds of people. That is why a matured person is a people-person. People are not robots, they are spirits. Knowing how to deal with one is key and it takes the help of the Holy Spirit.

Sometimes, to get the best out of people, you have to show them Grace, sometimes, you have to show them law. All in all, you have to be ready to deal with people, pass with some, fail with some, the joyful with some and be frustrated with some – all of them can be seen on the spectrum from non-christians to christians all alike. But, yes, you still have to deal with people in God’s kingdom.

Socialising is the Key to Church Growth

So, since people are very important, and people who own businesses will tell you this too. How do they affect the ecclesiology of Church growth in the general sense?

  1. For one, you can’t ignore people. Specifically, you can ignore certain kinds of people but generally, you can’t.
  2. Secondly, there are many otherchurches around us, it is important that we, as a Church, get into their motions too. Let their struggles be our struggles and let their celebration be our own celebration too.
  3. Thirdly, it is impotant to build each other up. Joyce Meyer alwasy says something: “If you’re struggling with Joy, go make someone else joyful, stop concentrating on yourself.” I also remember a story of a minister who saw people in hell. They were given very long spoons and told to eat from a pot of soup that would sustain them. All of them kept trying to eat for themselves and they were hungry, frustrated, starving and dieing in hell. The minister was later shown in this vision anoter room where the same criteria was given to these people but rather than feeding themselves, their own ego, they decided to humbly feed each other. The moral of the story is that, we Churches need to learn to feed each other because the work that God has given us, for us to grow, is too big (or too long) for us to only better ourselves with.

Pride of the Adult Christian

The pride of the Adult Christian is something that has been noticed to be evident insome Christians. There are many people who have reportedly left christianity becaue of the activities of other Christians who are said to have been Christians long before these ‘others’ fall out. The fallout-christian either becomes a nominal christian or a degenerated christian – and by degenerate, I’m using a theological lingo and not merely an insulting one.

What is it with Adult Christians that gives them so much pride and how is it that this prode is used to oppress many othe Christians.

Characteristics of the Adult Christian

  1. This Christian may know the bible inside and outside
  2. This Christian may know all the lingo used in the church
  3. This Christians knows how to get their way with the bible/ scripture either physically or spiritually
  4. The know all the expert-nuances of being a christian in such a way that they can divide essence from superficial parts.

However, there is nothing more terrifying than an Adult Christian, who had developed great familiarity with Jesus, to become prideful. For a Christian, an Adult Christian to become prideful, such christian would seem to have been “spoilt” … like a spoilt child growing up. What happened? Did Jesus not discipline him enough? Or did this Christian enter into social power too quickly? For example, imagine becoming a Christian and you havent spent more than 1 year being a new Christian and you have already been given a place of authority in the Church. This is not nice. There are many Christians like this and it is suffocating many other Christians, especially shaking christians and baby christians.

How do you recognise a Prideful Christian? He/ She may not even know that they are proud in the first place. It may be that they have a wagging finger always laying burdens on other Christians. This is what Jesus said concerning the Pharisees

They pile heavy burdens on people’s shoulders and won’t lift a finger to help.

Matthew 23:4

If you find that your fellow Christian is always giving you so much law – do this, do that, if not, you’re not a real christian. If you find out that they are not skillfully abound grace towards you, it may just be that they are a prideful adult christian.

Everything they do is just to show off in front of others. They even make a big show of wearing Scripture verses on their foreheads and arms, and they wear big tassels for everyone to see.

Matthew 23:5

If you find out that their Christian values seem to be very different in their private lives and yet, they expect/ demand a higher double standard from you, then they are a prideful adult Christian.

They love the best seats at banquets and the front seats in the meeting places. 

Matthew 23:6

If they like to be highly esteemed by you so that you reverence and fear them- for any reason. Maybe they were your mentor. Maybe they prayed for you for deliverance regarding certain things and you go well. Maybe. But that does not mean that they should lord it over you. I know that there is space for respect. But respect is earned in humility. You need the kind of humble adult Christian who says, “I know I spent sleepless nights praying and fasting for you, but I am not going to make you, nor me, nor anyone for that matter, make me prideful.” This is the hallmark of an balanaced adult Christian.

