Pro Rege Papers

I just downloaded Firefox 2.0, and it is really cool. It reads parts of this page a tiny bit better, and has other new features, along with a slick new look. Of course, you use about 10 million add-ons with Firefox, including one that I use that shows me the weather forecast on the bottom status bar.

If you haven’t yet tried out Firefox, do so and enjoy. I love it. Internet Explorer is just sludge that reads many pages the wrong way, including this one. For those of you who aren’t going stay up with the times, I am working on fixing the appearance on IE.

Many people say that God isn’t fair because people die or don’t get saved. They say that a good God would not do that to them, since they are fairly good people. They repeat an old phrase that goes something like this, from C.S. Lewis in the Great Divorce:

I always done my best, and I never done nothing wrong. And what I don’t see is why I should be put below…you. … I only want my rights.

In reality though, this is proud thinking that doesn’t acknowledge God for who He is, and man for what we are.

We are sinners who have broken God’s Law that He laid down from the beginning of time. Since He created us, we are bound to obey His law, but we have rebelled against Him. Every person has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. The penalty for this is everlasting condemnation and punishment in Hell, since God cannot stand anyone who is not as holy as He is. That’s a defining aspect of perfect holiness: you cannot stand any sin.

Therefore, we deserve to go to Hell for our sin. That punishment is fair. That punishment is just. The fact that God elects some of us to be saved and go to heaven is by His grace. It is not our right to be saved; it is our right to suffer forever for our disobedience to God.

Let’s think about this for a moment. The Milky Way Galaxy is hundreds of thousands of light years in diameter. The closest galaxy is Andromeda Galaxy, which is 2.5 million light years away. There are millions of these galaxies in the universe, made up of millions of stars that are hundreds of times bigger than our sun, which itself is 1.3 million times as large as the earth. The earth is of course huger than we can even get a grip of ourselves. So why do we, these puny little creatures living on a tiny planet in a humongous universe, think that we can tell God what is and isn’t fair?

That’s something to think about.

World Net Daily interviewed several terrorist leaders this past week, and their comments to WND are insightful in terms who is on which side in the War on Terrorism. World Net Daily interviewed Jihad Jaara, Muhammad Saadi, Abu Abdullah, an Abu Ayman; all leaders of terrorist groups such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and others. They said that they hoped America would vote for the Democrats in the upcoming election, because of that party’s now well-known stance on pulling out of Iraq. This would insure victory for the “resistance” in Iraq (and global jihad), according to the terrorists, apparently trying to draw some type of parallel between the coalition occupation of Iraq and the Nazi occupation of Europe during the ‘40s. They mocked certain Democrats, such as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who think that as soon as the United States pulls out, the insurgency will stop fighting and everything will become peaceful again.

Leading Democrats in office are not answering any calls from the press that are asking for an explanation or comment on the terrorists’ remarks.

But the terrorists and political pundits obviously don’t know United States government too well. Even if the Democrats win Congress, they wouldn’t be able to just order a withdrawal from Iraq on the spot. Those orders have to come from the White House.

Radical Muslims protested yesterday in Iraq at the killing of innocent civilians in an air strike against a terror suspect. Apparently they don’t have a problem with strapping up their young girls with bombs and sending them off to murder innocent Israelis on a bus (killing themselves in the act as well). But when a few innocent Iraqi Muslim civilians accidentally die in an air strike that aimed for a terrorist (who was probably being harbored in the area), they are up in arms protesting with all their might and calling it a war crime (as if they had any sense of international law themselves). That’s just another case of hypocrisy in an irrational religion.

John Kerry made some remarks that I’m sure you’re all aware of, further proving his disloyalty to America, and improving the chances of a Democratic loss on November 7. If you didn’t catch the news, he said that if you don’t do well in school, you end up “stuck” in Iraq. He implied that all or most of our soldiers are uneducated hobos who have nothing else to do because they’re so stupid. He obviously doesn’t realize the fact of the voluntary nature of our military today, along with fact that some people are designed for military career, and have made that choice because they want to serve their country. Kerry, of course, made the fake apology of “I’m sorry that some of you were offended;” and excused his remarks as a “misunderstood joke”. Question: Why does Trent Lott get sacked for making a positive statement at a person’s funeral, but John Kerry gets off free when he insults the entire military service in front of a crowd of bright young students?

America has a clear choice on Tuesday: They can vote for a party that is praised by terrorists and hypocritical fanatics, or they can vote for a party that is constantly vilified by those terrorists and takes its patriotism seriously. Make your choice carefully.

For some reason right now, the template for the main page isn’t working. I have no idea how or why this happened, but I’m working on it.

UPDATE: The template is back online. Temporary glitch there that is fixed now. Sorry for any inconvenience this might have caused you.

I always wanted to say that phrase.

I also made some design changes with the calendar font and bars before each post. If you have any suggestions, feel free to let me know.

UPDATE: Nevermind. Internet Explorer reads the page wrong. Firefox, Opera, and practically every other browser reads the page correctly, but IE puts the posts way down after the sidebar. I hate IE. Everyone, switch to Firefox please.

I watched this NOVA episode last night about the Scablands. The Scablands are an area in eastern Washington that contain unusual geographic features, such as sudden huge potholes, rocks dropped onto the ground randomly, steep drop-off cliffs, and unusual enormous scars. It has been a mystery for years as to how that landscape came about, but now geologists believe they have finally figured it out. They say it was a megaflood in Washington that carved this landscape. According to the theory, a glacier flowed down a mountain until it crossed through a valley in Idaho across the path of the Clark Fork river that was previously flowing through that valley. A huge lake (bigger than Lake Erie and Ontario combined) formed on the 2,000 foot high ice dam, and the water eventually broke through the ice barrier to flow down through eastern Washington in a huge flood miles wide, and hundreds of feet tall. This caused the staggering formations we see today.

