How can we know if we have a soul? How do we know souls exist? First it takes accepting that logic can be used to deduce truth. If you don’t believe truth exists or don’t believe it is possible to come to know truth; that is for a different argument. This article will present 4 arguments for the existence of a soul that which is separate from the physical body.
Continue reading
The nutrition and fitness industry is like the wild west, and that’s a good thing! Freedom drives innovation and discovery while fact-based insights and marketing help keep the freely driven industry accountable. That is how Power Balance bracelets came about. Freedom and a lack of fact-based informed consumers. Does it work, and if not, why do so many people swear by them?
There are all sorts of products marketed as something that can do something amazing. For example, remember those silicone wristband bracelets that promised to make you feel more “balanced?” Did you read all their zinger words? “Power Balance holograms“, “100% surgical grade silicone“, “Improve balance, flexibility and strength as well as contributing to an overall sense of well being.”
Here’s my favorate part though: “Mylar Hologram’s which are embedded with frequencies that react with your body’s electro-magnetic field. When the static POWER BALANCE Hologram comes in contact with your body’s energy field, it begins to resonate in accordance with each individual’s biological energy system, creating a harmonic loop that optimizes your energy field, maintains maximum energy flow while it clears the pathways so the electro-chemical exchange functions like the well-tuned generator it was designed to be, resulting in immediate improved balance, increased core strength, greater flexibility, increased range of motion and overall well-being. ” HOLY SHIT, that is some trash “science” lol. And then you have all these amazon reviewers swearing by this trash. I’ll touch on that sheeple mentality later. First, let me dig into what REAL science says about this.
There are no scientific studies showing that power bracelet balance works. And there is no earthly science even remotely saying that we can capture frequencies and bottle it in a hologram.
Here is an actual, real, reliable, scientific study directly looking at the Power Balance band itself [1]. I’ll let the study speak for it’s self when it states: “This study found that under the testing conditions used in the current study, there were no significant performance benefits when wearing the Power Balance® bracelet compared to the placebo bracelet… Thus, this study demonstrates that t the holographic bracelets do not work as advertised. It should be noted that while this study investigated the Power Balance® bracelet, it is presumed that results inves-tigating other performance enhancing jewelry would be similar, under similar testing circumstances.” AND then they go on to explain WHY the public demonstrations of this product “appear” to have a beneficial effect. It states: “these improvements were attributed to the fact that subjects were either: 1) more warmed-up (Maud et al., 2006a; 2006b) or 2) habituated to the task (Benson and Friedman, 1996; Wright et al., 2009).”
Then we have the American Council on Exercise (ACE) conducts a study on the Power Balance Bracelet as well [2]. ACE’s Chief Science Officer, Cedric X. Bryant, Ph.D. states “We ultimately found that the bands had no impact on performance outcomes. Moreover, the significant difference between the first and second time that participants performed tests is likely attributed to participants anticipating the specific test activities the second time around as well as becoming somewhat warmed up, not the bracelet itself… The study was designed to test the validity of the claims that wearing Power Balance bracelets with their embedded holograms restore optimal energy balance in the body to improve a person’s strength, balance and flexibility… The bottom line is that after all the data was analyzed, there clearly was no evidence to support the notion that wearing a Power Balance bracelet improves physical performance.”
Even Psychology Today felt the need to throw their hat in the ring, even calling it a scam [3]. You can’t discredit science and say something like “well science hasn’t been able to detect this form of energy yet.” and then attempt to use scientific reasoning to justify your belief. You just prove yourself wrong, contradictory, ignorant, and incompetent.
Even major companies can get duked into believing this trash works, CNBC did when they named it the “Sports Product of 2010”. Boy, I bet they feel dumb now. But I guess I shouldn’t expect anything different from major news media outlets who are notorious for not fact checking their propaganda they spew.
Then you have all these celebrity endorsements from wealthy morons such as, David Beckham, Robert DeNiro, Leonardo DiCaprio, P Diddy, Khloe Kardashian, Shaquille O’Neal, Cristiano Ronaldo, and Kate Middleton. Because we all know how reliable and informed celebrity opinions are too… yeah okay [4].
Then Power Balance comes out with all sorts of changes to their product. They removed promotional videos that made all the sort of initial claims of the product; they are shutting down outlets that are presenting their initial (original) claims of the product and only projecting the new (revised) claims of the product; and they started offering full refunds to unsatisfied customers. Why would they do all that if their product works?
Now if you go to their site, their claims are drastically changed and moved toward a more spiritual, religious sense. According to their website, about the question “What does this wristband do?” They state: “…it is based on eastern philosophies.” LOL Wait it get’s better. “What is Power Balance Hologram Technology?” Keep in mind, this question is about the TECHNOLOGY. Here is their answer “.… The hologram is designed based on Eastern philosophies.” LOL WTF, eastern philosophies have a “cutting edge three-dementiaoin” imaging holographic idea in their spirituality? If everyone emits this kind of “energy” and this band can harness this “energy,” why doesn’t it work for everyone? They state: “... there is no assurance it can work for everyone… That’s why we offer a no-questions-asked, money-back guarantee.” I guess some people just aren’t human if they don’t admit this “energy,” that or, the product doesn’t work at harnessing everyone’s energy… either way, that alone proves its a fraud [5].
Listen, the Placebo Effect IS REAL. Check this out:https://www.youtube.com/embed/yfRVCaA5o18?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en&autohide=2&wmode=transparent
The “Flexibility/balance/strength Test” these Balance bands tell you to do is more like a test of gullibility and here’s why. First they tell you to do it without the band. That’s important because you are doing it for the first time, you are unaware of possible current situational external things that make you loose your balance, like muscle weakness, fatigue, and other physical issues that would effect your trying to balance.
But, once you do it, you become aware of theses, consciously or subconsciously. Then, when you put the band on, and test yourself again, you are suddenly able to balance better…
That’s because of the things that you were not aware of that impacted your balance, you are now aware of, and your body can naturally compensate for it; consciously or subconsciously. That’s how the mind and the body interact naturally lol.
If you balanced on your right leg, and you felt your right leg was tired, maybe your outer quad was fatigued, the next time you balance on your right leg, you will shift weight to a different, not so fatigued muscle group; thus improving your balance, naturally.
Another nonscientific trick is that a sales guy will have you balance on one leg with your arms out and then he will push down on one of your extended hands, throwing you off balance. Then, they will let you try on the band and repeat the test. But this time, you consciously or subconsciously already know what to expect and your body will already, be ready to compensate the second time around… This natural mind-body interaction is then assumed it was because of the band, not the natural mind-body interaction.
Even the direction of the force applied by the sales man says a lot. The first time they may pull you or push you down and away from your supporting leg; which would, naturally, throw you off balance. Then the second tiem they may push you back toward your balancing leg, which just enables you to naturally shift your weight toward your stabilized planted leg. And presto, you are “more” balanced lol.
And that was 10 years ago. This crap got exposed 9 years ago. And still, morons are still buying and believing in this “eastern technology.” But, at least there are some people who have actually become more healthy from this product, the owner and executive staff of the scam. They have made a financial killing off all the moronic customers. And with those funds, they are able to live a healthier life.
If you are wearing one. Sorry, your a gullible tool. Take it off. Go to the gym and workout your stabilizer muscles.
If you have a friend that wears one, put them in check. Inform them of their stupidity and culpability in making scammers rich.
If you see a fitness and performance shop selling them, ask the manager how it feels to sell fraudulent products and be managing a company that is being scammed.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Sources:
Part of diet and fitness is your overall health. With so much hoopla about COVID and Face-masks, we want to know, supported by reliable data driven experts, if wearing a face-mask works, or does not work, or risks more harm or less harm; and how that can help you plan your safe, lower risk, workouts and going to the gym.
“If properly worn, surgical masks block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays or splatters that may contain germs like viruses and prevent them from reaching your mouth and nose, according to the FDA.” [1] So, according to the government agency, this mask protects YOU from OTHERS. But is it really protecting you, if you’re continually re-injecting viruses and bacteria from your own body? After all, sneezing and coughing is your body ejecting unwanted things.
“Because surgical masks fit loosely rather than having a tight seal, they don’t provide an absolute barrier or complete protection against tiny particles in the air that may be released by coughs or sneezes.”[1] And these “tiny particles” also known as “aerosol particles” are so small, they even go through all cloth masks. So, again, what’s the point?
