Eugene Milimoh

Soli Deo Gloria

Us vs Them (Tribalism) — December 5, 2018

Us vs Them (Tribalism)

Between 7th April and 15th July 1994, it is estimated that between 500 000 and 1,000 000 rwandese were murdered, that constituted about 70% of the Tutsi tribe. What was the cause of such a horrendous occurrence? we all know it was politics right? wrong. Of course politics had something to do with it, but the main course of the genocide was tribalism, it was the us vs them mentality, the idea that they are all ‘irredeemable devils’ out to get us, and we must destroy all of them before they get a chance, the idea that if they don’t speak my language, adhere to my culture, look like me or think like me, they are all inherently evil and they must be destroyed, tribalism. Almost every single conflict amongst ourselves in the African continent that resulted in people slaughtering each other can be traced back to tribalism.

The purpose of this article is not to talk about the 1994 Rwandan genocide or all the conflicts we have had and are still having here in our beloved continent of Africa, the purpose of this article is to address the issue of tribalism as a general concept, the Rwandan genocide reference is meant to show an example of the results of tribalism in a society. With that said, what is tribalism, Oxford defines tribalism as, ” behavior, attitudes, etc. that are based on being loyal to a tribe or other social groups”. So tribalism is not just about language groups as we have grown to understand it here in Africa, it is more than that, we could have a form of tribalism based on ideologies, race etc. A lot of good can come out of tribalism, for example, through tribalism, we can protect each other as well us help each other when necessary to grow and be better because of the loyalty we have for each other as a result of belonging to the same social group or tribe. But there are also dangers that can come with tribalism, dangers that might arise as a result of completely abandoning individualism and seeing everything through tribal lenses, whether it be race, culture, language, ideologies including religious ideologies among others.

For example, terrorism is a cancer that must be destroyed, we have terrorists of all shapes and sizes from all races and religions, the most famous terrorists however are the Islamic terrorists like the Boko Haram, the Al shabab, ISIS etc. This being the case, it is very easy for a Christian to assume that since members of Boko Haram and Al shabab or ISIS belong to the ‘Islamic tribe’, and they want to kill people belonging to the ‘Christian tribe’ all Muslims must be wanting to kill Christians. When this happens, the Christian would demonize every Muslim he meets, the Muslims who encounter this particular Christian will not appreciate being associated with terrorists and they will hate the Christian. What we will end up having is individuals who hate each other, as a result of a misunderstanding arising from tribalism, this will never solve anything. If we want to fight terrorism, we would need to work with everyone including Muslims, accusing every Muslim of being a terrorist will sideline them. We must therefore judge everyone including Muslims on a case by case individual basis, there are Muslims who translate the Jihad verses to mean spiritual warfare, those Muslims want to live in peace with everybody, then there are Muslims who translate the Jihad verses to mean physical warfare, and those ones want to kill some people including other Muslims, those are the ones we need to fight and I bet other Muslims would agree with that.

Another example would be the controversial feminism movement. The modern form of feminism aka inter-sectional feminism, aka 3rd wave feminism, has a lot of haters. Feminism is supposed to be about equality of the sexes, the idea that both men and women are equally and intrinsically valuable, non is superior or inferior to the other, and every human being with a normal brain would agree with that. The problem is, many modern day feminists are boarding the tribalism train, and so are their objectors. The us vs them mentality, the putting of all men or religious people into one group and demonizing them by a good number of feminists, and the putting of all feminists into one group and demonizing them by a good number of non feminists, mostly men is very prevalent. A good number of feminists, instead of judging men on a case by case individual basis, they judge them, mostly negatively as a group. For example, you will find some feminists claiming authoritatively that all men are rapists, some feminists, even very educated ones who should know better like Suzan Danuta Walters, a professor at a well known and respected university writing an article titled “why cant we hate men?” literally advocating for the hatred of men, not some men, not evil men but all men, why? Because some men are evil, according to her, since some men are evil, we must hate all men, just like how a Christian would say, since some Muslims are evil, we must hate all Muslims.

Some of those who criticize modern feminism also fall into the tribalism bandwagon at times, for example, a woman say in a church complains about a genuine issue where say some men are abusing women in some form, instead of listening to her complains and judge whether or not it is genuine, they immediately assume she is bringing toxic feminism into the church and dismiss her. A woman say complains about women rights being undermined in some form, instead of listening to her case, some people simply assume she is a bitter feminists out to bad-mouth men, and they dismiss her without listening to her. A movie that is female led comes out or is announced to come out, some men even before watching the movie start criticizing it, accusing it of pushing some anti man, female superiority agenda, even though it may actually not.

As long as we keep judging people on tribal bases, judging people based on the group they belong to whether it be gender, race, religion, culture etc without examining them at an individual level, we will always be in conflict with each other. Constantly fighting people that are different from us, essentially perpetuating an unending system of unnecessary hatred and resentment.  

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT — October 16, 2018



What is the butterfly effect? Well, we shall get to that in a moment, but for now, allow me to engage your imagination. Imagine on this year, the year 2018 things are exactly the way they are, things are bad, but they are not that bad, they could be worse. Now imagine we have invented a time travel machine. Imagine you are the first person to travel through time. So you get into the time machine and travel 200 years into the past, stay there for 3 seconds, do nothing at all, only observe and then come back to 2018.

On arriving in 2018, you realize that history has changed, things have changed. You discover that a brutal dictator has taken over the world and he is killing people in the millions. Him, by the help of some AI he invented alongside his radical supporters, have turned people into slaves, there is no freedom, people are being forced to become forced labor slaves, soldiers, gladiators (fighting other people to death for entertainment) etc or they die brutally. At birth, every new born is injected with some kind of computer chip, which is integrated into their blood through some kind of nano-technology, so they cant exactly dig it out, unless they drain blood from their bodies. The computer chip monitors their every moment, every move, every dialogue and they are being controlled by of course, the brutal dictator’s AI(Artificial Intelligence) programmed to terminate them remotely, should they show any hint of disloyalty. What I am basically saying is, the world is a complete mess.

Then you ask yourself, how could a harmless 3 second stay in the past have such a huge effect on history? Then you discover that during your 3 second stay, heat from the time machine killed a mosquito, just one female anopheles mosquito. Well that is such a small thing, how can killing one tiny mosquito result in such a huge change in history? You then discover that, that one dead female anopheles mosquito was the one which had the chance and opportunity, and was going to bite a certain pregnant woman, she was supposed to get malaria, infect her unborn child resulting in both their deaths. But since  the one anopheles mosquito died, the pregnant woman didn’t get malaria, her child didn’t get malaria, so the child was born healthy, the child grew up and gave birth to a child who grew up and gave birth to a child, who grew up and gave birth to a child, who grew up and gave birth to a child, who grew up and gave birth to a child, who grew up and gave birth to the brutal dictator terrorizing the world in the alternate 2018. Had the mosquito not died as it was supposed to happen, the brutal dictator could have never existed. It makes you think huh!