This is one of the reason why Daddy G.O. always says that “Pastor” is the highest position in the Redeemed Christian Church of God. If you want anyother boastful title, then go somewhere else.

You Pharisees and teachers of the Law of Moses are in for trouble! You’re nothing but show-offs. You travel over land and sea to win one follower. And when you have done so, you make that person twice as fit for hell as you are.

Matthew 23:15

Lastly, the hallmark of prideful Christian is that they do not understand the Grace of God. They only understand the Law of Moses – and after finally oppressing new converts, they make them twice as fit for hell than they are.

Please, be ware of prideful Adult Christians who want to make you admit that they know all, they could never be wrong and who oppress you without Grace. And if you are one yourself, search your heart. Ask the Holy Spirit where you may be failing. And get yourself connect back to your Heavenly Father who loves you very much in all humility and Grace.

God bless you


Rape Jokes – Are they alright?


This is a very disorientating question to inquire into. From one perspective, in our woke, politically correct culture, rape jokes seem to be the devil’s liquor. Of course, can anyone still see the hidden irony in that? Aren’t there people who would love the drink of the devil ‘s liquor? like, for real? I know I’m a Christian and I do not drink but this is the essence of the argument that I am making

One Man’s poison is another man’s food

One Man’s trash is another man’s treasure

Quote (1)

Isnt this the spirit behind multiculturalism? Isnt this the spirit behing diversity? So, what is happening here? Isn’t diversity our strength anymore? I know I do not believe that diversity is our strength but those who pander this rhethric always say this. So why the change of heart all of a sudden?

Look! Consider this:

See the source image

There are people in…

View original post 585 more words


RCCGPAL and Our Stance on Abortion – the real neoHalocaust ideology

Many of you know that this is a Church. RCCG stands for “The Redeemed Christian Church of God”. The mere fact that you see “Christian” and “Church” in the same context brings in all sorts of connotations as to what “box” or “group” you’re going to put this Church into. It is very important that we make our stance very clear. The head of this Church, Pastor Trude Adewoyin, has made it very clear the kind of spirit that she wants to bring about in @rccgpal: It is a spirit of Grace – one that does not attack muslims, atheists, norminal Christians or non-affiliated people. So it is important to know that all views expressed here are the views of the authour, me. I am the one who is researching and finding out what I personally believe @rcccgpal stands for in terms of abortion laws.

Surely, as a Church, and seeing that this is a very sensitive topic, we would like to stay quiet over broadcasting this on our News/ Blogs but rather quietly tell you and let you know should you be be to be so interested in what our stance actually is. @rccgpal is a chruch that encourages dialogue; we agree. we disagree and agree-to-disagree on vrious matters of theology, ecclesiology and evangelism. We recognise and appreciate that despite the seemingly simplicity of life, interacting in the social world of freewilled men put a lot of complexity in reality. So we encourage everyone’s uniquness as long as they do not believe to violate what we believe to be core values of what we stand for.

So, from whence cometh this issue of abortion? and why is it becoming more and more important to take a stand on it? Why is it that the abortion debate is becoming more and more polarised and we, as a church, cannot remain anymore silent on it. Well, it is because we are a Church and we believe that the government alone cannot deal with this issue. If you’ve had your ears pilled on the news nowadays, you would have noticed that the states of Georgia, Missouri and Alabama in the United States of America has come under great backlash and scrutiny over their abortion laws. This is somewhat of a conundrum because because the abortion laws are not as absolute as the mainstream media wants you to believe. They virtually never seem to attack the matter itself.

You virtually never hear of news positioned in a way that gets you an education on what the Abortion laws actually say. It would seem that in this age and generation, the news organisation have found out that people care more about what celebrities say in their #YouKnowMe hashtag abortion story movement than what the Truth actually says. This is why I like what Candance Owens says in her video: Dear Celebrities: No One Cares What You Think

And I think she did a balanced job onthat. Others may say, “Its not the fault of the mainstream media companies as they are dying out with President Donald Trump coining the word #FakeNews – other new independent journalism have seem to have arisen and people would rather trust others who were there, who personally recorded videos on twitter, snapchat and facebook regarding the situation. The Mainstream media is being trusted less and less nowadays to actually tell the truth or display the “spirit” of the Truth in Good Faith and not just go for clickbaits. Well, we will see how far that will take them.