Oddly, and “currently, the CDC does not recommend that healthy people wear a face mask to protect themselves from COVID-19 (or other respiratory illnesses). According to W.H.O., masks are only effective when a person also frequently washes their hands with alcohol-based hand rub or soap and water.” [1] Now that’s an interesting point. Is it the mask that helps or washing your hands?
If “aerosol particles” go through the mask but washing your hands can wash off and kill viruses in the particles, wouldn’t washing your hands be the thing to do?
*UPDATE*
The CDC reversed, again, their recommendations and are now recommending all people to wear masks. The idea is that it blocks the larger particles from spreading. But if health people are wearing masks, what COVID laced particles are they spreading? None. So then the benefit for healthy people to wear the mask is to prevent breathing in the large particles from sick people who aren’t wearing masks. Makes sense. BUT, have you ever smelt a fart or walked somewhere where you could smell food or weird bathroom smells? The answer is yes. Have you wondered how large those particles are? Well, they are larger than a virus. Now, granted the virus does not travel in the area by its self, alone. When someone infected sneezes, they shoot out all sort of sized aerosol particles, not just those big scary nasty droplets. Studies suggest the virus can be in the air for hours, depending on the size of the particles. Knowing smaller aerosol particles get ejected and can linger in the air, are smaller than fecal and food particles, this still brings us back to the starting point.
The basic scenario of some infected person walking down the isle of Walmart, sneezing while wearing a mask still ejects small aerosol particles in the air, that smaller kind that can linger. Then, you walk down that same isle 10 minutes later. You breath in and out smelling all the food smells… and inhale those very small aerosol particles, through your mask… Then, as the bigger heavier particles fall and rest on something on the isle, that you may touch and buy and take home… all of this while the both of you are wearing masks… What did wearing the mask accomplish?
A simple test is Tobacco Smoke. Can you smell it wearing your masking? The particle size of tobacco smoke is around 0.05 and 0.01 [18]. What about a virus attached to aerosol droplets that size? Well, it’s still a possibility according to this 2010 study, studying the H1N1 virus (same family of virus as COVID) [19]. A good visual is using a chain-link fence to block mosquitoes.
How many strangers, in public, sneeze in your face? How many strangers breath heavily in your face? None. No one really does that. It’s common knowledge that it’s rude and gross. So if heavier droplets fall on objects you touch and small aerosol particles linger in air as your walking around… all while wearing a mask, yet, smaller than the fibers of 99% of masks the public uses, what has been prevented? Still doesn’t change the premise of this article.
There are a couple of states that never went on lockdown [20]. Why don’t they have higher infections rates and deaths? [21] Some countries didn’t impose such harsh restrictions either, why are they not more hard hit? It’s logic, the more testing and data collection, the higher the numbers. Not necessarily because the virus is spreading but because of the amount of testing being conducted. Some states have even been busted inflating the numbers! [22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28… and we can keep going]. Even the bias left-wing VOX admits to this [25]. And what happened to the seasonal flu? What happened to those numbers? There are a whole host of influenza viruses out there, where are those numbers? Why do states to certain political ideologies seem to have worse numbers? Notice how they try to avoid talking about the deadliness (or lack of) of the virus, because, it’s not as deadly as they want you to think. Some even come up with arguments against considering the mortality rate. What is worse than death? See, there is more data manipulation and politics at play here than COVID itself.
*END OF UPDATE*
“As a lay person, using a cloth face mask, or continually wearing a surgical face mask whenever you leave your home, poses practical problems. “If you think about a bandanna or something that’s papery, it’s going to get wet through the day and be uncomfortable, and potentially you’re going to touch it more,” says Dr. Colleen Kraft, associate chief medical officer at Emory University Hospital and an associate professor at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta. That reduces the mask’s effectiveness and actually could expose you to possible virus on its outer surface.” [1] This seems to place the greater importance in washing your hands than wearing a cloth/paper mask.
Mask or no mask, avoid touching the mucosal surfaces of your face – your mouth, nose and eyes. “Surgical masks will not prevent your acquiring diseases,” said Dr. William Schaffner, a professor of preventive medicine and infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University, and the medical director of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases. Rather, he explained, surgical masks are typically used by surgeons to protect their patients from their mouth-borne germs — but “those masks don’t work to prevent inhaling diseases,” said Schaffner. As for more preventative measures, Schaffner recommends “abundant hand-washing” [6] Again, “abundant hand-washing” is prescribed.
Face masks can play a role in preventing the infection, but that role is limited. A healthy individual in a normal situation does not need to wear a mask. A face mask is not the ideal solution for protection from the new coronavirus for the following reasons: A surgical mask does not fit tightly over the nose and mouth (which allows particles in and out); It is not possible to prevent airborne virus infection (some particles are so small they just go through the mask anyway); When you touch the mask, you lose the protection and must replace the mask, and dispose of it safely. [10]
“CDC also advises the use of simple cloth face coverings to slow the spread of the virus and help people who may have the virus and do not know it from transmitting it to others.”[2] It’s odd the CDC still recommends “simple cloth face coverings” even though viruses to so small they fit right through them. It also seems that the mask “works” best for people who are already infected to prevent and reduce the risk of them spreading it from saliva and or coughing through droplets and expelling larger particles. But that still doesn’t address the smaller particles and the virus itself…
“But those who work around confirmed infected people, a mask may reduce the risk of inhaling the virus from the infected person’s cough (except if they particles are small). W.H.O. says, “If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19“…The WHO recommends masks for those who are symptomatic or known to have COVID-19, and those exposed to people who are sick, but not for the healthy out in public.”[2] Sounds a little contradictory.
“A cloth face mask won’t totally block the coronavirus. But it’s an added layer of protection for you and the people around you when you use it along with regular handwashing and social distancing measures like staying 6 feet away from others.”[7] Soooo it’s hand-washing and distancing that is better, since the virus can travel through the mask?
“The public does not need to wear face masks most of the time, said Dr. Otto Yang, a professor in the Department of Medicine and the Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles.” [8] It seems that way.
Major health agencies, including the World Health Organization, the CDC, and others, have offered confusing and sometimes contradictory guidelines (as noted above). Most healthcare professionals have concluded that, at the very worst, a mask can’t hurt, even if it may provide a false sense of safety. Three large, randomized controlled trials were conducted in the 1980s to determine once and for all if surgical masks actually did prevent surgical wound infection. Here, where bacteria were the major concern in wound infection, the enemy targets were larger and might not require the fine filtration necessary to keep a respiratory virus away, researchers theorized. But the trials “showed absolutely no efficacy” for that original purpose. “Really, the surgeon might as well wear nothing on their face,” C. Raina MacIntyre, MBBS, PhD, of the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia said. Mask wearing “is so inculcated into the practice of medicine that it’s going to be very hard to change,” said John G. Bartlett, MD, former chief of infectious diseases at Johns Hopkins. [11]. It’s as if wearing a mask is to make you feel better and a tradition and not something that actually prevents anything.
Wearing a face mask purportedly helps in two ways. First, you get to keep your own germs to yourself. (But is that something good for you and something you want?) [13] But, why would I want to continually keep re-inhaling a virus? They’re meant to be disposable and worn only once. If they get wet, they become useless and should be thrown away. So if you keep wearing the same mask, you keep re-introducing virus stuck on the mask into your body, over and over. You wash your hands, then touch your mask, washing your hands was pointless…
“A study involved four subjects with COVID-19 coughing with several mask types, and without any mask, onto petri dishes. The masks themselves were also swabbed after coughing. They found the masks did not prevent spread of the virus through coughing (for every mask type, some virus still made it onto the petri dishes). They also found virus on the outside of the masks but not the inside, which is a bit counterintuitive. They speculate that airflow around the mask may be depositing the virus on the outside.” [3]
A recent study found that surgical masks (which are much less effective than the N95 masks) are somewhat effective at slightly reducing the risk. [4]
In a recent systematic review of 19 trials, they concluded that in “the community, masks appeared to be more effective than hand hygiene alone, and both together are more protective. Randomized controlled trials in health care workers showed that respirators, if worn continually during a shift, were effective but not if worn intermittently. Medical masks were not effective, and cloth masks even less effective.” [5]
A March 17 study in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) [9] seemed to justify the fear of airborne spread, showing that the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 could survive in the air for up to 3 hours as an aerosol. The new study showed that the virus was viable as an aerosol in a lab, but not in real life. In the study, the researchers “took extremely concentrated virus, much more concentrated than a person makes, they used an artificial aerosol machine [a nebulizer], which probably generates way more aerosol than a normal person does So their conclusions were in this system. The researchers of that study looked at SARS-CoV-1 (the original SARS from the 2003 outbreak) and SARS-CoV-2 and found that both could be aerosols. “But we already know that the original SARS virus was not transmitted that way,” in the general public, so that makes their model “not very believable (Dr. Otto Yang, a professor in the Department of Medicine and the Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles.) [8]
The only high-level evidence for efficacy of masks in the community was a trial from Hong Kong — published online in the Annals of Internal Medicine — involving flu patients who were randomized to hand hygiene alone or in combination with surgical masks. when these interventions were initiated within 36 hours of symptom onset, face masks plus hand hygiene reduced risk of transmission by a very significant 67%. Although the entire benefit can’t be attributed to face masks, the results suggest masks may make a difference. [12] Compared with controls, employing hand hygiene alone or with face masks tended to reduce transmission of the flu to those living in the same house, but not significantly so [11].
