top of page


In all spheres of life we must always deal with reality, and not try to defend the indefensible by attempting to support unproven ideas with conjecture, imagination and speculation. Still, there are many people who consider themselves as highly advanced creatures because they can see the potentiality of potential, and can speculate for hours over mere potentialities rather than deal with absolute facts. Science claims one of two things: either the universe came from nothing, or that an unexplainable occurrence such as the Big Bang is the source of all things. Others, called Theistic Evolutionists, try to merge Creation with the Big Bang theory saying God started everything by a Big Bang, and then allowed this alleged phenomenon to take care of all the creating via evolution. That everything originated from nothing is still the popular theory among scientists who miserably fail to explain the origin of this amazing thing called nothing from which everything finds its origin. Imagine actually believing the madness that all which exists finds its origin in all that does not exist! Have you ever tried to make something from that which does not exist? How would you even begin to even think of how you could attempt such a feat? How could one ever locate that which does not exist in order to make something else which does not exist into something which does exist? Did all this order we see around us come from meaningless disorder which just spontaneously, conveniently, appeared out of nothing, with no source and for no reason, and yet, with a purpose? Yes? Well then, where did the disorder come from? What is its origin? If order came from nothing, or from chaos, then where did disorder come from? Every established law has an origin and a reason. You cannot have things proceeding from scientific law, and yet, scientific law proceeding from nothing. There are many convenient ‘truths’ which people refuse to relinquish despite copious amounts of evidence which contradicts those convenient ‘truths’. Winston Churchill once commented: “Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened”. Order cannot come from chaos, otherwise even chaos would have a pattern of some sort, an order to it, and would, therefore, not be chaos. Chaos would not be chaos if there was any order to it. If there was some order, some pattern to chaos, you would not only have to call it something else, it would be something else. “Hurricanes do not build cities. Floods do not plant fields. Earthquakes do not make paved roads.” Random chaos does not produce order. “The universe necessarily has (consistent, reliable) order. If everything were random, there would be no regularity or structure whatsoever, and no universe (or universal laws) as such. In fact, the universe could be defined as order. This is why the Greeks called it cosmos, which means ‘order’ and ‘world’ because the ancient Greeks (from whom western civilization comes) believed that the world was perfectly harmonious and impeccably put in order.”

“…in physics, nothing physical could exist prior to the beginning point (indeed there is no ‘prior to the beginning point’ because there is no physical time). Secondly, if the physical universe (and its physical time) did not exist prior to the beginning, then it was literally nothing. It is important to note that ‘nothing’ means ‘nothing’. It does not mean a ‘vacuum’ or ‘a low energy state of a quantum field’, ‘empty space’, or other real things. Vacuums, empty space, and low energy states in quantum fields are dimensional and orientable – they have specific characteristics and parameters, but ‘nothing’ is not dimensional or orientable, and it does not have any specific characteristics or parameters because it is nothing. For example, you can have more or less of a vacuum or empty space, but you cannot have more or less of nothing because nothing is nothing. Thirdly, nothing can do only nothing, because it is nothing. To imply the contrary is to make nothing into something. The classical expression is right: ‘from nothing, only nothing comes’. Fourthly, if nothing can’t do anything, then it certainly cannot create anything. Thus, when the universe was nothing, it could not have created itself (made itself into something) when it was nothing, because when it was nothing, it could only do nothing. Finally, if the universe could not have made itself into something when it was nothing, then something else would have had to have made the universe into something when it was nothing, and that ‘something else’ would have to be completely transcendent (completely independent of the universe and beyond it). This transcendent (and independent) creative force beyond our universe (and its space-time asymmetry) is generally termed ‘a Creator’. Therefore, a beginning in physics implies a transcendent powerful creative force (i.e., a ‘Creator’).” This is one reason why scientists love the ‘everything came from nothing’ theory because nothing has no origin, and, therefore, no source. So, rather than believe in a Creator God, science prefers to turn to nothing as the maker of all things. Yes, folks, can you believe that there are real people out there who believe that nothing is the creator of everything! Can you believe the insanity of refusing to believe in a Creator God, but embracing the lie that nothing whatsoever is the creator!