They go to great lengths to show us the enormous effects of flood water upon a landscape. They perform tests, and conclude that they have previously underestimated the power of huge catastrophes. (Does this sound familiar yet?)

The program went through the history of what scientists have thought about the origin of the Scablands, and told the story of one man, J. Harlen Bretz, who had the same hypothesis as the modern scientists do. In the 1920s he said that a huge flood had carved out the valley, but he didn’t know where the water had come from. Scientists excused his ideas as crazy, saying that it sounded too much like a “biblical flood”. The narrator even said that Bretz’s views were viewed as “heresy” to geology at the time because of the pervasive view of slow and gradual erosion over millions of years that evolution supports.

These geologists today obviously aren’t putting two and two together. They point out the enormous power of water and what it can do to a landscape. But they deny that a much bigger, more forceful worldwide flood could have done basically the same or slightly larger things. The hypocrisy is funny sometimes. More and more evidence is turning up that massive catastrophes have played a major part in shaping our planet, but geologists still hold to the gradualist evolutionary view of earth history. There’s another PBS show on today, and one next week that both talk about catastrophes causing enormous geographic features.

They also won’t admit clearly that science is deeply wrong sometimes, and they never tie previous errors to the fact that science could be deeply wrong today. I noticed that the geologists of the period quickly dismissed Bretz because of his views of a “biblical” sized flood (which everyone obviously knows is completely impossible). The evolutionary community is dismissing creationism today in the same type of way.
The evolutionists need to consider seemingly “far-fetched” ideas again and look at the world around them. Oh wait, that’s actual science.

The program with the transcript.

This is a topic that I’ve been wanting to write on for a while, and never got around to it. But some prodding came from an anonymous person’s comments on my previous post. He questioned the wisdom of getting involved in the North Korea situation, and apparently holds to isolationist views. You can see his three whole comments on my previous post, along with my complete resonse. I’m only going to post one of his statements that really brought up the question, with my answer (with the latter being larger of course):

I sincerely believe it is not the United State’s job to solve world affairs.

Nor do I. But this state of affairs has been forced upon us by the conditions that we live in today. I firmly believe that the United States should not go around as a police state in the world. However, there are certain cases nowadays (like the nuclear threat from North Korea) where we have to come in and make a stand, whether it’s diplomatically or militarily. Here are a few reasons why:

We were forced into WWII by Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, and the threat of terrible Nazi domination of the world. After that, we were forced into the resulting Cold War because of the power vacuum in Europe and the USSR’s constant threat to blow everyone up, including us. Now that the USSR has fallen, we are left as the only superpower in the world, which leaves us with responsibilities and liabilities that we would not otherwise have if the above events did not happen.

You also have to consider the fact that in the world today we have nukes, long-range missiles and warships, massive armies that can be deployed quickly, and rogue nations with crazy leaders that can do serious damage to many nations, including us.

These two things, history and current technology, inhibit us from pursuing an isolationist policy in the world today.

our getting into other people’s affairs is a direct violation of the Monroe Doctrine

The Monroe Doctrine was just that: the doctrine of a President that he followed that worked well in his day. I believe it is a good idea, but it is impractical in the world today, as I stated above. It is also just a certain foreign policy, not a law.

I think we should do something about North Korea before they become an even more serious threat, which is happening very fast. Not to mention that they already are a fairly serious threat.

I’d really appreciate feedback on these views.

I feel very sorry for the people of South Korea. They are sitting on the other side of the border from a communist rogue state, and their government seems to think that they can support that state unboundedly without consequences. The people are protesting, but they need to do something quickly if they want to keep their national sovereignty. You’ll notice that there is fairly high rate of suicide in South Korea.

The UN isn’t doing anything about the situation. They didn’t do anything when the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea (DPRK) kicked out the UN inspectors prior to their finishing of the nuclear weapon. They haven’t done anything when DPRK has repeatedly been absent at key UN meetings, and if you think that this new resolution that they finally passed is going to do anything, you’re wrong. This resolution comes as a response to North Korea’s recent testing of a nuclear bomb underground. However, it still implies no serious consequences to North Korea for its blatant defiance of international demands, treaties, and regulations. Apparently the UN feels perfectly content to impose on our national sovereignty, but cringes at the prospect of actually laying down the law on rogue nations. This resolution that passed would still be helpful though, if it was actually enforced. But it isn’t.

China is still supplying weapons, technology, food, and other aid to North Korea. This further proves the suspicion that some people have that DPRK is just the proxy of China to see how the Western world responds to a threat. However, you can expect a communist country like China to do that; what you don’t expect is South Korea, the nation most endangered by DPRK, to go easy on them. They are still pouring economic aid into North Korea in the name of friendly steps toward reunification (difference here between Germany and Korea: common people abolishing the divide themselves; and a free government trying to compromise with a rogue state that wants to kill everybody). South Korea continues to operate a resort inside DPRK for their government employees. Both these nations are refusing to abide by the rules set down in the UN resolution. Japan seems to be the only involved country that is actually implementing sanctions in punishment against North Korea. Japan has banned all trade with DPRK, and is stepping up surveillance on the country. However, they did this before the UN resolution was even passed, so it’s not like they are following the UN’s lead.

We need to toughen up on North Korea for its recent threats against the Western world, and show them that they can’t just threaten us and push us around without consequences. It’s not as if they can nuke the USA or possibly even Japan or South Korea currently, and if we take measures now, it will avoid the trap that we will be in when they get more technologically advanced. In the world today, and with the policy that we have already followed, we need to take affirmative action (in foreign relations, not racial matters, mind you).

*Image from World Magazine