A “2009 Canadian study of 446 nurses who were working with influenza patients concluded that face masks provided protection almost equivalent to that provided by respirators. Unfortunately, that turns out to be mixed news. Of the nurses wearing surgical face masks, 23.6 percent contracted the flu, versus 22.9 percent of those wearing N95 respirators. Ironically, that same year, an Australian study of 2000 Chinese healthcare workers had quite different results. According to the report from that study, “Consistent use of N95 respirators prevented 75% of respiratory infections (about the same as the Canadian study), while consistent surgical mask use was no better than low use for prevention of clinical respiratory illness (6.7% versus 9.2%, P=0.159) or of influenza-like illness (0.6% versus 1.3%, P=0.336).” In other words, surgical masks were nearly useless in preventing infection, but respirators were highly effective.” [14]
The real problem with all this is that aerosol particles aren’t really stopped by masks and can remain in the air for hours, even settle on objects that we touch a thousand times a day. They go through and around masks, even stick to masks, on the outside; as the studies indicate. Since aerosol particles can travel and linger in the air, experts recommend that you stay at least six feet away from contagious people. But what difference does that make if they can linger in the air for hours as you walk around and pass by people and touch things they touched?
There are several ways pathogens can reach the respiratory system. First, if a sick person coughs or sneezes they may expel “splashes,” which are large particles (greater than 100 μm in diameter) that drop to the ground fast. Those are the things we touch. Then, we touch our phones, masks, wallets, purses, car searing wheels, door handles and so on. A mask doesn’t protect against this. The masks usually can protect against the coughing and projecting “splashes”.
Droplets are a smaller version of splashes, between 5 μm and 100 μm. Then there are small, lightweight aerosol particles of less than 5 μm that remain suspended in the air, travel over distance, and easily penetrate the respiratory system.
Aerosol particles can come from sneezes, coughs, or just exhalations of the sick person. In fact, the air around an infected person is usually loaded with aerosol particles containing viruses or bacteria. Of which, can go around and through cloth/paper masks…
The US standard is the N95 respirator, which is certified to block 95 percent of particles as small as 0.3 μm (millionths of a meter), which is about the same size as a single virus. This seems to be the only mask that can offer some kind of protection against Aerosol particles.
So, if your not wearing an N95 respirator (mask) but some sort of cloth or paper mask you may as well not be wearing a mask at all.
It seems that washing your hands and wearing a N95 respirator is the only way to really, actually, and scientifically, reduce the risk of virus loaded Aerosol particles.
If someone tells you that you need to be wearing a mask, any mask, they are weak minded ignorant sheep of a system that just wants to make the populous feel better and feel like the government is doing everything it can, and that it’s the people’s fault for the continued spread…
Sorry, your cloth/paper mask is nothing more than your self-soothing, self-righteous, virtual signaling and that your “saving lives.” When, in fact, your cloth/paper mask can’t even stop the virus, in small coughed/expelled particles, that is so small it can go between the fibers of your mask, linger in the air and rest on anything and everything you touch…
And if you want to live in fear of a flu virus with a 0.26% mortality rate over all, and a 0.05% for people 49 years old and under [15, 16, 17], than at least wear a N95 respirator.
Sources
f you want to melt away body fat, you should first understand how it works. We lay out how fat storage and burning works, then give 4 principles to fight it, with a list of things you can do and track to make your fat melting effective!
When we eat, the glucose and other sugars harnessed from carbohydrates are the first fuel sources. The liver stores the glucose in the form of glycogen and releases it into the bloodstream as necessary to keep our body trucking along. Once that glucose runs out, fat takes over. Harnessing energy by burning fat is referred to as ketosis.
Hormones regulating our blood sugar levels activate an enzyme in the blood vessels of fat tissue called lipase.
Lipase ignites fat cells to release macromolecules called triglycerides, which are what make fat cells fat. Triglycerides are made of glycerol and three fatty acid chains. When they receive the signal from lipase to exit the fat cells, the triglycerides break up into their respective components and enter the bloodstream for use.
The liver snatches up the glycerol to break it down for energy, and some of the fatty acids move to the muscles that can farm them for energy as well.
This action of breaking down triglycerides into usable energy is called lipolysis. Once inside the mitochondria, or power source, or muscle or liver cells, the components of the glycerol and fatty acids are shuffled and reshuffled to harness their energy potential, producing heat, water, carbon dioxide and adenosine triphosphate (ATP).
ATP hauls potential energy in its molecular bonds for use when we exercise like cellular carb loading. The water exits our bodies as sweat and urine, and we exhale the carbon dioxide.
That is how Fat and Carbs, in your body, become water, heat, ATP, and carbon dioxide as they exit your body; leaving your fat cells depleted and eventually die off.
With all of that said; Ketosis is a good thing because it precedes and supports Lipolysis, the very thing we went to do.
But, considering STEP 1, if we reduce the amounts of EXCESS carbs, than the simple glucose are quickly burned up and nothing is left over to be stored. AND the amount of quick storage space in the liver and muscles is not filled to max capacity. From here we can determine an important principle:
This will lead our body to release the Lipase hormone sooner. All the glycogen will be quickly burned up and no additional triglycerides are stored. With no quick access energy, the body will enter Ketosis and release Ketones and Lipase. From there we can determine another important principle:
From here your fat cells will be spitting out their stored triglycerides left and right. The fat cells will shrink and your liver and muscles will be burning of the triglycerides for energy. You will notice a drop in weight and body fat. BUT, as the triglycerides convert into their various forms, one of them is water. You will sweat and dehydrate. As you drink water and REhydrate, your fat cells will store water and rehydrate as well. You may see an increase and weight and a loss in definition. Keep in mind, at this point, your fat cells are DEPLETED of triglycerides and only swollen from water. As you continual workout, they will dehydrate, rehydrate, dehydrate, and eventually die off because they are haven been rendered useless due to lack of triglycerides storage. The cells will be broken down, processed in the body, and out processed by the body. From there we see another valuable principle:
Don’t give them a reason to live. Keep them depleted of triglycerides. Starve them. By maintaining principles 1 and 2, they will be continually starved. There will not be any extra or access glycogen to store. The liver and muscles will take it all and burn it and leave nothing for the fat cells to store. Then, even if there is some to store, Ketones and the Lipase hormone will cause them to release it almost right away. Eventually, they will die off from their uselessness, basically.
When a muscle group is worked, it costs and needs energy. So, the more muscle groups you work, the more energy is required. The more energy that is required the more hormones are released to get those triglycerides dumped in the system for use. Multi-Joint workouts are king for this. HIIT, High Intensity Interval Training has been show to be the most effective workout system for fat burning.
There are things you can do to assist your body in this process.
A. Ketone Supplements. This will help in triggering the fat cells to think they need to be releasing their triglycerides.
B. Minimize simple sugar intake. Instead switch to MCT, Multi Chain triglycerides. These are like simple sugars but they are less likely to be stored by the body and more likely to be used as energy. There are various forms, but Coconut Oil is most common.
C. Intake things that force your body to work harder to digest or create more heat. Protein actually takes more energy to digest than carbs or fats. You actually burn more calories digesting high protein foods than any other food. Also, including a Black Pepper or even Cayenne Pepper supplements boost the thermobolics and force the body to burn more calories in digestion as well.
D. Drink Apple Cider Vinegar, Coffee, and Green Tea. Vinegar intake has shown to boost fat burning and prevention of carbohydrate absorption. Coffee has been shown to act as a central nervous system stimulant, increases metabolism and boosts the breakdown of fatty acids. Green Tea has been shown to boost metabolism and help burn more fat.
