And The Nails Went In...

© 2013 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved


An innocent man, never lied, cheated, stole;
nothing was there to place the blame on Him,
yet, there it was. In their mouths, in their
eyes, on their skin.

They blamed Him for their fear, the loss of pride,
their growing dissatisfaction with their place
in society and in the grandiosity
of their own minds.

He came in love, peace, with truth on his
lips of laughing kindness, gentleness, healing.
And yet, they couldn't believe, accept, leave
their places of power.

So they accused; falsely, but that didn't matter,
for they were the judges and false judges
with false charges, their own choices make:
right and wrong gone.

Judged, He judged not. Condemned, He condemned not.
Slapped, beaten, mocked, whipped and whipped
and whipped again. Till flesh left bone and blood
dripped, ran down torn flesh.

Crowned and forced to carry the cross of
His own mechanism of torture and death and
stumbling, could not complete that task,
another forced to help.

Golgotha gained, his muscles strained as arms stretched
so wide. And the nails went in, one hammer stroke
at a time. Pounding, pounding, ripping, tearing,
spreading bone, not breaking.

They nailed his feet, his hands and stood the cross
up to hold him, as he struggled through the pain of
torn flesh, nailed hands. And breath came in bursts
of pain and anguish.

"Father, forgive them!" He cried through it all,
no mention of punishment, no cry to damn them
as He struggled to cry out, forgiveness He gave
as they gambled for his clothes.

And as His breath came harder in rasps, He
saw there His mother, and gave her away, to
ensure her future and her care. He saw those who
had put him there.

Still struggling to breathe His last breaths, lift up
and gasp, piercing pain on the nails, the nails that
went in, and He for us paid the price
the price of our sin.

In heaven, GOD the Father looked away, as our sin piled on
the Son He loved so much more, but they both had agreed,
before earth was made and we were here,
that this was the price we were worth.

"Eloi! Eloi! Lama sa-bach thani?" Father, why have you
forsaken me? His heart broke as the separation -- the full price
was paid, and then a whisper, "It is finished." and the only One
without sin, died covered in ours.

Thus is the story of this Eastertide. A story of love
and betrayal, of judgment without truth, of forgiveness
where none was deserved. Three days later,
the story complete,

Christ rose, nail scars still there, as Thomas can attest,
and His resurrection brought us final rest. For now we can
spend eternity in His Father's house, where none of us really
deserve to be.

As you celebrate this Eastertide, remember the Reason,
remember the price. 'Tis not just the death, nor just return
to life. But the thirty-three years, without sin; perfect,
obedient, God's Son.

And the nails went in...


© 2013 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved

My Theory: All “Atheists” Believe in God

Could all “atheists” actually believe in God? Could it be that all their posturing, lawsuits, speeches, science, press releases and Madalyn Murray O’Hairs really belie their true beliefs? Startling to think that this could be true, but consider the evidence.

First: their chosen designation: “atheist”. The term atheism originated from the Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god". The “a” from the Greek meaning "without" or "not", and “theos” from God. So, an “a-theist” would be someone who is “not” God or “without” God (that “not” part is a given). If there is no God, then why include the idea of him in their name? Why not just say “pagan” (heathen: a person who does not acknowledge your god), why include the idea of a god within the label of someone who does not believe in nor accept gods? That’s like saying “I am anti-baseball, but my name is Baseball.”

Second: If they don’t believe in God, why do they spend so much effort, time, money and breath denying His existence? After all, you don’t see them fighting the idea of the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, or the existence of leprechauns, do you? They don’t believe in those entities so they don’t fight the idea of their existence. However, with God, they spend millions of dollars on lawsuits, thousands of man hours, print reams of paper in books and pamphlets, post hundreds of thousands of atheism pages on the internet, and put in appearances on television and radio shows in order to deny the existence of someone they don’t believe in. If they don’t believe in Him, why the effort? Why spend so much money on Him? The more they protest the more they show how much they are worried about Him and the more they prove their belief. Why not ignore the issue as they do with the existence of Sasquatch or Tinkerbell if they do not believe?

Third: If atheists believe in medicine and science (and only medicine and science) why do they not consider that belief in God? After all, they prove His existence, do they not? Consider that medical science is always making discoveries on how things work with our bodies, and how miraculous they really are, and that is a sign of God. Evolution goes simplest to most complex, and tries not to get complex. With our bodies, we can see evidence of God in how they work, what makes them tick and in the ways that – miraculously – we are healed. Medicine cannot account for the kinds of miracles seen in the human body’s recovery, spontaneous remission of diseases, or in other things that human bodies do. They can neither explain them, nor deny them. God in action in the atheist’s belief in medicine.