So, next time you think about using the, ‘problem of evil‘ issue, i.e ‘how can a good God allow bad stuff to happen‘, as an excuse to question the omni-benevolence or the existence of God in order to justify you rebellion, or you think about going on a rant insulting or mocking those who like to say, “everything happens for a reason”, remember, the butterfly effect.

So what is the butterfly effect? Well it “…is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a later state.” (Boeing G. 2016). Basically what this means is that, a change no matter how tiny it is, in a huge complex system can have a massive significant impact on the whole system. The concept is often accompanied by a version of one of these famous pseudo-scientific urban legends, it goes something like; a butterfly flapping it’s wings in New-Mexico can cause a typhoon in China.

Remember Benjamin Franklin’s quote,

“For the want of a nail the shoe was lost, For the want of a shoe the horse was lost, For the want of a horse the rider was lost, For the want of a rider the battle was lost,
For the want of a battle the kingdom was lost, And all for the want of a horseshoe-nail.”

That is the butterfly effect.






Were Biblical accounts plagiarized?

There is this movie / documentary that came out a few years ago, it is called the ZEITGEIST movie. The movie among other Christ ‘mythers’ had some interesting “facts”, which are actually just a bunch of conspiracy theories, one of the major premises of the movie was the idea that most of the Biblical accounts are not original, but copies of accounts from earlier pagan religions. In the previous article (link) we addressed the claim that the account of Jesus was plagiarized from the accounts of earlier pagan gods, we looked at Horus, Dionysus and Krishna. Today we look at Mithra as well as a few other plagiarism claims.

Mithra (1200 BC)

Christ ‘mythers’ claim that Jesus’ biblical account is simply a copy of the pagan god Mithra based on the following; they claim that:

  • Mithra was born of a virgin on 25th Dec just like Jesus.

  • He was a travelling teacher who performed miracles and had 12 disciples.

  • He sacrificed himself for world peace

  • Died was buried and rose after 3 days later on Easter morning just like Jesus

  • His followers were promised eternal life just like Jesus

  • He was called the good shepherd, savior, redeemer, the way the truth and the light just like Jesus.

  • His holy day was Sunday and his followers partook in the Lords supper every week

This would prove them right, except the claims are not true:

  • To begin with there are 3 versions of Mithra and none matches Christianity, most who make the above claims usually refer to the Mithra of the Roman cult. Mithra was not born of a virgin, it is said he was born out/grew out of a rock as an adult not a baby (The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries, page 36), in other versions he was created as an adult by Ahura Mazda (AVESTA: KHORDA AVESTA 6 – 7)

  • There is no record of Mithra being a travelling teacher. As for performing miracles, every supposed deity has that quality, it is too general to form a parallel. There is no record of Mithra having 12 disciples. In the Iranian/Persian versions he had 1 companion, Varuna. In the Roman version he had 2 companions, Cautes and Cautopatress.

  • There is no record of Mithra sacrificing himself for world’s peace, the closest we can get is him slaying a bull not sacrificing himself

  • There is no record of Mithra dying or being buried and rising from the dead, these are made up lies.

  • There is no record of Mithra being referred to by any of the titles applied to Christ, Christ Mythers made this up.

  • It is true that Mithra’s holiday was Sunday, but there are only seven days in a week and in many cultures the first day of the week (in our case Sunday) was of great significance and was often dedicated to some gods, mostly son gods, because sun gods were considered more significant than others. It is therefore irrelevant.

  • Finally, most of the records of Mithra that can be found are from after Christ, if there is any copying it would have been the other way around.


Again, in order for any of the Christ’s account plagiarism claims to be true, Jesus would have be simply a mythical character and not a historical figure, but we have demonstrated that Christ Jesus is not a mythical Character (link)

Let’s look at a few other plagiarism claims;

The star in the East


The claim: According to the conspiracy theorists, the star in the East is the brightest star in the sky called “SIRIUS”, which supposedly on December 24th aligns with the three brightest stars on Orion’s belt which are called the “three kings”. The 3 kings and the brightest star in the sky, Sirius, all point to the rising sun on December 25th; the three kings (brightest stars on Orion’s belt) follow the star in the East (The brightest star in the sky) as they point towards the rising sun (The birth of the SUN), this is supposed to parallel Christianity in the following ways;

  • The SUN of god = the SON of God

  • The three kings (brightest stars on Orion’s belt) = the three wise men

  • The 3 kings align with the star in the East = the wise men follow the star in the East

  • The star in the East aligns with the three kings as they point towards the rising sun on Dec 25th = the three wise-men follow the star in the East as it leads them to the birth of the Son of God on Dec 25th

See the desperate attempt at forcing a parallel with Christianity?

Understand that many cultures and religions over the centuries worshiped the sun, they considered it a god. Some even anthropomorphizing it, creating mythological characters, who were supposed to be sun gods e.g. Dionysus, Horus among other sun gods. Those who make the above claim would like us to believe that Jesus is just another sun god and Christians like pagan religions before them got their theology and account of Christ from astrology.

Response: First of all, Jesus was not born on 25th Dec, the 25th Dec reference is thus irrelevant. Secondly, the three stars (3 kings) and three wisemen parallel doesn’t work either, the bible does not give a number of the wise men it only gives the number of the gifts, they could have been 20 wise men bringing 3 gifts. Thirdly, Sirius (brightest star in the sky) is always aligned with the three brightest stars on Orion’s belt, this is not a one-time event, it happens 365 days a year and not on the 24th of December only. Fourth, the SUN and SON are only homophones in the English language which is only about 1000 years old, Christ existed 2000 years ago, pagan Mythologies began to develop more than 4000 years ago. Finally, Christianity would have nothing to do with sun worship, it is actually forbidden in the first book of the Bible, Genesis.

The virgin Mary and Virgo


The claim: The virgin Mary is supposedly the constellation Virgo; Virgo in Latin means virgin. Virgo is also supposedly called, ‘the house of bread’ and the translation of the name ‘Bethlehem’ from the Hebrew language is actually the words ‘house of bread’. This therefore supposedly means Bethlehem is a reference to the constellation Virgo, a place in the sky and not a real place on earth. This is another forced parallelism that is supposed to make us believe that Christianity, like pagan mythologies before is made up and draws its theology like almost every other pagan religion, from astrology.

Response: Bethlehem does in deed mean house of bread, that however does not mean that it is a made-up place named after the constellation Virgo. The existence of Bethlehem is well attested. The old Testament mentions Bethlehem, years before 400 BC, when the constellations were divided and long before the 2nd century when the constellation was first cataloged by the Greek astronomer Ptolemy. The Jewish historian Josephus mentions Bethlehem in some of his writings as a real place. J.B Hennessy reports of archaeological discoveries which demonstrate that Bethlehem was habited during the iron age (1200 BC – 600 BC). On the same issue, Marcia Montenegro, the author of ‘Spellbound’ says,” You can’t just make a story out of names like Virgo, Leo, Taurus etc. and why doesn’t the story begin with Aries? If it did, then Leo comes before Virgo, yet Leo is supposedly Jesus the Lion of Judah. It seems it would come after Virgo not before in a story.”