Every erroneous answer to an equation makes sense to someone, especially if it is ‘supported’ by a wrong method of calculation. Miscalculation can only ever lead to erroneous answers, but if that flawed process is all that a person knows, is all a person can see, or wants to see, they will only ever see the answers their misjudgement provides as nothing but true and correct. Worse still, they will only ever see the truth as error as long as they hold to their flawed methods of calculation. What everyone who holds to a wrong answer has in common is the fact that none of them have, or will ever have, the right answer because, none of them have used the right and proper method of calculation. It is important to note that a flawed method of calculation is not one which differs from the standard method, but one which leads to error. If you have a room filled with 100 four year old children and you ask them the question ‘How much is 7.25 x 8 to the power of 12 – 14 + 18.7 ÷ 3, how many different answers do you think you are you going to get? One hundred. You will not get one right answer because the children do not know how to reach the only right answer because they do not know, have never been taught, or are ignoring the proper method of calculation. You get one hundred wrong answers because the children simply do not know the truth.  They will all arrive at a wrong answer because they have all travelled the wrong road of improper method. But does all this mean there is no right answer? Do the miscalculations and improper mathematical methods of the ignorant which only lead to incorrect answers offer one iota of proof that no one can ever arrive at the only correct answer? Or that there is no correct answer? Of course not. If a proper, provable method is adopted one will always and only arrive at the correct answer. If one has a clear view of all the facts, and the knowledge of how to correctly decipher them, one will always arrive at the truth. As long as a person uses the correct method of calculation, one will not only know what the correct answer is, but also why it is the correct answer, and why every other answer is evidence of an erroneous method of calculation. Ignorance obscures one’s view of that which is real, of that which is truth, and leaves one with only an imagined reality, an imagined truth. People have different answers because they are looking at different pictures, or only part of the same picture, because they are in possession of conflicting information as well as diametrically opposing methods of processing that information. The insane makes logical sense to those whose knowledge is not only limited, but also flawed. The insane, or those who are just plain wrong, share a common trait: they do not believe what they believe because they believe it to be wrong, but because they are convinced it is right. Just about any answer has the potential to make sense to one who does not understand the subject matter.


One cannot arrive at the correct answer by using a faulty calculator, or by feeding a perfectly functioning calculator, the wrong information. To illustrate this point I present the reader with the following analogy: The old Vaudeville comedians Abbott and Costello came up with a comic routine that explains all this perfectly. Costello claimed that 13 multiplied by 7 equals 28. Of this he was certain, sincerely and vehemently convinced. In an effort to prove his claim correct he proceeded to write the number 13 on a blackboard and directly under the 3 wrote the number 7. So far so good. Then, he proceeded to multiply the 3 by 7 which equalled 21, and promptly wrote that number down. Subsequent to this, Costello multiplied the 1 (from the number 13) by 7 which makes 7. He then wrote the number 7 directly under the 21. Adding the two numbers, 21 and 7, his solution was 7 x 13 = 28. Far from convinced, his partner, Abbott, in an attempt to prove his buddy wrong, and arrive at the correct answer, told Costello to write down the number 13, seven times. After doing this Abbott began adding the column of threes together: "3,6,9,12,15,18,21", after which Costello quickly joined in finishing off the count by adding the ones to the 21: "22,23,24,25,26,27,28". Having proven his calculation correct, to his own satisfaction, Costello confidently walked away with not just one, but two ways he can ‘prove’ that 7 multiplied by 13 equals 28. For Costello, these two witnesses assured him he was incontestably correct in his calculations. This is precisely the same way Satan confuses man, and leads him astray in matters spiritual. Change the proper method of arriving at truth, feed on the wrong information, and/or wrongly interpreted information, and you will arrive at anything but the truth. Abbott not only knew the truth, but in the light which only truth can provide, he was also able to see, know and understand why Costello could not possibly be right. Costello, on the other hand, was simply blinded by error, believing it to be truth. Truth will always expose error, but error can only ever reveal itself. PRECLUDE THE TRUTH, AND ERROR WILL MAKE SENSE. Nonsense makes perfect sense to those who have no sense of what the truth is.