Back to the matter of abortion – in our outrage culture, there are people who are sensitised by facts or people who are sensitised by feelings on a case by case basis. At the heart of the matter, the laws over abortion is not a logical fact – who cares if a few babies die – people die in this world all the time. The laws of abortion are an emotional argument primarily, followed by the secondary consistency or coherence of good logic. This is not a political left vs. right issue because there are people on both parts of the political spectrum who favour abortion on many different bipartisan issues.  

This is rather a Moral issue. And in a world run mad by moral relativism, we have to fight for what our moral conscience tells us

So where does @rccgpal stand on this issue of abortion? Simply, we abhor abortion. We hate it so much – in every sense of the word.

Now I earlier spoke about the abortion laws and I can tell you that those abortion laws we hear of from the USA are not absolute. They are limited. The abortion laws say that if you can detect a heart beat in the baby, it is illegal FOR THE DOCTOR to abort that baby – even if you did it in another state and came back to that state, if you get caught, you would be prosecuted and may face jail time. The exceptions include where the baby poses a serious threat to the life of the mother.

The New York late abortion laws as seen in the video above, go on to prove that this “exception” can be stretched to mean a lot of things. It does not mean “fatal” risk to the mother but could mean “mental” risk to the mother and one should be careful about this.

So, why is this such a controversial issue? Well there are several arguments I want to debunk:

Limits on Abortion equals More illegal/ unsafe Abortions

This is for the most case, most probably true – and it is logical in the sense of the propositoin.

  • if you make abortion illegal, abortion becomes illegal
  • people who want to abort, will surely abort one way or the other – and this could involve unsafe means

So this argument is still sensible. Give or take, a little under 30% of any given population of preganancies will result in an abortion. That is 3 in every 10 people. One of the contributing factors to abortion being so low is the fact of contraception, condomns, counselling and, in essence, family planning. But here is the issue we are trying to solve for:

Do abortion laws help stop abortions? What good are they for?

When does life begin?

This is the elephant in the room and the whole reason for this blog/ news. We, @rccgpal, wholly believe that human life begins at conception. And I believe that law makers have had their conscience woken up by many prolife advocates incluing ex abortion clinc director Abby Johnson

Abby Johnson says that NO ABORTION is safe because a human life with a beating heart has to die. She calls pro-abortion people to seek healing while calling abortion a “NEW LOW”. She also likens abortion to the Nazi Halocaust.

So what good do restrictive abortions laws do to a society? Well, this is the message: IF YOU WANT TO KILL YOUR BABY, DO IT YOURSELF, NO DOCTOR WILL HELP YOU. Isn’t it funny how facebook, youtube, twitter etc will censor an abortion proceedure taking place? There is a greusome technique in killing your pregnancy and the abortion laws do not care for your pro-choice bluff that you would kill your own baby yourself in an unsafe way. You want to kill your baby, do it with your own hands – bloody your hands, see what you are doing, let your conscience prick you – you deserve to see the consequences of your actions … whether you were raped or not. There is no need to get a doctor involved to take away the gruesome consequencies of your actions from you.

Abortion is not a right. ASSUMING for arguemnts sake that abortion was actually a woman’s right, why are is my tax money used to fund it?

  • Freedom speech is a right but the Government does not pay me to speak, create a website or write a book.
  • Freedom of religion is a right but the Governement does not pay my church to assemble, to open find a permananet site and gorw.

So why does my tax money go towards abortion? I am a Christian and I do not want to be complicit in your uterus decisions. Also, there is a double standard here. You’d normally hear the rhethoric from prochoicers, “Keep your politics/ laws out of my uterus” or “Stay out of my vagina”. These things are common knowledge happening nowadays. Well, if you don’t want my politics in your uterus, then am I free to tax away my tax money away from your uterus too? Abrotion should be highly expensive and rare … and if you still wanna do it, bloody your own hands, not mine.