There is also no relationship between Virgo the constellation and the Virgin Mary. According to Cynthia Calhoun“The name Virgo is derived from the word virgin in reference to the goddess Astraea. She was the daughter of Jupiter and Themis… Themis was the goddess of justice in Greek mythology. In the Golden Age, gods and goddesses walked the earth. Astraea was a respected goddess and looked after her people before she went to live in the sky”.

In the Egyptian version, according to Cynthia Calhoun, ” Virgo was connected to the goddess Isis. Typhon, a monster, relentlessly chased her until she got an ear of grain and dropped it. All the grain kernels became the fainter stars of the Milky Way. The brightest star in Virgo, Spica, was important to the Egyptians. They built altars to worship this star and called it the “Star of Prosperity.” The name Spica actually means “ear of wheat.””

According to , “Virgo is typically linked to Dike, the Greek goddess of justice, and Persephone, the daughter of Demeter, the harvest goddess. According to Greek mythology, the earth experienced eternal spring until the god of the underworld abducted the spring maiden Persephone.”Do you see anything related to Mary there? the Virgin Mary was simply a young Hebrew woman who gave birth to Jesus.

And finally, according to  Vic DiCara, the ‘Author of 27 Stars 27 Gods and Radically Deep Fundamentals of Astrology,‘ “People have it backwards, completely backwards, when they think that the visual symbolism of the zodiac signs created the meanings ascribed to those signs. Lets be real, the zodiac signs are just dots. You could as easily make the three dots of Aries into a snake as you could make them into a ram. You could as easily connect the virgo dots to draw a picture of a giraffe as you could to create the picture of a virgin carrying wheat and fire. The real fact is that the ancient seers connected the dots in the ways that they did simply as a mnemonic tool to help people understand the nature of the energies that existed within that area of the stars.”


The 12 Disciples


The claim: The 12 disciples of Jesus are supposedly the 12 constellations of the Zodiac, of which the ‘SUN of god’ goes through just like Jesus the ‘SON of God’ travels with his 12 disciples.

Response: To begin with, again SUN and SON are only homophones in the English language and not in any other languages. Secondly, Jesus does not ‘go through’ his disciples the way the SUN goes through the Zodiac constellations. Thirdly, Jesus selection of the 12 disciples was because of the 12 tribes of Israel not the Zodiac constellations. Some skeptics however claim that the 12 tribes of Israel accounts were also based on the 12 Zodiac constellations, the problem is, the book of Genesis was written approximately 1000 BC and contains the account of the 12 tribes of Israel, which would have occurred even earlier.  But the division of the Zodiac into 12 constellations did not occur until about 400 BC, when the Babylonians created the division. Astronomer Jay Pasachoff confirms, “The Babylonians divided the Zodiac into 12 constellations in the 5th century BC.” The account of the 12 tribes of Israel upon whom the 12 disciples of Christ was based, was not created after the 12 constellations of the Zodiac, because the accounts of the 12 tribes of Israel came long before the Zodiac was ever divided into the 12 constellations.


Biblical accounts, Astrological ages

The claim: The bible supposedly reflects 3 astrological ages while foreshadowing a fourth age, these astrological ages are normally associated with pagan mythologies and cults some dating back to thousands of years before Christ.

The first age is Taurus the Bull (4400 – 2200 BC).


supposedly the account of the Israelites worshiping the golden calf represents this age.

The second age, supposedly represented by Moses is the age of Aries the ram (1800 BC – 360 AD)


This is supposedly the reason Jews blow the rams horn. The other reason is supposedly the fact that Jesus became the good shepherd.

The third age is supposedly the age of Pisces the two fish (360 AD – 2400 AD)


It is supposedly represented by the fact that Jesus fed people 2 fish and 5 breads and had 2 fishermen as disciples. The fish symbol often used by Christians (Image below)

Fish thing

Is also supposed to represent this age. Allegedly, this symbol is a symbol for Christ’s reign during the age of Pisces the two fish.

And finally, the fourth age being foreshadowed is supposedly the age of Aquarius or the water bearer (2400 AD – 4600 AD), this is supposedly due to the fact that Jesus underwent a water baptism.



Response: The bible is not related to the astrological ages in any way whatsoever. Those who make these claims are forcing the symbolisms. So, since there is a mention of a bull (the golden calf) then that must be symbolic of Taurus, but we have bulls and cows being mentioned in the new testament and during Moses’s time which are supposed to be within the age of Aries, how is that? If whenever the bible mentions a bull or cow that account falls under Taurus how then is it that cows and bulls are mentioned on ages that are not Taurus? Moses is supposed to represent the age of Aries the ram, and that is supposedly why the Jews blow the ram horn, the problem here is that there is no relation between Moses and rams, Moses is nowhere recorded blowing a ram’s horn, this is simply forced.

The third age is the age of Pisces or two fish, it is supposedly symbolized by the fact that Jesus had two disciples who were fishermen. This doesn’t work, the disciples who were fishermen were four, not two, and what about the other disciples, some were tax collectors, some tend makers, why are they not represented. It is also supposedly symbolized by Jesus feeding 5000 people 2 fish, but he also fed them bread, why is it not called the age of bread? He later on fed 4000 people ‘…several fish…’ probably more than two fish, how does that fit into the supposed age of 2 fish? He also turned water into wine, walked on water and performed many more miracles during this age, why is it not called the age of wine, or the age of walking on water?

It is also claimed that the fish symbol Christians normally use is symbolic of Christ’s reign during the age of Pisces (two fish). The fish symbol however has nothing to do with the age of Pisces, it was developed by Christians during the early periods of Christianity as code for communicating to avoid persecution, the Greek word for fish, ΙΧΘΥΣ (ichthys) is also an acronym for, “Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, Θεοῦ Υἱός, Σωτήρ” transliterated as, (Iēsous Christos, Theou Yios, Sōtēr) in the Greek language, which translates to, ‘Jesus Christ, God’s son, Savior’ in the English language.

Fish thing 2

We have other animals mentioned throughout the bible, like donkeys, camels, roasters, snakes etc., why are they not represented? The age being foreshadowed supposedly the age of Aquarius or the water bearer is supposedly represented by Christ’s baptism, but that age has not come yet, that age is supposed to be between the years 2400 and 4600. To put this into perspective, we are now on the year 2018 and Jesus was already baptized 2000 years ago, how does that work? All these symbolisms in the bible that are supposed to represent the 4 astrological ages are forced symbolisms, they don’t exist.