Order is all around us. There is order in the universe, there is order in nature, order in our lives and even in our own bodies. “Every organic body expresses the law of order.” “Until something goes wrong, we often don’t think about the incredible way all the systems and organs of our bodies work together flawlessly. Nerves and muscles, bones and tissues, our heart and brain and lungs, eyes and ears—all these things and hundreds more—are seamlessly connected into a functioning, healthy human person. Thousands of years ago, the psalmist pondered the intricate way his body was put together and exclaimed to God, ‘I will praise Thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are Thy works…’ (Psa. 139:14).” Every day, scientists are discovering that the wide variety of heavenly bodies has a purpose, that there is a reason for the existence of everything in the universe, and that nothing exists because of any randomness, or by some form of nonsensical, meaningless chance. Everything that exists has an origin, and therefore, a source. If an origin there must also be a reason, and if a reason there must be a purpose for, and a cause behind everything, including the origin of the universe, and, therefore, everything in it. Chaos can come from order, but order cannot come from chaos. One can put the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle which has fallen onto the floor together again (order from chaos), but one cannot logically expect to wildly toss the finished puzzle into the air and have all the pieces land perfectly into position (order from chaos). Chaos can come from order, but no order can be produced by chaos. As Leonardo Da Vinci once said, “Everything connects to everything else”. Everything leads to something else. If everything connects to everything else then surely there must be an ultimate single Source, One Who is behind the connecting, otherwise there would be no orderly pattern to life, no sense or real meaning to the connections. Darwin identified this single source, wrongly labelling it by his preferred phrase “descent with modification”. While not using the term evolution, Darwin did use the term ‘evolve’ “…though only once, in his book ‘The Origin of Species’ (1859)”. “Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) ‘descent with modification’. That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival—a process known as ‘natural selection’.” The mad theory that one creature evolves into another is torn to shreds by the fact that everything produces after its own kind. Monkeys do not produce human beings, but only monkeys. Likewise, humans do not produce Llamas, but only other humans. If there is connection there is continuation, a constant and consistent theme running through everything and everyone. It’s called the Will and Creative power of God. Everything in the universe points to and leads to a Creator God. Many people have no problem with this. Most do believe in a Higher Being, or Higher Power. The overwhelming failure of mankind, however, which highlights its sinful nature, is the fact that most do not know Who exactly that Higher Being, or Higher Power, is, or how to determine which is the only true God.