E. Iron Supplements. a deficiency in iron may impact the health of your thyroid gland. This small gland in your neck secretes hormones that regulate your metabolism, and low levels of iron in the body may be associated with impaired thyroid function and a disruption in the production of thyroid hormones.
Calorie Deficit: You want start counting calories and calories burned daily. This is how you will know if you are burning more calories than you are in taking. A fitbit, more just about any fitness smart watch make this easy. You want to maintain an negative calorie intake, but not over 500 calories consistently. You don’t want to starve your body either.
Carb Macros: You want to see how much of your total diet are carbs. Tracking your macros can also be done on any smart watch and smart phone. A Keto Diet tries to get you to stay at a 5% carb intake, but that’s tough. Honestly, a 15-25% carb macro is just as good, if you are maintaining a calorie deficit. (also check out How to get started on The King of Diets.)
Ketosis Meter: You may want to invest in a simple Ketosis meter to see if you are in Ketosis or not. They are typically a breathalyzer type of machine that tests for Ketones in your system.
Smart Scale: You will want a scale that can track not just your body weight but your body fat as well. They are not 100% accurate but that doesn’t matter. You want to track THE CHANGES in your body fat. If it starts going down, things are working.
Regular Workout Routine: You want to have a regular, 3 to 5 days a week, workout routine that targets multiple muscle groups and or HIIT workouts. Remember, heat, sweat, and exhaling carbon dioxide IS YOUR FAT CONVERTED AND LEAVING YOUR BODY!
Supplements. They are NOT your enemy. They are nothing more than what you already eat, just in an isolated form. Get some Ketone supplements, Keto high-protein meals ideas, MCTs, and start drinking more Apple Cider Vinegar, Coffee, and Green Tea. (also check out Block those excess carbs and sugars!)
Nuke that belly fat hiding your abs!
With the politicians and media outlets constantly pushing news updates on the Coronavirus, we all by now are aware of it, but what is it, how dangerous is it, and why the hype?
First of all, the death rate for ages 1-49 is less than the annual flu. The low is around 12,000 deaths and the high is around 56,000 deaths, annually, from the annual flu. It hit 80,000 in 2018 [1]. How many has the Coronavirus killed? 3,494… world wide [3]. With 102,228 confirmed cases, and 3,494 confirmed deaths, we can calculate a death rate of 0.034 or 3.4% Seems high, but when you look at the age groups effected you see that most of the confirmed cases were elderly which are also the higher confirmed deaths. The death rate for SARS and MERS was far greater, 10%, and 34% [6]. Here is another important fact about the Coronavirus and its death rate. 80 percent of those who died have been over the age of 60, and of those 75 percent had pre-existing conditions such as cardiovascular diseases and diabetes [6]. Compared to Ebola that killed perfectly healthy people, this flu like virus hits harder those who are already weak. How if we put it in perspective, each year an estimated 290,000 to 650,000 people die in the world due to complications from seasonal influenza viruses. That’s EACH YEAR.
*UPDATE: 4/16/2020*
The GAME of numbers and statistical manipulation; a form of propaganda. But, numbers also can’t lie. Confirmed, low death rates show how deadly it’s not. Then how do some regions have much higher death rates? Sanitation regiment and cultural hygiene may play a role but that isn’t the virus’ doing. How can New York suffer such a high amount of mortality, yet, the rest of America doesn’t? Does testing rate change the numbers? Yes, and No.
Italy and Spain (7.7%) have high testing rates with a 5.79% mortality rate. But, France and the UK have very low testing rates, with 5.7% and 5.2% mortality rates. The example here shows that testing rate doesn’t seem to matter here. What they don’t tell you is that initially, as it began, those who died were tested and made up the initial batch of stats. Therefore, the percentage WOULD be a lot higher because they made up a majority of the confirmations from the very beginning [7].
As we test more and more, we find more and more infected, surviving; and as we find more and more infected, and not dying, this drops the mortality rate. In March, the death rate was estimated around 3.4% (The W.H.O. estimation), and even they, it seemed to be an overestimate. Even Trump disagreed with those numbers (consulting with professionals) and said it’s under 1% and everyone laughed [8]. As more countries ramped up their testing, they found a vastly lower mortality rate. South Korea determined a 0.6% mortality rate given all their increased testing. China even published a study putting the mortality rate at around 2.3%
But then this study was published. A group of researchers analyzed data from China and found that the overall mortality rate of COVID-19 was 1.38%. But if they adjusted for cases that likely went unaccounted for due to their mild or asymptomatic nature, the overall mortality rate decreased to around 0.66%, they reported on March 30 in journal The Lancet Infectious Diseases [9]. Then, another study, exposed problems with the data coming out of China. Their study published in the journal Nature Medicine had found that the death rate in the city — without including those who were likely asymptomatic — was around 1.4%.
Consistent with previous research, the new study also found that the death rate varied greatly by age. While the death rate was around 0.0016% in 0 to 9-year-olds, it increased to about 7.8% for people who were age 80 and above. The researchers also found that nearly 1 in 5 people over the age of 80 infected with COVID-19 were likely to require hospitalization whereas only 1% of people under 30 were likely to be hospitalized.
THEN the CDC issued March 24, the guidance tells hospitals to list COVID-19 as a cause of death regardless of whether or not there’s actual testing to confirm that’s the case!! Instead, even if the coronavirus was just a contributing factor or if it’s “assumed to have caused or contributed to death,” it can be listed as the primary cause!! The Western Journal author even stated “It doesn’t help that data when the guidelines for determining who’s actually died of the coronavirus are profoundly vague.”
WHICH LEAD TO this:
“probable” and “presumed” is NOT accurate or confirmed.
What if they died from just the seasonal flu? After all, that infects and kills more people annually. How would they know the difference if the symptoms are very similar?
What happens when an elderly person with numerous underlying conditions comes into the hospital and dies? What happens when someone suffering from late-stage cancer or liver failure dies in the hospital? If that person was in the final stages of life and no testing is done and no autopsy conducted, what are we to assume? [12] Data manipulation is a communist propaganda strategy. Which is why China’s numbers aren’t reliable and everyone admits it. The Washington Post, shockingly, reports on China’s unreliability and their tactful manipulation of their data [13]. Even in their opinion section, they expand on that gross dishonest and manipulative behavior [14]. So, officially, if you are basing your insight and fear on numbers from China… you are officially indoctrinated by communism.
SO NOW, we have States putting out mildly unreliable data, counting those who died from a per-existing condition, as someone who died directly due to the COVID-19. AND we have extremely unreliable data coming out of China. You add those together and BAM, trash statistics, inaccurate unreliable numbers, but cause fear.
*UPDATE: 5/25/2020*
Here we are again, with another update and CDC “revision” [23] of their numbers. Shockingly, of course, as predicted, they drop the mortality rate by a lot; to 0.26% over all.
Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.
Ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomatic cases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected. [24]
Why are the death rates only higher in Democrat controlled states? Yes, their numbers are/were skewed.
*End of Update(s)*
You can start to notice some hype. News outlets compare it to Ebola and and AIDS, when, in fact, it is just a mutated flu virus [4]. And all these fancy websites are set up to ‘track’ it like some sort of massive pandemic about to bring about the end of the world [5]. The media has hitting on this 24/7. If there is negative news relate to this virus, they do news alerts, blow all the horns and whistles and talk about it non stop. You have liberal states and cities quick to declare national emergencies for ONE confirmed case. I guess all their homeless spreading all kinds of disease as they shit in the streets and leave heroin needles on the ground everywhere isn’t a big deal.
For the same reason why they politicize children, victims, homeless, and every other vulnerable population and exploit tragic events; the make a political opponent look bad.
The criticism of The President after his press conference was interesting. He is acting in his official capacity and meeting with experts to formulate a federal response. And before any sort of implication or visual result, he is already attacked. Now, this is not an enforcement for any one party or person. We have our serious disagreements with him too, but we are also fair, rational, logical, and call out hypocrisy no matter where it is.
The truth is, The Federal government shouldn’t have this much power in the first place to control our daily lives. If I don’t want to get sick, ill wear a mask, wash my hands, and avoid public places; until it dies down. If I get sick, ill follow all proper medical advice, quarantine myself, stay hydrated, get plenty of rest, and keep my fever down. I shouldn’t depend on the government to tell me what I should and should not do. Mommy Daddy government in a forced healthcare state is never a good thing. Communist China couldn’t even stop it from spreading.