Rape Victims

Now there are people who would say that @rccgpal is taking an unfair stance in this situation and there are people who are victims of rape. However, it is not the victims of rape who have to pay for this. The baby who has a heartbeat by approximately 6 weeks and 6 days. The bible says in Ezekiel 18:20

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

The child is not the father, so why should ANOTHER VICTIM pay for the sins of the choices of the Father? This is what the horrible father wants. Because he knows that if you keep this baby, one day, as they say in africa, the rooster will come back home to roost. I believe the children will condemn the father if my tax does not do anything in the state. I believe that the state should not kill any rapist too quickly. I believe that rapist should be put into FORCED HARD labour for many years to pay for the welfare of the child till an age where the child becomes independent. During while the mother can give the thumbs-up to the state if the man should be castrated. After which the independent-child and mother can choose if the rapist father should be released or put to death. This is how strong my stance is regarding rape. But I also feel like: IT IS A TERRIBLE MISTAKE TO LET THE CHILD PAY FOR THE SINS OF THE FATHER.

There are many children that exist today who are the products of rape – I would never call the a “sin of their father”. As a Christian, I believe that they are unique, cherished and blessed children of God – infinitely loved.

Other Bad ProChoice Arguments

  1. The Child could have a horrible life because of my finances. I do not believe that a child is raised individually. It takes a community to raise a child. Now I know that I am in the UK and I look at what’s happening in the US sometimes but I realsie that there are other countries out there too. So, even if you do not have the government to help you, there is the community, there are charities, there are churches etc. If finances is an issue for you, I do not think you should let your child die without a good fight. This rebuttal also applies if you feel shame over having a baby and your family does not approve; there are other people and charities you can run to. I am confident that there will always be help out there.
  2. The Child could have a horrible life because he would have come out with complications in health or be deformed and I do not want him to suffer in life. Now who are you to dictate the future of another human being? Who knows if the quirk of your child is needed to bring about a great world change like find a solutin to cancer or find a solution to longer life up to 300 years old? Or maybe if there would be solutions in the future that may cure your child. Well… either way, even if you win this bet and your child would suffer, that argument does not ‘carry on’ to everyuy other person who are having horrible conditions in life – when is it ever ok to kill another human being because they have a horrible condition? NEVER
  3. The child is dependent on the mother and it is the mother’s choice: There are many other children – OUTSIDE THE WOMB – who are still dependent on their mothers. If we stay consistent with this logic, is it ever ok to kill another human being just because they are dependent on the mother?
  4. Its just a bundle of cells and cannot be considerd human when in the womb: Now who is to say that being outside a womb magically makes you a human? This is the same horrible rationale that has birthed New Yorks late abortion laws. If the child is just a bundle of cells, you know what else is technically a bundle of cells? You. You too are a bundle of cells. This child has a unique DNA that is not the mother’s DNA.
  5. It is the woman’s choice: Well, does the child get a choice in this matter? And who is to say the child cannot choose? You can choose! You just don’t have the standard level of communication to find out if a child wants to be alive. Well, here’s a psychology theory: Maslow’s Hierachy of Needs” which shows that even a “simple cell” reacts to simple pain in such a way as to counter the pain.
  6. If there are any other prochoice abotion arguments you know, tell them… apart from killing a child just because it poses a fatal threat to the life of the other.
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

Future Steps Against Abortion

As a Christian, I believe that there are things we can do in the future to fight abortion. There are artificial wombs being researched on that I think every Christian should invest in. You don’t want your child? Don’t worry, we will take care of him/ her for you and make sure they get adopted into a more loving and competent home – being pregnant is not your fault, wanting to kill your preganancy, I will not fund, that one, is your sin and your fault. There are all sorts of eschatological consequences to this technology especially if it falls into tyrannical/ satanic hands but if it could stop the killing of more people, I will surely invest in this.

I urge you to continue to pray against abortion. A country that kills its children, kills its future and I do not want my tax money going to that to make me complicit in going to hell because I fear God. Kill your own child yourrself and erode your conscience in a false sense of self-liberation.

Hope for Abortionist

There is hope in Jesus if you have had an abortion or if you have aborted a child. Many of you Christians need a little bit of faith. Grow with Jesus, Get to know HIM. HE said,

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Isaiah 1:18

Your heavenly Father wants to be at peace with you. HE loves you. There is so much grace and help available as you fight in this your good fight of faith.

This has been me exploring the views of @rccgpal as an institution and not as members. Members who may have a different point of view may discuss them continually with ourselves. More Grace to you all. I pray that the Lord Jesus keeps you free from all sin and writes your life story in a very beautiful way. God be with you .