It is estimated that 86% of the world’s population is religious. Around 89% of Americans believe in the existence of God. “Approximately 90 million Americans believe Aliens exist, and around 12 million people in the US believe that interstellar lizards in people suits rule their country.” In a world in which the masses have an intimate relationship with just about anything that is not true, many believe that aliens—whose existence has never been proven—from other planets do not merely exist, but are in control of planet earth, plotting and watching our every move. Other conspiracy theorists believe that some government’s intelligence agency has the power to manipulate our thoughts and actions etc., that satellites in space are reading our minds this very minute, and possibly even directing our steps. “Some of the world’s richest and most powerful people are convinced that we are living in a computer simulation…Philosophers have long been concerned about how we can know that our world isn’t just a very believable simulation of a real one…Many people in Silicon Valley have become obsessed with the simulation hypothesis, the argument that what we experience as reality is in fact fabricated in a computer…” One gentleman has commented: “…computing technology has advanced so quickly that at some point in the future it will become indistinguishable from real life – and, if it does, there’s no reason to think that it hasn’t done already and that that’s what we are currently living through". The madness of man is made manifestly visible in his attempts to complicate reality, to interfere with reality, to ask inane questions about the unquestionable, because of his inability, or unwillingness to accept reality as it really is. Add to this the worldwide use of drugs, perhaps the most potent of which is technology, and you have a unique creature which not only questions reality, but seeks to eagerly replace it with that which is unreal. A forerunner to this nonsense was Chinese philosopher, Zhuangzi (c. 369 BC –c. 286 BC), who is quoted as saying: “Once upon a time, I dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was myself. Soon I awaked, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man". Anyone who seriously ponders over such a ludicrous question may as well believe that real butterflies often wonder if they are really people who are only dreaming they are butterflies! Seeking an alternative reality is as foolish an endeavour as seeking a safer seat on a sinking ship, or seeking an alternative to truth. In this sin-cursed world, even many animals seek the effects of drugs to alter their reality. “Cats using catnip, dolphins squeezing puffer fish in the hope of the fish releasing a small burst of neurotoxin, and passing it to other dolphins, cows grazing on locoweed, an intoxicating plant which acts as a tranquilizer, big horned sheep scraping hallucinogenic lichen to which they often become addicted, deer, including moose and caribou, seeking out psychedelic mushrooms, and so on.” When one does not know the truth, or will not accept reality, one is constantly assailed by that which ‘might be truth’, which might be real, even the ridiculous. The same is true for drug takers. One can be just as addicted to unreality as one can be to illicit, or even prescribed, drugs. When one does not know the truth, or even how to correctly calculate truth, even the mad thoughts of obsessed individuals cannot be discounted as being potentially true. Without truth, no thought can be discounted, no philosophy, or outlook on life—no matter how preposterous it may be—can legitimately be discounted. All must be considered as potentially true until proven untrue. This, my friend, is literally the stuff of madness.


Despite the ravings of people who have perhaps seen one-too-many science fiction movies, or who worship at the feet of rebellion for rebellion’s sake, and simply refuse to believe any truths which the preceding generation believed, the universe does have one who is in control. A Designer and Planner of inestimable wisdom and power, who is unmistakably known by those whom He has revealed Himself to. “According to a survey by World Religions Religion Statistics Geography Church Statistics, people who are ‘secular, non-religious, agnostics and atheists account for about 14% of the world’s population. 14% of 7 billion people is 980 million people. Therefore, the actual numerical figure of people who believe in the existence of ‘God’ is approximately six billion and twenty million people.” Though 86% of the world’s population believe in the existence of ‘God’, the problem which most of them face is that though there obviously is a God, they do not have the faintest idea as to WHO this Higher Power is, or how to know for certain who the true God is. For many, their belief in ‘God’ is a superstitious one. They are bound by tradition—cultural and familial—rather than the truth. A truthless tradition is nothing but a curse. There is absolutely no merit in upholding a tradition which does not find its origin in God’s Truth. “Human tradition is fallible. Divine revelation is the ultimate authority, not the human tradition that has developed around it…When we look at what the Bible actually says, including Jesus’ rebuke of the traditionalists of His day (see Lk. 11:37-52 cf. Mk. 7:13), it is clear that the Bible is to be our authority. This is not to say that tradition is without merit, but that tradition is only authoritative insofar as it is correctly based on biblical truth…Traditions, no matter how ancient they may be, only have value if they are properly grounded in God’s truth and point us to Him. Tradition must be under the authority of God and His Word; any tradition that contradicts God’s Word or distracts us from it should be discarded.” Many have no regard for the truth, for they have no intimate relationship with its Author. They do not recognize truth as truth, nor the true God as God. Their relationship is with what they have been told the truth is, and who they have been told God is. Religionists the world over have a relationship with whom they believe the true God to be, with what they believe the truth to be, but not with who the true God, or what His truth, actually is. “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Tim. 4:3,4).