Suddenly all the anti-borders, pro-immigration folks are perfectly fine with China sealing off their borders. You can’t be anymore anti-immigration than the actions that China took. Not a word from them. Why? Because they politicize immigration and all the immigrants to make a party and a president look bad. They DGAF about immigrants because they aren’t all up and arms about China…
*Update 4/16/2020*
Wow, just look at what has happened since this Article was originally published on 7 March 2020.
The government has deemed people’s livelihood as “non-essential” and forcefully closing them down. Small businesses have gone out of business. Unemployment rate has shot up to over 10% [21, 22]. What’s crazy is those elements in the Bill of Rights; those businesses directly related to those absolute rights, are deemed “non-essential”
Even POLICE DEPARTMENTS feel like your absolute RIGHT to protest is “non-essential”!
Be sure to give these piece of shit Gestapo-like police a phone call, email, or social media tag, they deserve nothing less for their oppressive mindset.
https://raleighnc.gov/policepoliceinfo@raleighnc.gov919-996-3335
And their Police Chief:
Deck-Brown, Cassandra
Cassandra.Deck-Brown@raleighnc.gov
919-996-3385https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1250098856827801600&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fpotr1774.com%2Fthe-coronavirus%2F&siteScreenName=POTR1776&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px
https://www.facebook.com/CityofRaleigh
Then, they started enforcing “stay-at-home” orders, dictating where you could and could not go. Commanding you to not leave your house or get arrested. The LOCAL governments fearlessly infringing on YOUR RIGHT to assemble [14].
THEN, these LOCAL and STATE governments ordered a RELIGION not to worship, meet, on one of their holiest of days; Easter. And, when they did, they were issued citations and some even arrested! [15, 16, 17, 18, 20]. And notice a lot of these snide self-righteous virtue-signaling peaceful slaves cheering on these local governments to violate everyone’s religious freedom [19]. What is so crazy is, here, we SEE government TELLING a religion HOW they can and can not worship…
“Pursuant to Executive Order 202.10, all non-essential gatherings of individuals of any size for any reasons (e.g. worship services, parties, celebrations, or other social events) are canceled or postponed. Congregate services within houses of worship are prohibited. Houses of worship may only be used by individuals and only where appropriate social distancing of, at least, six feet between people can be maintained. Further, individuals should not gather in houses of worship, homes, or other locations for religious services until the end of this public health emergency. If possible, religious leaders should consider alternative forms of worship, replacing in-person gatherings with virtual services, such as phone or conference calls, videoconference calls, or online streaming. “
ALL THIS IN A MATTER OF A MONTH.
The Bill of Rights (READ IT!), YOUR inalienable HUMAN RIGHTS, were disregarded and violated in less than 30 days, by YOUR local, state, and federal government…
Completely based on inflated, hyped, and inaccurate numbers of a virus that has infected and killed less people than seasonal flue…
*UPDATE: 5/25/2020*
“When controlling for the differences in population across states, the number of deaths from coronavirus is over three times higher in states with Democratic governors than in states with Republican governors. As of Sunday, April 26, states with Republican governors have experienced 57.53 coronavirus deaths per million of population, states with Democratic governors have 179.74 deaths per million of population. Even excluding the state of New York as an extreme outlier, states with Democratic governors have 138.58 deaths per million from coronavirus, still over twice as many coronavirus deaths per million as deaths in states with Republican governors.” – James R. Rogers [25]
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo won glowing reviews in the news media for his handling of the state at the epicenter of the crisis, though the reviews have started to dim. Republican governors, however, were vilified for moving slowly to order total lockdowns or being the first to lift restrictions [26].
Odd, its almost as if a certain ideology is actively counting more deaths, that may not be corona-virus related, to induce fear and elicit more funding from the federal government. States that are going broke, such as California…
*End of update(s)*
As we see, investors are weak-minded sissies who bought into the scary hype. They acted like Apple and Microsoft wouldn’t recover… The worlds biggest tech companies wouldn’t survive a dip in production… so like weak minded hopeless sissies do, they sell off. Thus, the major dips in the stockmarket.
Then we have the media constantly beating the horrors of the flu into our heads and some how tying it into how poor the president is doing at containing the situation… COMMUNIST CHINA COULDN’T CONTAIN IT. Stfu MSNBC, CNN, even Fox. When you’re in a public place and you see this propaganda on the tv, change the channel.
The virus will die out.
The economy WILL recover.
The human race will go on.
You just may want to invest in companies that diversify their labor factories in more than just one country. Mexico and India are good alternatives to China alone… just a thought.
But this sissy knee jerk reaction to something that takes place annually needs to stop. Confront the fearmongers and shut up their pathetic attempts to control the weak.
The government, as proven, is NOT fighting for your rights, they careless about your rights, and have proven it in the COVID-19 era.
Sources:
The climate changes! That is a fact. Before the ice age, the temperatures were warmer, then the ice age hit, then they eventually warmed up again. There have bee an estimated 5 or so ice ages that can be detected. Hu… LONG before the industrial age, plastic straws, SUVs, and mass agricultural farting cows. What is more sad is the fact that the reports used to justify financially punishing people, aren’t logically and mathematically reliable due to selfish human manipulation, willfully leaving out certain data, and even fudging the numbers…
So, it is illogical and ignorant to say that climate change is caused by deforestation, oil spills, air travel, and bla bla bla.
Uneducated blind sheep will point to the fires in California as evidences of man caused climate change that is negatively effecting wildlife and human life. Well, first of all, if the fire was caused naturally and spread naturally, why is that not considered a part of nature? Aside from that self defeating argument, when we consider the information that was put out by National Climate Assessment we are LEAD to believe that, oh my goodness, the amount of acres being burned is steadily increasing!
OH NO…. but wait, why does their data sheet start in 1980 and not at in the early 1900s? Well, lets just find the data prior to 1980…
Well, that’s interesting. An entire half century was left out… doesn’t look so bad now when we compare it to the first half of the century. This is what we call presentation manipulation. This data is nation wide. But when we just focus on California we see that the average acres burned in the past 80 years is down and still treading down.
A lot of pseudo-climatologist will claim that sea ice is melting and will raise the ocean levels. What they DON’T tell you, either because they don’t know or purposefully don’t want to tell you is that arctic sea ice is at the highest volumes since 2006. And when comparing data over the past decade, you see a pattern of annual growth and shrinkage of ice. So when they say ” oh no the ice is shrinking!!!” its because that happens every year… like natural clock work. Even the arctic temperatures are averaging the same as the 1950s-2000s average. (see data)
But the ocean sea levels are rising! Aren’t they?
World-leading sea-level expert Prof. emeritus Nils Axel Mörner gave a presentation in 2018 where he discussed actual sea level data. The actual overall averaged oceanic increase in the past 125 years can be estimated as modest at 0.9 mm per year. Stockholm’s tide record is the second longest in Europe; the mean long-term change in sea level is a decline of 3.8 mm per year. The country itself is rising 4.9 mm per year due to the post-glacial rise of the continental landmass. The difference of 1.1 mm per year is the true oceanic component. Nova Scotia: sea level 700mm higher back in the 16th century. The Indian Ocean and the Pacific, in the 17th century, the sea level was 70 cm higher. Sea level at Fiji Islands, Maldives, Goa has dropped since the 1950s. [2]
So, are sea levels rising? Yes and no. Depending on where you live. BUT given the historical data and historical patterns, the rise and fall of sea levels IS NATURAL.
Researchers at King’s College London found that the research study by Penn state to be extremely inaccurate. And all the talking points proclaiming the apocalyptic rise of the oceans is not true, or accurate [4].
Oh but there are holes and huge cracks forming in the Arctic Glaciers. Yes, this is true; but instead of being an ignorant puppet of stupidity and assume by default its all the fault of man caused global warming, use your brain, and educate your self. Did you know there are volcanoes under the glaciers? 91 volcanoes have been identified, literally, under the arctic glaciers [5][6][7]. Even if these volcanoes were to melt these glaciers, the water level would not change. The water is already displaced by the glacier, and the melting of the glacier would take up the same total space and volume as it does already. None the less there are plenty of studies explaining that the changes in the arctic glaciers is caused by plate tectonics and volcanoes [8] and not SUVs, hair-spray, and anything man caused.
We have been told for years that the increase in CO2 will cause the earths temperatures to rise and kill all life on earth as we know it… Actually, its not. We see that CO2 is rising yes, but the temperature is not even following CO2 changes. Much like the natural trends of ice ages, arctic ice, we see that there are even natural trends in the earths CO2 levels. [3]
There is another scientific explanation for global warming that is far too nerdy for me to rephrase, so I will quote them instead:
NASA space weather observations, extremely low sunspot counts, and a severe Polar Vortex are consistent with cyclical global cooling onset.