We shall stop here for today. I promised in the first article of this series that we shall cover Serapis, Attis, the Noah’s flood account, the creation account and the ten commandments and Moses accounts plagiarism claims. But if we did that, this article would have been longer than necessary, so we are saving those for the next article, the third article of this series.




There are some statistics out there showing how ‘the most religious’ demographics in the world tend to be the poorest, not always, but from a general perspective this seems to be the trend. And we can all agree that this is true to some extent, the poorest people in the world tend to be the godliest people in the world. Does that mean that religion causes poverty? Absolutely not.

Just because the rooster crows before the sun rises, it doesn’t mean that the rooster causes the sun to rise. Just because leaves dry and fall off trees during summer, it doesn’t mean that the leaves drying up and falling from trees causes summer, summer causes the leaves to dry and fall from trees.

Same thing, just because the poorest people in the world tend to be the most religious, it doesn’t mean that religion causes poverty. It could be that the poorest people in the world are the ones who have a greater motivation to be religious (they realize they are not self-sufficient), not always, while their richer counterparts lack the motivation (because they supposedly have everything they need) also not always. Or it could be because of the widespread twisted theological positions like the ‘prosperity gospel’ among Christians, with proponents like the famous TD Jakes and locally Mr. and Mrs. or shall I say Reverend Kathy, who claim that poverty is linked to ungodliness and lack of faith. This often results in many, especially the most ‘modernized’ or educated individuals (who tend to be the richest) considering religion, in this case Christianity laughable, while some already poor people who are in desperate need of provision cling to it hoping the claim that if they were more religious they would be richer, is true. You don’t have to be a genius to realize how absurd the claim that poverty is linked to ungodliness is when statistics are telling us otherwise. Some of the richest people in the world are actually ungodly atheists and agnostics, I am not saying evil, I am saying ungodly, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, the Face book guy among others. We should also keep in mind the fact that there are people who are religious, simply because they consider it to be true and not because it makes them rich or gives them any kind of material benefit, and these group of people ranges from the rich to the poor. What I am saying is, religion does not cause poverty but at times poverty can cause a strong religious adherence.

This can be linked to another absurd claim which is the claim that religion is hindering scientific progress and technological advancement. You will understand how silly this claim is, when you realize that someone through ‘technological advancement and scientific progress’, has invented a sex robot, the one thing that all religious people would agree that it is wrong, and yet it is out there in the market, explain to me again how religion is preventing scientific progress and technological advancement? You will understand how illogical that claim is when you discover that almost every branch of science was set in motion by religious people, not the, ‘I believe in God but hate Christianity’ religious people but the ‘bible thumbing’ religious people.

Religion the main cause of all the world’s problems?


There is this idea that religion is the main cause of ‘all’ the world’s problems. There are those who claim that getting rid of religion could solve ‘all’ the world’s problems, giving rise to a peaceful and advanced utopia. Yeah, that’s not exactly true. Religion is not the cause of ‘all’ the problems in the world. If lack of religion results in a peaceful utopia, explain North Korea, one of the most non-religious countries in the world.

I know what you are thinking, what about ISIS, Al Shabab, Boko Haram in Islam and the crusaders, the burning ‘witches’ situation, the pedophile priests and the conmen ‘pastors’ in Christianity? First of all, I am not a Muslim and I disagree with Islam 100% from a theological stand point,  but according to pew-research, by 2015, there were 1.8 billion Muslims in the world, that was 24.1% of the global population, and they are estimated to grow faster than any other religion in the world including Christianity, that’s a big number, if all Muslims were bloodthirsty murderers, with those numbers, they should have killed at least half of the world’s population by now, but they have not.

That’s probably because not all Muslims are out to kill us. Some Muslims want to live peaceful lives with others, they have translated the Jihad verses to mean spiritual warfare, there are other Muslims, a very small minority, who are just killers and they translate those verses to mean actual physical warfare of which they engage in. With Christianity, the crusaders and the ‘witch burning’ situation took place ages ago and had nothing to do with Christianity as a religion. The crusaders were supposedly retaliating extremist Muslim Jihadists and the witch burning was borrowed from Norse mythology. About the thieving con men who pretend to be pastors and the pedophile priests, those are just evil people doing evil things utilizing any opportunity available to them. It is like how some teachers use schools as opportunities to prey on children or like how people use the business world as an opportunity to con people through pyramid schemes etc.

You might think these bad things only happen in religion or within religious contexts, proving the point that religion enhances evil behavior, and you would be wrong. Even if there was no religion, the two world wars could have still taken place, they had nothing to do with religion. Even if there was no religion, the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda could have still killed each other in the thousands, the war had nothing to with religion, at home in Kenya, even without religion, we could have still killed each other in the hundreds during the 2007/2008 post-election violence because of tribalism. There are recorded instances of non-religious people killing religious people because of their religion, e.g. The young American man who shot up a church and killed people because he did not like organized religion or the one who shot up a school, asking students whether or not they were religious and telling them to prepare to meet God before shooting them, he was an atheist and didn’t like organized religion either.

In fact, out of the 1,763 recorded historical conflicts according to the Encyclopedia of wars, only 123 had religious motivations, that’s about 6.98%, this includes Islam. Mao Zedong killed 45 million people, he was an atheist, didn’t believe in any supreme beings. Joseph Stalin another atheist leader killed between 20 and 60 million people. What I am basically saying is, religion is not the cause of ‘all’ the problems in the world, it is not even the ‘main’ cause of all the world’s problems. The main cause of all the problems in the world is the fact that human beings are totally depraved.

Was Christianity plagiarized? (The ‘ ZEITGEIST’ Conspiracy) PART 1 — September 1, 2018

Was Christianity plagiarized? (The ‘ ZEITGEIST’ Conspiracy) PART 1


If you are often on-line, you may have seen or heard plagiarism accusations leveled against the Bible and Christianity in general. The most common one being the claim that the account of Jesus Christ is a copy of older pagan mythological gods’ accounts. This claim amongst others were made famous by the popular conspiracy theory movie, the ‘ZETGEIST MOVIE’. The shocking thing is that some supposed Christian leaders like Rob Bell are propagating some of these ideas. Is Christianity guilty of plagiarism? Let’s find out.

Horus (Egypt, 3000 BC)


Horus is the SUN god, Jesus is the SON of God. Set, the main enemy of Horus has a name that starts with an ‘S’ and he is evil, Jesus’ main enemy Satan’s name starts with an ‘S’ and he is evil as well. This is supposed to prove that the concept of Jesus and Satan were borrowed from ancient Egyptian mythology i.e. Horus = Jesus, Set = Satan. This is however not true, the Sun as in ‘the shining sun in the sky’, is only a homophone of the son as in ‘child of’ in the English language, English is only about 1000 years old, there was no English during Jesus time and there was no English during the development of the Egyptian mythology. Those two words (SUN and SON) do not sound the same in any other language, so the argument that one borrowed from the other based on this is false. Same with Set and Satan, they only both begin with an ‘S’ in the English language. About both Set and Satan being evil, in every story there is a good guy and a bad guy, Egyptian mythology is no different, one of the good guys is Horus and one of the bad guys is Set, doesn’t prove anything.