Man has mistakenly interpreted and subsequently confused his traditions, sincerity and familiarity with what he believes the truth to be, and the way it makes him feel, as unassailable confirmation that it is truth. Man has believed God to be just about anything from various animals to aspects of nature and even celestial bodies such as the sun and moon. Once we cast aside the ridiculous all we are left with is a Creator God Who Sovereignly rules over all. Despite the fact that many acknowledge the existence of a Creator, the confusion as to exactly who the Creator is, and why we are all here, is in no way diminished, because people believe so many different and contrasting things about ‘God’, and, consequently, who exactly the true God is, what He has done, as well as how, and whom, He saves. Many who claim to believe in the God of the Bible, have contrasting and erroneous beliefs about Him. What conclusion would you reach if you were to walk into a room filled with a thousand people all having a different answer to a particular equation? Would you conclude that none of them had the right answer? Or would you go beyond the obvious, immediate thought concerning the mass of confusing, and contradictory answers and think that perhaps one of the people might just be right. If they all have different answers then there is no other logical, rational conclusion that can be reached other than all are wrong, or one of these thousand people does have the correct answer. They cannot all be right, for their answers are all different. The only way to have the truth, to discern the truth, is to KNOW the truth.


Vast numbers of people hold to beliefs and traditions which are very personal to them concerning God. Secret ‘truths’ which they are convinced are true, but do not share with anyone. They either have no biblical precedent for what they believe, or have misconstrued and misunderstood what the Word of God is saying. If ever there was a sign of a man’s accursed state it is his incorrect understanding of Who God is, what God has done and for whom He has done it. Sincerity can never outweigh error, nor can it in any way legitimize error and qualify one for Heaven. Truth is not some mystical thing, it is not subjective, it is not deduced or recognised by a certain feeling. Feelings and certainty, tradition and a misinformed zeal can only lead one astray, for they only confirm prejudices and preferences. They are not the path to truth, but gateways to Hell. These are not the proper means by which to judge truth and separate it from error. Truth is logical, and when it comes to God’s truth it is understood and recognised by God revealing it, and His mighty Word confirming it. A biased, or malfunctioning scale will not give you a correct reading, only a proper scale functioning perfectly will correctly show what the truth is. If one could believe something for a million years it would still not make it truth if it was not truth to begin with. If truth is subjective, able to be recognised by emotion or experiences, then how does one explain the fact that those who are having the same feelings and experiences concerning what they believe the truth to be, are all believing in different and contrasting doctrines and diverse gods? How then could feelings ever be that which could be safely depended upon “with full trust and confidence”, as a discerner of truth? How could one ever properly distinguish truth from error with feelings and sincerity, if feelings, experiences and sincerity lead one person to this god and another person to a different god? All sincerity proves is conviction of belief, and all conviction proves is a sincere belief in that which one is convinced. PROOF of truth is what everyone should be striving for, instead of merely settling for believing something which makes them feel good. Simply believing in something is no evidence that it is true, but only that it is believed. The truth is absolute and unchangeable, and not subject to what a man believes it to be. Something does not become truth simply because we believe it is truth. Something may well be considered truth, and acted upon accordingly, but a man’s conviction, in and of itself, is no proof that what he believes to be true is true. Conflicting beliefs, and contradictory claims as to what the truth is should sound alarm bells loudly and clearly in one’s life. Disagreement between believers as to what the truth is, is a sign all are deceived, or that some may have the truth whilst others have been deceived into believing that which is untrue. Sincerity of belief is no proof of truth. Conflicting beliefs is the sure sign that all that is believed cannot be truth.