The complex flows of ions and electrons inside the sun produce sunspots that average about ten times the size of Earth and have magnetic fields that are ten thousand times stronger than the Earth’s magnetic field.
Sunspots were first observed by Galileo in the early 1600s and have been scientifically tracked as 11-year cycles since 1755.
The U.S. National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration’s Space Weather Prediction Center uses NASA’s Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics satellite conducts Sunspot Number Progression counts, measures F10.7cm Radio Flux and the Ap Index geomagnetic activity, and its SABER carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO) instruments gage infrared solar output in Earth’s top atmospheric level.
As the Earth was completing Solar Cycle 24, sunspot counts and magnetic activity were expected cyclically fall from its high of over 100 in 2014 to a low of zero in 2022. But the sunspot count plunged to zero in mid-2018 and has remained substantially lower than forecast for Solar Cycle 25.
The data could indicate the onset of a super cycle ‘Maunder Minimum.’ The last Maunder Minimum period from 1645 to 1715 was a period with 7 percent fewer sunspots and global cooling, referred to as the ‘Little Ice Age.’[10]
So lets us simple logic now. If a reduced amount of sunspots influences global cooling, than an increased amount of sunspots would logically influence global warming. And last I checked, mankind is not in control of sunspots.[9]
Don’t be fooled by fancy images and politicians. They get control and money through manipulating the data, to manipulate ignorant minds. Keep in mind what we first exposed about National Climate Assessment.
Climate Central published this alarming image. Makes you think the winters are getting warming and warmer. That’s exactly what they want you to think…
But when we look at the actual data, we see a very different truthful trend.
Here we see the average temperatures from 1920 to 2016 actually trending down, not up.
There were predominate Climate Scientists how have had their emails hacked. Their emails have revealed some very savage things. Check out this email from this sciensist who’s research is often used.
“I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI [Freedom of Information] Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process,”writes Phil Jones, a scientist working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
And these scientists were so arrogant about their data manipulation they kept talking about hiding it.
“Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden,” Jones writes in another newly released email. “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.”
They are even aware of a problem in their research that they didn’t want anyone to know about!
“Mike, can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith [Briffa] re AR4 [UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 4th Assessment]?” Jones wrote to Penn State University scientist Michael Mann in an email “Keith will do likewise. … We will be getting Caspar [Ammann] to do likewise. I see that CA [the Climate Audit Web site] claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!”
Then, to avoid, any future problems in their research papers, they arbitrary pick and choose what data and information to use and put in their papers…
“The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out” of IPCC reports, writes Jonathan Overpeck, coordinating lead author for the IPCC’s most recent climate assessment.
See, its not about truth and real science. Its about a “cause” that they need to push for, even if it is not in the numbers. And they are willing to sacrifice fellow scientists in this cause.
“I gave up on [Georgia Institute of Technology climate professor] Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but its not helping the cause,” wrote Mann
These climate scientist shit bags even look to black mail and destroy the careers of other scientists who disagree with their papers.
“I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose [skeptical scientist Steve McIntyre], said Mann.
These guys are so driven by their own opinionated agenda, they even toss around the idea of changing how the peer review system should work for their agenda’s benefit. Tom Wigley, a scientist at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, authored some of the leaked emails in which he asserting that his fellow Climategate scientists “must get rid of” the editor for a peer-reviewed science journal because he published some papers contradicting assertions of a global warming crisis.
But, some in the climate science community challenged and disagreed with those who push the man caused global warming research.
“Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary,” writes Peter Thorne of the UK Met Office.
“I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run,” Thorne adds.
“Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive … there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC,” Wigley acknowledges.[12][13]
The issue here, in the light of all this, is that you can’t even trust the research of man-caused global warming. You must have a religious blind faith in it. Man-caused Global Warming is more like an extremist religious cult.
Yes Climate Change does exist. Yes, the earth gets hot over time. Yes, the earth gets cold over time. Yes, the glaciers melt. Yes, the glaciers expand. There is such a thing as global warming and there is such a thing as global cooling. THE ISSUE is what causes it. Welp, given the RELIABLE research of sunspots, volcanic activity, historical data prior to Al Gore inventing the internet, we can logically see that it is NOT caused by mankind.
So, all you Climate Change militant religious cultish extremest are hopeless. If they can’t see the bullshit they have faith in at this point, there is no hope for them now.
Yes, everyone should recycle. Yes, everyone should take care of animals and the environment. Not because we are causing global warming, or an ice age, or sea levels to rise and kill us all (which none of that is supported by reliable studies); but because it is the decent respectful honorable human thing to do.
Take your “New Green Deal” you cultish blind religious nature nut jobs and shove it.
Don’t get addicted to pill popping some addicting narcotic or get advice some from nut job spiritual guru. There are some REAL things YOU can do to reduce your stress and anxiety, supported by studies. Being stressed and extremely anxious all the time is a sign of not being mental healthy AND leads to becoming physically unhealthy too.
There are a couple of biological elements that need to be addressed to reduce the feeling of stress and anxiety.
This is HUGE. Poor sleeping habits WILL INCREASE stress. Stress is strongly linked to insomnia, a sleep disorder characterized by difficulties falling asleep or staying asleep — or both [3,4]. You want at least 7 to 8 hours of sleep. So, to get that, YOU need to take steps to cultivate the bodily habit. GET OFF YOUR PHONE, lower your home’s temperature, and use a Sound Soother when you are laying in bed. CREATE a bed time routine. This creates an environment that literally tells your body it’s sleeping time.
Melatonin is a natural hormone that triggers your body to go into sleep mode. Adding some extra supplementation will greatly help with that [5,6]. Supplementing does NOT effect your bodies own production of, that is awesome [7]. Famous for helping people nod off at night, but it may also help lower anxiety levels in people who are scheduled for surgery. A review published in April 2015 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews of more than 770 people found that melatonin may be as effective at reducing anxiety presurgery as midazolam, a sedative.
Rhodiola (Rhodiola rosea) has been shown to improve the feeling of exhaustion, fatigue, and poor sleep [1,2]. A review published in January 2018 in International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice concluded that Rhodiola rosea extract may be effective in treating stress symptoms and preventing chronic stress and its complications.
Ashwagandha (Withania somnifera): In a study published in September 2019 in the journal Medicine (Baltimore), 30 adults were given 240 milligrams (mg) of the extract a day, and 30 were given a placebo. After two months, those who’d taken the ashwagandha reported feeling less anxious, depressed, and/or stressed. A similar study, published in December 2019 in Cureus, followed 60 stressed, healthy adults for eight weeks. Each day, one-third of the group received 250 mg of ashwagandha, one-third received 600 mg of the supplement, and one-third received a placebo. The result: Participants who were given ashwagandha reported sleeping better and feeling less stressed compared with those who took a placebo.
Glycine is an amino acid that your body uses to create proteins. Studies suggest that glycine may increase your body’s resistance to stress by encouraging a good night’s rest through its calming effect on the brain and ability to lower your core body temperature [8,9].
Lemon balm can help ease anxiety and improve sleep, according to a study published in June 2019 in European Journal of Integrative Medicine. The researchers followed 80 people who underwent coronary artery bypass surgery and gave half of the group 500 mg of lemon balm three times a day and the other half a placebo. The results: Those who took lemon balm improved their anxiety by 49 percent and sleep quality by 54 percent. Lemon balm is also linked to improvements in mood in healthy young adults, according to a small study published in November 2014 in the journal Nutrients.
Thinking about stressful things, causes more stress and leads to an increase in cortisol. Changing what you think about and put your mind on, in fact, leads to a reduction of stress and a reduction in cortisol. A study of 122 adults found that writing about past stressful experiences increased cortisol over one month compared to writing about positive life experiences or plans for the day [17]. Another study of 128 women with breast cancer showed stress mindfulness training reduced cortisol compared to no stress management strategy [18].
This is NOT that “mind over matter” spiritual nonsense. This is just like doing thinking exercises. Making yourself more aware of thinking about stressful things, stopping your self, and purposefully recalling different, positive, non-stressful events and memories. You see your thoughts as an observer instead of a stressful thought victim. Training yourself to be aware of your thoughts, breathing, heart rate and other signs of tension helps you recognize stress when it begins.