There is more;

  • Horus was born on December 25th by a virgin named Isis, in a cave on a manger, Jesus was born of a virgin named Mary on 25th December, on a manger.

  • A star in the East announced the birth of Horus and he was visited by 3 wise men just like Jesus.

  • Horus had an earthly father called Seb which translates to Joseph the earthly father of Jesus.

  • Horus was baptized by Anup the baptizer before starting his ministry at age 30, Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and started his ministry at age 30.

  • Horus had 12 disciples, Jesus had 12 disciples

  • Horus performed miracles like walking on water and raising El – Osiris from the dead, Jesus performed miracles like walking on water and raising Lazarus from the dead.

  • Horus was crucified between two thieves, died and buried and resurrected after 3 days. Jesus was crucified between two thieves, died was buried and after 3 days rose again.

  • Horus was called the lamb of god, the light, KRST, anointed one, the way, the truth, son of man, messiah and other titles applied to Jesus.

Seeing that the myth of Horus was developed years before Christ, the bible must have plagiarized the account of Christ form the account of Horus. Yeah, this could only be true if the above claims were true, except they are not.

  • Horus’s mother ISIS was not a virgin, she was married to his father Osiris, one legend has Isis sleeping with the dead body of Osiris which resulted in the birth of Horus (see, ‘Plutarch Isis and Osiris’ pg.65), Horus was not born on a manger or in a cave, according to James Frazer in ‘Adonis, Attis, Osiris pg. 8’ he was born in a swamp. Nowhere in the Bible does it say Jesus was born on Dec 25th , and there is no record of Horus being born on Dec 25th . Horus was born during the month of Khoiak (roughly November though there are variations) according to ‘Traditional festivals; a multicultural encyclopedia’. According to ‘Plutarch, Osiris and Isis pg. 65’ Horus was born during the winter solstice.

  • There is no mention of stars announcing the birth of Horus in Egyptian mythology, no mention of three wise men, and even if there were three wise men, the bible says nothing about three wise men, the bible says ‘…wise men…’ there is no number attached to them, they could have been 20 for all we know.

  • There is no linguistic connection between Seb and Joseph, Seb according to Egyptian mythology was a god, the god of the earth, he was not the earthly father of Horus.

  • There is no record of Horus being baptized, the character Anup whose name means royal child had nothing to do with baptism, there is no such thing as baptism in Egyptian mythology. There is also no record of Horus having a ministry or starting his ministry at age 30, these are lies manufactured from thin air.

  • Horus was never said to have 12 disciples, according to ‘gods of Egypt pg. 61’ he had 4 followers. And according to ‘The Center of Ancient Civilization pg. 231 – 232’ he had an unknown number of metal workers.

  • Horus is said to have done some supernatural things but that is to be expected of any deity. There is however no record of him walking on water or raising El – Osiris from the dead. Those who came up with the raising El-Osiris thing, intentionally added the ‘El’ to make it sound like Lazarus, there is no such thing as El- Osiris in Egyptian Mythology, there is only Osiris who happens to be the father of Horus and when he died, he never came back but remained in the underworld and became the god of the dead (Conceptions of god in ancient Egypt pg. 233).

  • There is no record of Horus being crucified, or being buried and rising after three days, these are outright lies.

  • There is no record of Horus being referred to with the terminologies commonly used to refer to Jesus e.g. Christ, Messiah etc.

Dionysus (Greece, 500 BC)


He was supposedly born of a virgin in December 25th just like Jesus, Was a traveling teacher who performed miracles like Jesus, was called holy child and placed in a manger like Jesus, turned water into wine and was known as the god of the vines like Jesus, rode on triumphant procession on a donkey like Jesus, he was a king that was ritualistically killed and eaten (sounds similar to the Christian Eucharist), he rose from the dead on March 25th, was depicted as being hung on a tree like the crucified Jesus. He was called king of kings, begotten son, redeemer, savior, anointed one and the alpha and omega. He also has the same trial as Jesus. The conclusion would be that Jesus is a copy of Dionysus. But how true are these claims? Let’s see;

  • Dionysus was not born on December 25th or by a virgin according to ‘The God of Ecstasy, page 153’ he was the son of Zeus and Persephone and according to ‘Classical Mythology by Mark P.O Morford and Robert J. Lenardon page 221’ as well as ‘Diodorus Siculus 3.64. pg. 3-6’ he was born of Semele after being impregnated by Zeus.

  • Dionysus did travel and perform some super natural acts, but that’s expected of any supposed deity and does not prove anything. There is no record of him being called holy child or being placed in a manger, this was made up.

  • His account of turning water into wine comes from the writings of Achilles Titius, Leucippe and Clitophon 2.2.1. In the second century about 100 years after the death and resurrection of Christ, according to scholars, the pagans were parodying the Christian Eucharist (Fiction as History; from Nero to Julian pages 125 – 128) so in this particular case, it is the pagans who copied Christians. And Jesus was never called God of the vine, He called himself THE VINE.

  • Dionysus has been depicted riding a mule while crowds are waving ivy branches, this was however common practice in the ancient Greco -roman culture, all their kingly figures were treated this way, Jesus was not the only one, so the comparison is invalid.

  • Dionysus being killed and eaten was never done ritualistically by any of his human followers like the Christian Eucharist, according to the mythology, he was captured by the titans as a child, they then boiled and ate him, Zeus found out, he killed the titans and restored him back to life from a leftover of his heart (Diodorus Siculus 3.62, Masks of Dionysus, Thomas H. Carpenter and Christopher A. Farone page 28)

  • There is no record of Dionysus rising from the dead on the 25th march, no depiction of him hung on a tree. The depiction commonly used namely ‘The Orpheus Amulet’ is a forgery from the 20th century (see: The Orpheus Amulet from the cover of the Jesus mysteries by James Hannam, )

  • There is no record of him being referred to with any of the titles commonly used to refer to Jesus. Finally, Dionysus trial is nothing like Jesus, he was put on trial for making women go mad, he let himself be taken in order to publicly humiliate the King, he then escapes from prison by a lightning and has the women kill the King (you can search online) nothing like Jesus.