There cannot be genuine unity when there is no agreement as to what is true. Many, however, see no problem with joining hands with those who believe differently. They say ‘Everyone is different. Everyone sees things differently and so we must respect one another and what we believe’. But since when did truth ever become something that was subject to what a man believed, or did not believe it to be? Are we to understand that our differences are a sign that we are one? That though their beliefs conflict, all religious people have the truth? Are differences somehow the sign that all are believing the same god/God? If opposing beliefs are a sign that all are believing in the same God, why does the Word of God consistently warn of false doctrines which present false gods? This ‘We’re all ok and have the true God even though what we believe about Him differs’ attitude, is sheer madness. The line of thinking that says our differences do not change the fact that all are believing the same god/God is something which is not even considered in any other area of life. Two people who have different and opposing answers to an equation are not said to both have the right answer, for their answers are different, and if different then they are opposed. Such thinking puts man above truth. It makes truth subservient to man and whatever he believes it to be. However, since when has the truth ever found its starting point with what a man believes it to be? I have never understood how people who claim to have the truth can possibly, and comfortably, unite with those who disagree with them. “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” (Amos 3:3). I mean, on what basis are we to respect one another? That we are all human? Or that we all believe something? That we are fellow believers, not because we believe the same thing, but that we all believe something! If true unity exists among people simply because they have a belief, then what of those who believe in the same thing? Surely true unity can only be present among those who believe the same thing, rather than among those who simply believe something. One rightly believing that Jesus the Messiah is God, and another believing Buddha to be God, does not for a moment suggest grounds for unity of any kind, for such beliefs are in the strictest opposition and nullify the other. Whilst there is a generalized unity among believers whatever they believe, which separates them from those who do not believe, true unity can only exist among those believers who believe the same thing. For example, there is a general unity shared between all men who play football, for they are all football players, but there is a different kind of unity, a specific unity, among players who play for the same team. This kind of unity is that which separates those who play for the Dallas Cowboys, from those who play for the Denver Broncos, and those who believe the truth from those who labor under the misapprehension that what they believe is truth. How can there be unity over Who God is and what His Holy Word says, between people who vigorously disagree. How can a person who believes 2 + 2 = 4 possibly respect any other answer to this equation? Disagreement does not give anyone license to violence, be it physical or verbal, toward anyone who opposes them, however, I cannot respect any beliefs, or the entertainment of doctrines, which oppose the truth, and, therefore, could not possibly be, truth, but only anti-truth. Anti-truth is not only opposed to truth, it seeks to usurp the place of truth.

Despite all this, many Protestant ‘Christians’ happily sit alongside Roman Catholics, Mormons and others with whom they have doctrinal disagreement, neglecting their differences and seeking communion over what they do agree with. It’s basically, ‘We’re all nice people so no matter what we believe, the fact that we all believe something shows we are all bound for Heaven’. Such a worship of unity at the expense of truth is becoming more and more accepted in the last days. Man has become so blind to truth, and its essential role in salvation that he sees very little need for it. Such people actually laugh at their differences. They make jokes about the most serious and gravest of matters: what a person believes. The world sees all this ‘unity’ as commendable and loving, but what is so commendable about putting anything above truth! What is so loving about leaving a person in their ignorance of the truth, and not telling them what the truth is? Man has become so ridiculously ‘sensitive’ to the feelings of others that truth is no longer important. But is this alleged sensitivity really an excuse for apathy? Is man’s alleged sensitivity really a metaphor for indifference? It would appear that what the truth actually is to such politically correct people, is not as important as one believing something to be truth. But what advantage can believing a lie provide? Unity at the cost of truth is not unity, but at best wishful thinking. “Unity without truth is nothing but an illusion.”‘Let us unite for we are all believers’, they cry, with simply no regard, or concern, as to what they are believing, and who their doctrines are defining. Someone once wrote the lyrics, “God remains the same, forms of God have changed”. The problem with this carnal thinking is that not only does God not change, He is in no way to any degree changeable. No aspect of God is changeable, nor is His Infallible Word subject to how a man interprets it. If God remains the same God forever, then His truth remains the same truth forever, and it is precisely that God, that truth, which must be believed. If heresy is heresy and heretics are heretics, then that is what they shall remain as long as they believe in that which is not the only true God’s truth.