Deep breathing is a simple technique for stress reduction that can be used anywhere. A study of 28 middle-aged women found a nearly 50% reduction in cortisol with habitual deep breathing training [19,20]
As discussed above, SLEEP and your Cortisol levels are linked. The less sleep, the higher cortisol, and the more sleep, the lower the cortisol levels [14,15, 16].
L-theanine is an amino acid most commonly found in tea leaves. It has been studied for its ability to promote relaxation and reduce stress without exerting sedative effects [10,11]. One study showed that supplementing with 200 mg of l-theanine reduced measures of stress, such as heart rate, in response to performing a mentally stressful task [12]. In another study in 34 people, drinking a beverage containing 200 mg of l-theanine and other nutrients lowered levels of the stress hormone cortisol in response to a stressful task that involved multitasking [13]. L-theanine’s anti-stress effects have been demonstrated in research; it can also be helpful for improving focus, memory, and verbal ability. In a study published in October 2019 in the journal Nutrients, 30 healthy adults were given 200 mg of L-theanine or a placebo every night for four weeks, after which researchers saw improvement in three stress-related symptoms — sleep problems, depression, and anxiety — in the group that received the supplement. And a review of nine studies published in November 2019 in Plant Foods for Human Nutrition found that getting 200 to 400 mg of L-theanine a day may help reduce stress and anxiety in people exposed to stressful conditions.
A review of several studies also showed massage therapy can reduce cortisol levels by 30% [21].
Activities that increase life satisfaction also improve health and one of the ways they do this may be through controlling cortisol. For example, a study of 18 healthy adults showed cortisol decreased in response to laughter [22]. Freak’n laugh a little. Even freak’n gardening helped decrease cortisol! [23,24]. Own a pet! [25] Find God! Studies show that adults who expressed spiritual faith experienced lower cortisol levels in the face of life stressors such as illness. This was true even after studies took into account the potential cortisol-lowering effects of social support from faith-based groups [26,27]. Prayer is also associated with reduced anxiety and depression [28]
Sources:
This is actually a pretty relevant question that can impact what you eat and when, for those of you are trying to destroy the smallest remaining amount of body fat.
The Deficit Factor
If your body burns 85 calories an hour, no physical activity, and you eat every 3 hours. That means you burn 255 calories between meals. If you sleep for 8 hours, you burned around 640 calories while you slept. So, you wake up with a calorie deficit. Then, you eat a 400 calorie breakfast, you’re still at a 240 calorie deficit, THEN you burn 255 more until your next meal. That puts you at a 495 calorie deficit. Eat another 400 cal meal, you’re still at a 95 cal deficit.
This gives your body no chance to store the food you eat as fat. BECAUSE it takes your body TIME to process your meal, all the while you’re still burning calories, just living, and you don’t have any extra calories anyway. And yes, digesting, burns calories too.
First, understanding the process helps us understand how it can impact our goals.
Your body, on average, will store around 1,000 calories in your liver and muscle tissue for quick energy access. This is not really what you think of as “body fat.” These are known as glycogen. Quick and easily access and burned type of sugar. But, once your quick access glycogen is full, and there is excess floating around in your blood stream, then your body starts to convert it and store it in your fat cells, wherever it finds room. These are called Triglycerides, and this is what you think of as body fat. The fat cells swell and fill up with triglycerides, and boom, your pant sizes increase. When your glycogen reserves are depleted, your body releases ketones that tell your fat cells to start releasing its stored energy. That’s how fat cells shrink, lose their stored fat, and you “burn fat.” Really, the energy is just converted from stored triglycerides to body sweat and carbon dioxide when you exhale.
But this brings us back to: How long does this take?
It is easy to find a bunch of sites parroting the notion that it takes 3 to 5 hours to digest and store triglycerides [1, 3]; but WHERE did that number, the amount of time, come from? Apparently, there was an Oxford Study done in 2012 that found that fats are stored in fat cells within 4 hours but carbs and proteins take longer[2]. Dr. David L. Katz, in an article stated the same [4]. Then we have an article in Forbes that states we can’t know anything [5]. Monica Reinagel, MS, LD/N, CNS states that it would take weeks to accumulate enough excess calories that get converted into body fat before you see any noticeable changes. But, again, that doesn’t help either [6]. Simply put, a calorie deficit is the way to avoid body fat storage [7]. Here is a helpful statement that gives us a window of time it takes for the whole process; 6 to 8 hours [8].
The question then becomes, a 24 hour calorie deficient total, or constant deficit? If i burn 2,000 calories in a day, and suddenly eat a 1,700 calorie meal, does that get all burned up or no?
It would seem, with the 2012 Oxford study and Mayoclinic article in mind, that if we ate one massive meal, using the example above, that 700 calories would become body fat IF we didn’t need that 700 calories within the 4 to 8 hour window. Since there would be nothing in the reserves, 1,000 calories would replenish the reserves, leaving 700 calories still remaining, to be used or stored in 4 to 8 hours.
Even though we burned 2,000 calories in the day, total. The 4 to 8 hour digestion of the 1,700 calorie meal still means that 1,000 would be used to refill and become glycogen and the remaining 700 aren’t being used at the time, would be excess, thus converted and stored as triglycerides, if not needed.
But we have to take into account our metabolism. If eating once a day sped up your metabolism than you would begin burning more calories throughout the day over time. That’s a whole other monster to try and factor in.
Therefore, we can assume that a CONSTANT DEFICIT maybe best. You consume calories UP TO or no more than 3 hours of calorie burning past what you have burned already. Let me explain.
When you wake up, you burned 600 calories while you slept. Thus, you begin your day at a -600 calories. You eat a 400 calorie breakfast. That puts you at -200 calories. Let’s say you burn 90 calories an hour and your next meal is 3 hours later. That puts you at a -470 calories before your next meal. You eat a 400 calorie lunch, that puts you at -70 calories. At this point, you will NOT have stored anything you ate, in theory, in fact, your body has been in a calorie deficit all day and may be burning body fat to maintain your energy needs. Then, it’s time for your next meal, 3 hours later, but this one is prep for your evening workout. At the time of your meal, you are at -340 calories. So you eat a 600 calorie meal. For the moment, you are at +260 calories. Then, 2 hours later, your 1 hour work out that burned 500 calories, plus the 1 hour leading up to it (+90). BAM, you are back to -330 calories. Just as your body is breaking down your dinner for the energy needed for your workout. Again, nothing stored. Then, 3 hours later, you are ready for a night time snack. At this point, you are at -600 calories. You can eat a large meal, say 870 calorie meal, and still be at a deficit 3 hour after you ate, AND as you burn calories while you sleep.
Think of your body like a Bank and food is the cash. This sounds bad, financially, but you always want your account in the negatives. Every time you eat, you are deposing into your account. But you don’t want your account to remain positive for more than 3 hours. That is the idea behind having a Constant Deficit.
This example shows you can eat around 2,200 calories a day, timed right, and maintain a calorie deficit, constantly, throughout the whole day; in theory, not store any triglycerides, but use what is already stored; burn body fat. Assuming you eat healthy and not so much sugary foods.
This also shows how IMPORTANT maintaining a calorie deficit is, whether its an all day total deficit or a constant hourly deficit.
Sources:
We are not discussing the moral or ethical related issues of sexual activity. We are looking at the biology and science concerning people who do some foreplay, mess around, have sex, or do anything sexual that leads to an orgasm; what are the actual, biological health benefits?
This Article will analyze the Anti-vaxxer’s arguments and justifications for refusing to get themselves and their children vaccinated. Do they have a rational, logical, and justified reason? Should they have the freedom to refuse vaccinations? What does REAL science and studies have to say about vaccinations? Continue reading
Injecting steroids is for losers and those cowards who are scared of the hard work, dedication, self discipline, self control, and self respect. BUT testosterone is an extremely important factor in building muscle and burning body fat. Supporting and increasing testosterone production isn’t as hard as you think. Continue reading
The first important question is SHOULD we, as Christians, make judgements on a person, or groups of people, based on Statistics? Can we rightly judge solely based on statistical analysis? Why is this even an issue? It goes to the heart of using statistics to see a need for the gospel. Of course, everyone, at all times everywhere, need the gospel, even we need the gospel. But Jesus strategically went to specific areas and the Apostles went to specific areas, whether it was locations or people groups. But how did they rightly judge where to go and who needed what message first. What does this have to do with racial profiling, prejudice, and rightful judgements?