Fourth: Science – besides medical science -- is constantly making new discoveries, finding the answers to new questions. Quantum physics (as did other fields of study) led to new laws that science’s observation, testing and deducing proved to be there. Did their discovery make those rules’ existence come about? No. Their discovery – their finding – simply proved that they already existed. Somehow, those rules of quantum physics, chaos theory, and fluid dynamics already existed before they were found by scientists. Those rules didn’t just pop into existence out of nothing. Did they “evolve” or were they pre-programmed by an intelligent designer who knew how things work?

Atheists believe that science will disprove God and they believe in science, yet all of science’s work (whether they admit it or not) proves the existence of God. To wit: If the universe, solar system, life, "evolved", then what happened to make it "evolve"? Wouldn’t there be some sort of need for evolution, according to the atheistic ideal of Darwin’s theory of evolution? Survival of the fittest would not suffice in an universe of nothingness, void and without form. What would be the catalyst for evolution? If the universe developed purely out of randomness and these rules were not in play before the process started, then what put the rules into place? Was it the randomness that suddenly found order and the rules followed out of already existing order from randomness? Can that happen that without the rules in place the rules develop themselves? Fact is that chaos (randomness) can develop into some semblance of order, but the rules were there first to make it so, just as scientists finding those rules made the rules already there, and not the discovery of those rules birth the rules’ existence. Therefore, science has proven the rules – rules that make scientific and mathematical sense – were in existence prior to the formation of the universe. Therefore, intelligent design (it must be intelligent design for the rules to make sense) is responsible for the rules and thus, God existed prior to the universe’s existence.

Some of you would argue that last sentence, I know. But watch the videos here and and continued here and tell me that the rules were not there prior to scientific discovery. Science didn’t write the rules. Man didn’t come up with them and enforce them. If they weren’t done by man they had to have been done by God.

"But, wait!" some cry. "Nature could have done it itself!" The belief that there is no God demands the belief that nature had to have made all of the rules itself, but how did that come about? How did nature’s pre-universe (as we know it), pre-earth (as historically represented via Pangaea, etc.) pre-evolution (into humans) decide to write its own rules? Random atoms floating somewhere in darkness and tumult, banging into each other, floating without rules and without purpose, evolved order without outside interference? Random atoms chose of their own free will to cooperate, to lump together, to go in a certain direction at the same time, to change their physical and chemical characteristics and become something that – by chance and by random association – would become a universe, solar system, planet that would not only develop all of this out of nothingness, but also be capable of sustaining life as we know it? It not only sustains life, but it creates life out of non-life: a breathless (in any way, shape or form), non-eating, form without a heartbeat of any sort, without any sign of life whatsoever was created by this randomness and became suddenly alive. Alive in the sense of the scientific sense of the word: Life: (noun) "the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally." In the atheists’ world, randomness evolved into life, without interference of an intelligent being.

Fifth: Not only that, but all this randomness evolved into homo sapiens, humans as we know them. Just as Darwin described, atheists believe it to have been. Darwinism defies belief in God because we were not created, we evolved. Apes and protozoa and all of that; we came from nothing and to nothing we return. That’s all there is to it. Therefore there can be no God because there is no creation. That sort of thinking proves nothing. Saying that the existence of “X” always disproves the existence of “Y” is erroneous: they could co-exist, could they not? I do not believe in evolution as Darwin set it forth and others expounded upon. There are way too many problems with it and there is within the scientific community still disagreement on it. (Read more on that at Evolution Guy.) That being said, if any sort of evolution did occur, who is to say that God did not make that happen as well? The atheist’s insistence that God is not real because Darwin is, may just as well prove that God exists because things are happening in an orderly, intelligently designed fashion. Therefore, Darwin’s Theory – or a modified version thereof – may very well be a confirmation of God’s design and of His creative hand in the “evolution” of man. Atheists believe in God in that way, too.

Considering all of this, no matter which way you slice it, it seems to me that atheists are not atheists, but theists in disguise. They may profess that they do not believe in the God of the Bible, or the God of Islam, or in any particular god, but everything they profess faith in either proves the God of the Bible or at the very least does not disprove Him. Their own actions – which speak louder than their words – prove they are afraid of and don’t want God to exist. If I am correct and there is a God that we must answer to, then atheists have a lot to answer for as do Christians. The question is: Theists all, or just afraid of God?

© 2010 Linda McKinney All Rights Reserved