God does not adapt, or morph, Himself, He does not present Himself to people as they would like Him to be, or as they would prefer Him to be, but simply and ALWAYS as He can only be: Himself. God is not a chameleon-like God. God is Who He is, and He cannot/does not change. God says of Himself: “…I AM that I AM…” (Ex. 3:14). “This signifies the real being of God, His self-existence, and that He is the Being of beings; as also it denotes His eternity and immutability, and His constancy and faithfulness in fulfilling His promises, for it includes all time, past, present, and to come; and the sense is, not only I am what I am at present, but I am what I have been, and I am what I shall be, and shall be what I am.” God is immutable. It is only the views of carnal man that change. God remains the same forever (see Heb. 13:8), and one either believes in Him, or one does not. God does not accept anyone who does not believe His truth, for if He did, believing the truth would not matter. If truth did not matter it would lose all relevance, and would be transformed into a subjective free-for-all. Trusting in the true God, in the doctrines which specifically define and identify Him, would not matter if truth did not matter. One would have no obligation to truth, if truth did not matter. The only thing man would be obligated to believe would be that which one felt comfortable with, only with whatever each person privately called truth. Therefore, one would not need truth in order to know the true God. Consequently, Who God is, His attributes and what He has done, would simply have no relevance to whether a person believed in the true God, or not. The only thing that would matter would be believing, for it would surpass what is believed. If believing is more important than what is believed then what is believed would not matter at all. Consequently, truth would not matter at all, and if truth did not matter then God would not matter. Can you see how such a line of thinking makes what man believes the truth to be, predominant over what God says it is. Nothing would matter except believing whatever is convenient for one to believe. The only thing that would matter would be to be nice people, and have some spiritual beliefs no matter what they are, or whom exactly they define and identify. No doctrine which is not 100% true can rightly represent and define the only true God. No answer can be right unless it is correct. There are no degrees of correctness. Either something is correct, or it is incorrect. Either something is true, or it is untrue. Truth has no degrees. If this were not so then a teacher could never accurately grade an exam paper. Either an answer is correct or it is incorrect. Either a person believes the true Gospel of God, or they do not. We see from this that what a person believes about God is the evidence which shows whether they have the true God, or not. Believe the truth, and you have the true answer. Believe the true Gospel, and you have the God of truth. Trusting in lies which are believed to be truth will never be compensated by a Holy God.


The doctrines we believe always define and identify the God/god we believe in. When it comes to things spiritual, doctrines are what define the details about whom one believes in. If any hold to doctrines which portray God differently to how He has revealed Himself in His Gospel, then they are holding to false doctrines which can only depict false gods. The true God cannot be identified by false teachings which do not represent Him, which do not define Who He is and what He has done. The false can never define that which is true, only that which is untrue. The true Christ has never been revealed by a false gospel, just as a false Christ has never been revealed by the true God’s Gospel. When it comes to salvation, belief of the Gospel is not some minor detail, but is the telling sign of a born again man. The detail is the difference. Doctrines define. Doctrines identify. Doctrines reveal. Doctrines differentiate and distinguish between false gods and the true God. Feelings, religious fervour and sincerity can all be identical, but doctrines are the telling sign, the identifying sign as to whether a man believes in the true God, or a worthless false god. Those who believe in the false cannot be in possession of that which is true. Because of all the confusion, which incidentally only exists in the minds and hearts of those who do not know and do not have the truth, many have turned away from the ‘idea’ of God, and have gone off in search of abstract ideas and explanations for the reason and purpose of life. Man loves alternative religion because it provides him with the opportunity to believe whatever he is comfortable with, rather than believing what is true. One person, known to this author, will gleefully talk about anything from astrology to Buddhism, from Karma to the universal ‘force’, from astrology to vibrations, but when I inject the true God into the conversation they suddenly become silent, eagerly changing the subject matter once I have made my point. The only true and genuine friend man has is truth, and yet the vast majority prefer the company of lies. They prefer to believe what they believe the truth to be rather that what the truth actually is. The Lord Jesus teaches “…this is the condemnation, that Light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than Light…” (Jn. 3:19). Now, most men do not believe what they believe to be darkness, for if they did they would surely not believe it. The wrong do not know they are wrong, nor are the deceived aware of the deception they are under. The majority of mankind believes the truth to be that which in reality is darkness. The Lord Jesus adds “…if therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!” (Matt. 6:23). The Word of God also says: “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isa. 8:20 cf. 1 Tim. 6:3-5).