Krishna (India, 900 BC)


Krishna was supposedly born of a virgin on the 25th December like Jesus. His birth was signaled by a star in the East like Jesus and was attended by angels and shepherds, who presented him with spices like the wise men’s presents. He was persecuted by a tyrant who killed innocent infants like Jesus’ situation as a child, he is depicted with his foot on a serpent similar to the allegory of Jesus ‘…crushing the serpent’s head”, he was a miracle worker who taught through parables like Jesus. He argued with the Hindu priests and called them hypocrites like Jesus with the pharisees and Sadducees. His beloved disciple was called Arjuna which translates to John, he was killed at age 30, rose from the dead and ascended to heaven like Jesus. It is said he will return on earth on a white horse to kill an evil prince, sounds familiar? He was crucified on a tree between two thieves and was said to be the lion of the tribe of Saki, like Jesus the lion of Judah. Finally, he was called the second person of the Hindu Triumtri, like Jesus is the second person of the Trinity. Clearly Jesus was plagiarized from Krishna, or so you might think. Let’s look at the facts;

  • Krishna was not born on 25th Dec, he was born during Janmashtami in August (Krishna in History, thought and culture – Lavanya Vensani PhD, pages 139 – 140) Jesus was not born on 25th Dec either. Krishna was not born of a virgin, his mother had seven children before him ((Krishna in History, thought and culture – Lavanya Vensani PhD pages 49) Krishna is only said to have been conceived without sexual intercourse. And there is no record of a star signaling his birth. There were Hindu angels in his birth but not shepherds, they were cow herds, and no spices, just flowers divinely given from heaven.

  • Krishna was said to be persecuted by a tyrant who slaughtered infants. He is depicted standing on a serpent but is nothing like the Christian Jesus crushing the head of the serpent. The depiction shows Krishna dancing on the head of a serpent with a thousand heads (Srimaad Bhagavatam 10.16: 25 – 31) He is said to have performed miracles, but that is to be expected of any supposed Deity so, not proof of anything.

  • Krishna taught but not through parables, Krishna did attack the Hindu priests for focusing too much on rituals, there is however no linguistic connections between the name Arjuna Krishna’s disciple and John Jesus’ disciple. John is simply an English name for the Hebrew (Yochanan) and has no connection to India.

  • Krishna was not killed at 30, he lived to be over 100 years old. He did not rise from the dead, after dying his spirit is what ascended into heaven (Srimaad Bhagavatam 10.30.25 – 43) unlike Jesus whose physical body ascended into heaven.

  • The myth does not say Krishna will return in a horse, according to the mythology, a future incarnation of Krishna is supposed to ride a white horse and destroy all evil, which is to some extend similar to the Christian view.

  • There is no record of him being crucified between thieves, no record of him being the lion of the tribe of Saki and he was not called the second person of the Hindu Triumtri, he was one of the ten avatars of Vishnu.

Some of the claims are clearly false and even those that are almost similar, have no power seeing that Hindu scholars agree that the Hindus twisted the tales of Krishna by borrowing extensively from Christianity.

“some scholars believe that, except for the name, the Krishna cycle of stories has borrowed extensively from Christian sources, especially in relation to the birth, childhood and divinity of Jesus. The Great orientalist, Sir William Jones held that the spurious Gospels which abounded in the first years of Christianity found their way to India and were known to the Hindus. According to others, Krishna’s victory over Kaliya is a travestied version of Christ’s victory of Satan, the serpent. The German writer, Weber, held that Krishnaism was indebted to Christianity on the grounds that the worship of Krishna as the sole deity was a post- Christian phase in Hinduism, and the legend of his birth and the celebration of his birthdays, the honor paid to his mother Devika, and his life as a herdsman, all showed Christian influence (XI p. 131)…summing up the data Hopkins says, “Considering how late these Krishna legends are in India, there can be no doubt that the Hindus borrowed the tales, but not in name (XI p. 144)” (Benjamin Walker, The Hindu World, page 240)

Dr Edwin Brant says, “These stories of Krishna can only be dated as early as between the 4th to 6th century”, these are decades after the death and resurrection of Christ. (

( )

David V, Mason suggested, “…Maybe as early as the second century…” still too late for Christians to have copied.

From the above we can conclude that if copying did occur, it was the other way around, Krishnaism copied from Christianity.

In the next article we shall look at Mithras, Serapis and Attis, and a few other plagiarism claims including the Noah’s flood account, the creation account and the ten commandments and Moses account.

Finally, in order for any of the plagiarism accusations concerning Jesus to be true, Jesus would have to be a mythological character just like the others. But the historicity of Christ has been well authenticated (Is Jesus simply a mythical Character), Jesus was a real historical figure and we have evidence.

THE PROBLEM OF EVIL (THEODICY) — February 22, 2018


Young woman having a headache

The Greek philosopher Epicurus said, “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.  Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” A question has been asked by many, “If God is so powerful and so good, how come evil exists?”

How can an all-powerful (omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient), all-good (omnibenevolent), all-present (omnipresent) God exist yet evil exists? There are two categories of people who would raise this question or a version of this question, the first group would be the believers, Christians and the second group would be those opposed to religion, atheists, agnostics etc.

First, lets address those opposed to religion. Before you complain about the existence of objective evil, you have to have a definition of objective good and objective evil. To a world where no God exists, good and evil don’t exist, think about it, how would you conceptualize the idea of good and evil if you are for example an atheist? I asked one atheist to define good and evil and he told me that good is that which is generally acceptable in society and evil is that which is generally not acceptable in society. This definition doesn’t fly, in Nazi Germany, it was generally acceptable to kill Jews, was it good? absolutely not. Another atheist told me that good is that which benefits conscious beings and evil is that which harms conscious beings, and these conscious beings include animals. This definition doesn’t work either, why?  We kill animals (conscious beings) for food, skin and other utilities yet that is not considered evil unless you are a radical vegetarian, animals kill other animals to protect territories, for food etc., yet that is never considered evil. In an atheistic worldview good and evil are relative, nothing is objectively good and nothing is objectively evil so it would be hypocritical for anybody opposed to religion to complain about the existence of evil.

The other thing is, most people opposed to religion like to make the claim that if something is not backed up by empirical scientific data, they cannot accept it as part of reality; well, there is no scientific data backing up the concept of good or evil, science backs up the concept of pain, but pain doesn’t necessarily equal evil, so good and evil to those people doesn’t exist.

Think about it, humans are animals just like any other animal from an exclusively scientific perspective. Now if a human being kills another human being, that can’t be evil scientifically because that would be just like a lion killing a gazelle, or a gorilla killing another gorilla trying to invade its territory. A tsunami takes place, people are killed and others are swept into the ocean, that can’t really be evil scientifically, we eat fish, what is wrong with fish eating us when some of us get swept into the ocean during a tsunami? The tag-line for evolution is survival of the fittest, the strong survive at the expense of the weak, that’s science, I have a gun, I am strong, you don’t have a gun, you are weak, I kill you and take your money, survival of the fittest in action. Basically, to anybody opposed to religion good and evil don’t exist, meaning they have no justification for complaining about God allowing evil and whether or not that’s a good thing.

Now to the believers, there are several approaches: there is the free will argument. The argument would be that God gave us free will and he allows evil things to occur because he does not want to violate our free will, for example, a criminal wants to kill another person, if God stops him, he would violate his free will and God does not violate our free will, so he lets it happen.

This argument is bogus, it doesn’t work, what about natural phenomena like earthquakes? Whose free will is being upheld? If God answers prayers, then this argument falls apart, think about it, if my house has been broken into by robbers who have planned to kill me, then I pray for protection and God stops them and prevents them from killing me, he would have violated their free will wouldn’t he? And by the way free will as in autonomy doesn’t exist, free will means having the ability to chose between to or not to do something with an equal amount of ease, only God has that ability. Think about it, if for example you are asked to kill your mother, unless there is something wrong with your mind, you will easily choose not to kill your mother, it would be extremely difficult even impossible for you to chose to kill your mother. In fact the only way way you could kill your mother, is if your re forced to. That’s not free will.

The other argument is the open theism argument. Here the claim is that God made himself not know the future, essentially denying the omniscience of God. The argument is that God is just as surprised when bad stuff happens as we are, he does not know the future so we can’t really blame him. This argument is flawed as well because, one, the bible clearly teaches the omniscience of God. Two, if God does not know the future, then he has lost control of his creation, why trust him or worship him, why pray to him, a god who is not omniscient is a weak god that is not worth of our worship. How does he know whether or not he will defeat the devil?

The other argument is the that God knows every possible decision we would make in every possible scenario, so he works things out without violating our free will ensuring we end up with the scenario that results in the best possible decision being made, basically he is trying the best he can. This argument has a few flaws, the main one being if God is trying the best he can, that means certain things are outside of his control, meaning he is not exactly sovereign and that’s not the Christian God. There are other arguments which are just as futile as the ones above.

You could forget all these futile rationalizations and like me admit that at the moment this is one of those areas that are beyond our comprehension. God’s intelligence is infinite, ours is finite. If you take your eight-month-old baby to be vaccinated, the baby’s intelligence level is too low to comprehend the significance of the injection, the baby will only be experiencing pain, to the baby, that’s evil. But to the adult whose intelligence level is higher, the painful vaccination is part of a process of attaining a greater good i.e. prevent dangerous diseases. We have finite intelligence, God has an infinite level of intelligence, his level of intelligence is clearly way higher than ours, he sees the bigger picture that we don’t and cannot see. The evil stuff might just be like the vaccine injection to the baby.





Every single human being has some hypocritical tendencies. You see the term hypocrite routes from the Greek word, ‘hypokrites’ it was a technical name for a stage actor, someone who puts on a costume to play a character on stage, in front of an audience. But when the lights go out and the audience has left, the costume comes down, the mask is lifted and the actor retreats to his real self. Almost every human being likes displaying the best parts of themselves to the world and hiding every flaw or struggles to avoid being judged or appear vulnerable, this is especially true of believers. That is some type of hypocrisy.

I recently read one challenging poem titled ‘little boys & girls’ and it encouraged me to actually try and avoid this type of hypocrisy, not completely, but we must begin somewhere. I figured I should share a little something about myself, a small part of my testimony. I will start from the beginning.

When I was 5 years old, I was sexually abused. I know, I am a man and men are supposed to be strong, men can’t be abused, they should ‘man up’; yeah, the problem with  these kind of nonsense is that first of all, at 5, I was not a man, I was a child, big difference. Secondly, every human being can be abused, adult or not, it’s not just women. The abuse was obviously a traumatic event that resulted in me developing a mental illness; some anxiety disorders and a huge pool of psychological and emotional mess. Today I will only share one of those disorders, social anxiety disorder. Developing social anxiety made it extremely difficult for me to socialize; social anxiety disorder is sometimes referred to as social phobia, an irrational fear of socializing. That means I was and still I am extremely unfriendly and not very social, you can guess from that people perceived me to be rude, disrespectful and prideful, some still do. I had extremely few friends, superficial ones, not close friends, no best friends or anything like that. As I grew older, I began suffering from depression due to loneliness and the inability to properly socialize.

When I was almost finishing my primary school, during the last year, I began my ‘struggle’ in the faith, at that time I was a catholic, attending catechism classes I was on my way to becoming an altar boy. But catholism wasn’t enough for me so I became a Rastafarian, I still held on to my catholism but I was also Rastafarian on the side, which was weird because Rastafarians don’t like any kind of, ‘isms’, Christianism, catholism, those are ‘Babylonian’ ways, the ‘Babylonian’ ways and Rastafarians as you may have heard from some reggae music are oil and water, they don’t mix, at least the serious ones. So this went on up to my first year in high school.

On my second year in high school, the first term, I began questioning this whole Jesus, God thing, the Trinity made no sense to me, after several months of questioning my belief system, I decided it was time I abandon both Christianity and Rastafarianism, so I became a Muslim for a few weeks, it didn’t last long. Then by one month into the second term of my second year in high school, I had abandoned all religion, I had become an atheist, I no longer believed in the existence of God. Part of the reason for this was the anxiety and depression I was struggling with, yes my anxiety disorder was still haunting me. So as an atheist, during the final term of my second year in high school, I had a very unsuccessful suicide attempt, the depression was too much, I couldn’t take it anymore, and not having close friends to share my struggles with didn’t help much, I had friends we just weren’t close, to me they were very important people, but to them because of my poor social skills I was the least important part of their lives.

Let me cut this story short, in December 2010, date 10 at around 8:00 pm, God in his grace and mercy saved me, he gave me a new life and new desires, that didn’t fix everything, but it sure was awesome. It was the best day of my life. We were on holiday, I still had questions I had acquired as an atheist, so I went looking for answers, reading books and articles online etc. and my journey to the Apologetics ministry began. From that time hence forth, the feeling of being unloved and unwanted which contributed mostly to my depression began to subside not completely but to a good extend.

But the struggle didn’t end there, I have been saved now for about seven years, and I still have struggles. Apart from the fact that my anxiety disorder is still alive and well, and so are most of my psychological and emotional mess, which means I still at times suffer from depression, I also struggle with sin, some traces of sin from my previous life still haunt me, I at times struggle with envy, Just as an example. I have poor social skills, that means everyone I call friend at the moment, is I would say a superficial friend, I am not really close friends with anyone, I am not even that close to my own family members. I have been told the words ‘I love’ you by only one person in all of my existence, not even the playful, ‘I love you like a brother’ or, ‘I love you with the love of Christ’ nothing. That person was my sister Adelaide, actually she didn’t tell me she loves me, she posted a picture of me on Facebook and wrote there, ‘this is my brother, I love him’, maybe my mother told me I love you when I was a kid I wouldn’t know. So every time I see people tell each other I love you, mothers and fathers to their children, friends to each other, lovers to each other etc. Every time I see people boast of their best friends and things like that I get very envious, I wish someone had said that to or about me, the only problem is, I don’t have that kind of relationship with anyone so that would never happen. Envy and jealousy are sins, and so I strive to fight them every time they arise, and by the grace of God, I overcome.