Many are convinced that everyone believes in the same God regardless of what they call Him, or what is believed about Him, or even who people say He is. Their inexplicable claim is that religious beliefs are all just mere opinion, and that while no one actually has the truth they are all, somehow, believing in the same God who allegedly manifests himself as Buddha to some and Christ Jesus to others, etc. “Elohim, God or Allah, the name doesn’t matter". They say we are all imperfect so it is impossible for any one person, or group of people to be right about God without also holding to many contradictions and untruths concerning Him. However, if imperfect man cannot be right about God under any circumstances, then surely this imperfection would also affect the claim that man is so imperfect that none can know who the true God is. If a man cannot be right about what he believes, then he has no authority at all to pass comment on what the truth is, or even what it is not, for how can a man know what is wrong unless he first knows what is right. What a person believes must be compared with the proper Standard before he can be certain as to whether or not what he believes is true or false. The only way you will know whether what you believe is right or wrong concerning the exact length of an object, is to use the standard of measurement by which length is measured. One requires a tape measure and the ability to properly use and read that tape measure. The only way one will know what the truth of God is, is to use the proper and only Standard of measurement—the Word of God. If a man cannot be right about what he believes, then all that remains is conjecture and opinion. When there is no acknowledgement of truth, there can only be opinions of what it might be. The claims of some who believe that everything is knowable except truth, are simply unfounded. If everything is knowable except truth, then how can any say that this statement, purported to be truth, is true at all? If there is no absolute truth to believe and know, if we cannot ground ourselves in truth, and allow our beliefs to be formed by it, how can any have the true God which only absolute truth can reveal? Again, simply because there are a multitude of differing and contrasting opinions as to what the truth is, does not for a moment suggest that there cannot be any truth at all. Despite all this, the issue of God remains for many a purely subjective one. Most have been conditioned by anything from fear of truth, to an apathetic attitude when it comes to spiritual beliefs, to believing that such things are of a private and personal nature. Most do not want the truth, for they are comfortable with what they have convinced themselves is truth. As long as one believes something one is ok, is the attitude of the masses. The attitude of the masses is: As long as one is sincere, then how could one be wrong. This is as asinine a statement as the following: How can a person  be wrong if they are convinced that what they believe is right. This is the kind of thinking, or lack thereof, which most people prefer to entertain. They hide themselves behind a veneer of not wanting confrontation with those who believe differently, when what they really do not want is to be confronted with truth.


People are judged as being right about God by their character and conduct, by their sincerity and ‘well intentioned’ attitude, by their strong conviction in, and devotion toward, whatever it is they believe, and whoever they believe God to be, rather than by what God says of Himself, and by what the Gospel of God declares. The world looks admiringly on those who have a strong conviction concerning just about anything. A man once told me, “You’ve got to believe something”. I promptly informed the gentleman that it would be highly preferable to believe the truth, rather than just anything. Curiously, man does not have this you’ve got to believe something attitude when it comes to anything else but God. Man has established a veritable plethora of teaching institutions designed to teach the truth concerning that which must be believed if one is to be successful in whatever career, or path, one chooses to follow in life. But, they say, when it comes to God, Heaven and eternal life, believe what you like, for all is open to your interpretation. Be nice and all will be well. Every major religion out there teaches that what they believe must be believed, whilst on the other hand encouraging an ecumenical, multi-faith attitude towards those who believe differently! A sort of strength in diversity situation. No one is to be corrected, but only encouraged. This attitude was championed by Mother Teresa who after visiting the poor and the sick sent them back to whatever god they believed. In her biography, Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work, she said: “If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we...become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, a better Catholic, a better whatever we are...What God is in your mind you must accept". Alcoholics Anonymous, and other such groups, also talk about God ‘as you conceive Him to be’. Having an answer does not automatically mean one has the right answer. Believing in a god does not automatically mean one has the true God. Those who do not know absolute truth see even reality as subjective, and according to the minds of some religionists, mere illusion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

bottom of page