I also struggle with balancing between turning into a psychopath who thinks he is the center of the universe and people owe him things, and becoming a whiny insecure looser. At times I get angry because people don’t understand me hence judge me, or when I am not shown any kind of affection by anyone, but more specifically my family, I get upset about so many social defects that come with my condition, (I sound like a teenage girl right now). But each time that happens I remind myself that I am the one with the anxiety not them, I remind myself that nobody owes me friendship, nobody owes me love, affection nobody owes me anything. At that moment I avoid becoming a psychopath, but then fall back into a little insecure looser, I start feeling sorry for myself, I start thinking of how big of a looser I am, I think of how awful I am that I ignore people and I am rude to people, I think of how I will never have a wife because to get a wife you need to be a really good talker, but if you have poor social skills that is most likely not going to happen. And I also struggle with the fact that I feel this way, we all have struggles.

Writing what I have written would probably be considered by some to be less manly. Is it less manly? Probably, but it would be hypocritical for me to pretend I don’t go through these stuff. I would like to remind us that Paul had the metaphorical thorn on his flesh, he prayed for God to take it away, God didn’t, and that situation was actually used to glorify God. I am sure there are people out there with experiences worse than this little situation, but the principle is the same, trust Him, He knows what He is doing, after all, He is the sovereign God.

Sin leave me alone (a poem) — August 18, 2017

Sin leave me alone (a poem)

Sin leave me alone

I have been your slave for so long

Serving you for too long

Locked in your prison without hope

And now it’s time to go home

Sin leave me alone


Sin leave me alone

I have been your friend for so long

The two of us were tight

Only you were a parasite

Like a termite

Working hard to destroy me

Sin leave me alone


Sin leave me alone

Because of you I am a hypocrite

Claiming not to know you

While embracing you in secret

Sin leave me alone


Sin leave alone

I have met my master the Christ and the king of kings

He is my savior the Messiah and the creator of all things

Paying for my sins he did

When on the cross he died

You no longer have dominion over me

So sin please, leave me alone



Stay Loyal Brother, It is worth it — June 4, 2017

Stay Loyal Brother, It is worth it


This articles is addressed to my brother’s in the faith, and every other person that happens to be reading it. Let’s talk about one of the biggest struggles in this day and age with regards to sin, sexuality. The devil is clever, he is the accuser of brethren Rev 12:10, and he is also the tempter Mathew 4:3 So basically this is what the devil does; he tempts you to do things by whatever means necessary, you do the said things which are obviously wrong, after which he turns around and condemns you,  making you feel worthless. So he tempts you then he accuses you.

With regards to sexuality, the scriptures are clear, no sex till marriage. But the devil, especially in this generation has managed to convince the society that real manhood is measured by sexual prowess. So, you are not a real man until you have some kind of sexual prowess, in order to attain this sexual prowess you will need to practice and in order to practice you will need to be fornicating with as many women as possible. Technically if you are a born again Christian, then you are abstaining and if you are abstaining, well, you are not a real man, you are worthless and a disappointment to society. How does that make you feel, not good I am guessing right?

Now, what if you compromised, what if you decided to give in to the pressure of society and fornicate, what then? Well, the Christian community and God will be disappointed, but the society, the secular community will be impressed, they will applaud you and congratulate you for finally becoming a ‘real man,’ or will they? Allow me to surprise you, Christian single man, compromise and fornicate, the society that was once disappointed in you because you were not a ‘real man’ for not fornicating, well it will still be disappointed in you, because this time, you will have become a hypocrite. So, you abstain, your secular friends make fun of you and look down on you because you are not a real man, you compromise and fornicate, your secular friends still look down on you and make fun of you because now you have become a hypocrite. Just as I said, the tempter and accuser, the devil uses your secular friends to make you feel bad for abstaining. You then decide to compromise, the devil smiles and uses the very same people to make you feel bad and guilty and worthless for fornicating, by letting them remind you how much of a hypocrite you are.

How about this, stop trying to impress people that will never be impressed by you, stop working so hard to please people that no matter what you do you will always be a disappointment to them. So what if your friends look down on you and do not consider you man enough? So what if your secular friends don’t want to hang out with you because you are not cool enough? You will be hanging out with the angels, angel Gabriel and Michael, two of the most powerful beings in existence and Jesus Christ himself the coolest dude to ever exist in heaven for eternity. So what if you will probably not have a wife because a good number of ladies out there today will reject you because you lack ‘experience,’? Which by the way should not be an issue seeing that the bible forbids relationships with non-believers and I would like to think that all ladies who are believers don’t think like the rest of society. Even so, assuming that all the believer ladies will have been taken and the only ones remaining are the secular ones, no big deal, you will be in good company. Jesus Christ himself the real deal, never had a wife, Paul did not have a wife, Timothy did not have a wife, all the disciples didn’t have wives, none of the New Testament apostles, Matthew, Mark, John, and Luke etc. had wives. Some of the greatest theologians in history did not have wives, Jerome the theologian who gave us the Latin Vulgate, he translated the whole bible from the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic into Latin by himself, did not have a wife. Talk of Athanasius the man responsible for the athanasian Creed, did not have a wife, St. Augustine of Hippo a philosopher and theologian, he gave us the fare war theory and the city of God a refutation of pagan mythological gods, never married. Clement of Rome who is even mentioned in the Bible by Paul, the 4th pastor of Rome, never married, Clement of Alexandria the first ever Christian Apologist apart from Jesus and the Apostles, never married. The list is long. The point is, it does not matter, we simply have no excuse for compromising and if we do compromise our accuser will not be proud of us he will still mock us, insult us and make us feel bad about ourselves in relation to God.

God tells us his York is easy and his burden is light, which is true, if you obey him, he is proud and impressed if you disobey him he is not impressed, simple. The devil and his minions on the other hand, whether you listen to his lies or not, he will always find a way to turn you into the bad guy. The whole point of this little article is that if God has saved you from sin, be loyal to him, life will be easy, you might face opposition from the other camp, but you will be okay in the end.

The imperfect perfectly perfected (poem) — April 11, 2017

The imperfect perfectly perfected (poem)

Every subatomic particle in existence he created

The universe he put in place all animals plants and humans he made


But like the serpent of old man lusted for his job falling for the devil’s lies

The forbidden fruit he ate,

Man was no longer perfect, see now sin, had entered the world

evil, a concept formerly not familiar to man, now become all too real, fear, death, disease,

Man learn t to hate.

Separated from God, man had no hope

But in his sovereignty with a greater plan in mind he made promises

Preserving his incarnation’s lineage through a nation later to hate him Israel.

His promises he kept, failing not in one even to the ultimate promise

Offering himself, in the person of Jesus the God man, fully God fully human.

Crushed for our transgressions, suffered for our sins, God’s wrath is now satisfied.

No longer do our imperfections separate us from the perfect King, creator, the alpha and the omega the supreme, infinite, eternal, immutable God almighty Yahweh is his name.

The imperfect perfectly perfected.