If there was a community where 98% of the community participated in a survey stating that they are atheists and there was another community where they were all surveyed and was found that 98% were repentant Gospel focused people… it seems that we see a ‘greater’ situational need for one community over another. Jesus reveals the distinction in need in Luke 5:31. Paul makes the same point in Romans 10:14-15. This seems to justify the application of statistics to recognize a greater need. But is the judgement discerning more important situational need or a judgement of the people?
What happens when the statistics do not survey the entire community or entire people or nation but only a small portion. If a people group, we will use Smurfs for our example, has a survey where only 15% of the entire people group is surveyed and the results claim that 98% of Smurfs are atheists; are we right to assume that the rest of the 85% are more than likely atheists too? So when we hear about the Smurfs, are we right to assume every individual Smurf is an atheist? Lets say it another way. If there are 100 Smurfs, and 15 of them are surveyed, and 14 of them claim to be atheists, can we rightly judge the 85 other non surveyed Smurfs as atheists? Keep in mind, we have never met these 85 unsurveyed Smurfs. So, before we meet them, can we assume they don’t believe in God? OR do we see a situational need? Is there a difference? Lets magnify those numbers. What if there are 10,000,000 Smurf people and 1,500,000 were surveyed, and 1,400,000 claim to be atheists. Can we rightly assume the rest of the unsurveyed 8,500,000 other Smurfs are atheists too? This still leads to the same question.
Lets change the survey focus from “atheism” to “below X house hold income level“. And “X” is determined by an overall societal income average. If there are 10,000,000 Smurfs and 1,500,000 were surveyed, and 1,400,000 were below X house hold income level. Can we rightly assume the rest of the unsurveyed 8,500,000 other Smurfs are below X house hold income level too? No matter the statistical focus, the issue is still the same: Can we rightly judge all those who were not surveyed based on those who were? Would it be prejudicial (“a preconceived opinion not based on actual experience“) to view the all the other unsurveyed 8,500,000 as impoverished too?
Would it be wrong to assume they are all impoverished, based on their ethnic group and the statistics? That every time we hear about a person of that people group, can we assume they are more than likely poor?
What if a survey was conducted that showed Smurfs are responsible for more than half of all violent crime. If you were in a room of Smurfs, would you be justified to feel scared? For no other reason than them being Smurfs and that stat? If poverty directly influences crime rates, and Smurfs were surveyed showing they mostly live below the poverty level, would you then also be justified to be scared around Smurfs? Are these judgements based on their ethnicity and statistics justified?
The premise of the judgement is WHAT justifies us to judge those who we don’t personally know. OR do these kinds of stats lead us to prejudice and profiling? And is prejudice and profiling wrong?
The Don’t Judge Me Crowd
Clearly anyone who feels it is wrong to “judge” anyone are hypocritical when making assumptions about ace based stats. They are still making a judgement on someone they don’t know directly. Even if they do know the person, and tell the person not to judge them, they have still actually judged that person. They tell people not to judge them unless they have walked in their shoes but then judge other races based on stats… THAT is telling someone to take the speck out of their eye while you have a log in yours. The very same hypocritical judgement Jesus is talking about. If you go around and tell people not to judge you and you actively avoid ANY kind of judgement, you have already failed logically, rationally and, even, become disobedient to Christ (Lev. 19:15; Zech 8:16; John 7:24, 51; Luke 12:57). We CAN rightly judge and are called to. BUT, is judging a person based on statistics “rightly judging” or is in sin?
He Said, She Said, so You Must Be.
Would it then still be wrongful to make a judgement (assumption) about someone you have never met even when it is based on stats? How do you know those stats directly represent that person? You don’t. You have to apply an ignorant assumption and essentially hope (even have faith in your own judgement) that the stat does represent that person directly. According to Scripture, an ignorant assumption/ judgement about someone is unjust and not a rightful judgement because it is not based on the truth about that person… but is actually and truly based on a possible truth about someone else (the person(s) surveyed). It would be no different than believing gossip or second or third hand-talk about someone else. Someone spoke to some people, compiled the numbers, published a study, and then apply that ignorantly to someone else you don’t even know, with no knowledge if it directly applies to them, simply because of their race. That is in no way a justified righteous judgement in light of scripture.
Rightful Judgements – John 7:24
God IS the standard of righteousness and he alone is the author of just judgements (Psalm 7:11, 9:8; Isaiah 33:22). They are based on KNOWN TRUTHS about THAT specific person. Jesus tells us absolutely we CAN SEE the fruit of someones heart and KNOW them (Matthew 7:15-20; Luke 6:43-45). We must first fix ourselves “then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye” (Matthew 17:5). God himself empowers us to be able to rightly judge (Judges 2:18). We ARE to judge those who profess to know Christ (1 Cor. 5:12), this is how we keep each other accountable to the Lord (2 Timothy 2:25, 3:16; Titus 2:1). We are called to correct and rebuke each other; which requires us to have the ability to rightly judge (2 Thessalonians 3:6; 1 Timothy 6:20). Discernment, rightly judging, and correction are to keep unity (Ephesians 4:13; Galatians 6:1), only the hard hearted, self-righteous, fall away. And all righteous and just judgements come from God, and God has given us his very word (Ephesians 2:20). John the Baptist corrected Herodias (Mark 6:18-19). Paul corrected Peter (Galatians 2:11). They were filled with truth and knowledge (Colossians 1:9) and they obediently reproved and rebuked (2 Timothy 4:2) just as Jesus himself required (Matthew 18:15-17). ALL of which requires us to have the ability to Judge in the first place.
Assuming the facts before knowing them is a wrongful judgement (Prov. 18:13). Assuming to know someone based on their looks or gossip is also a sinful humanistic mistake (Luke 7:36-50). Assuming to be righteous where others are unrighteous, yet, actually falling in the same sin is a hypocritical judgemental error (Romans 2:1; Matthew 7:3-5). If you hold people to a perfect standard, and judge them for not meeting your self-righteous standard, you are judged by that same standard (Matthew 7:2). Assuming you are more righteous in your ignorance is sinful humanistic error (James 4:6; Luke 18:9-14). Assuming you know someone, when in fact you don’t, and then judging them based on your false assumption is a sinful untrue judgement (Prov. 19:5).
Thus we can see the core elements that makes a Godly Righteous Judgement is first having TRUE ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE in direct regards and then discerning the rightfulness or wrongfulness with a clear mind and conscience, according to the whole council of God (Acts 20:27).
Seeing how Holy Scripture speaks about rightful and wrongful judgements, we already see a inconsistency with statistical judgements applied to individuals.
Racial Profiling and Prejudice
Having all these statistical studies can help see potential issues within a society and a situation BUT they are not the identities of the people they test. Even when it SEEMS harmless and “positive”, it is a contrary to Scripture and rightful judgements. Here’s an example: The NBA is 75% African American. The WMBA is 70% African American [2]. The biggest percentage of NCAA basketball athletes are African American [1]. Lastly, just about all the top high school basketball teams are majority African American [3]. From high school, to college, all the way to the pros. In every major organized basketball organization the majority of athletes are African American. Using the same reasoning to justify racial systemic inequality, can it be assumed that African Americans like basketball? That’s a harmless assumption right? Buying a basketball for an African American teen for his birth day isn’t racist right? Statistics would support the likelihood of him enjoying the gift. BUT why is there something inherently wrong with this kind of ‘harmless’ and ‘positive’ assumption?
The Moral Issue
We are applying what someone else says about another person, to them, and we don’t even know if it is true. We just assume it is. Its easier to assume something about someone and justify it with numbers from someone else. The Jews just assumed all Gentiles were hopeless and godless. They had stats to back up their assumptions about the gentiles. They did not have The Law of Moses. They did not have the Writings of The Prophets. They were not lead out of slavery from Egypt. They, at that time, and generations prior, were not declared as God’s Chosen people. BUT JESUS destroyed their statistical assumptions. Jesus GOES DEEPER than their statistically justified judgements. GOD shows that HIS WILL is more vast than statistical probabilities and averages. That HUMANS can not calculate and quantify God’s Will; and to assume so is our self-righteousness self-idolatry rearing its ugly head- even in the seemingly harmless positive assumptions/judgements.
THE ULTIMATE HYPOCRISY
It is wrong to assume all African Americans like basketball for the same reason it is wrong to assume all “white” people are privileged. Both are “positive” conclusions drawn from different areas of statistical data that seem to support and justify the conclusions. BUT, YOU CAN NOT KNOW if these assumptions are true about an individual UNLESS you KNOW THAT individual personally.
When you ASSUME YOU KNOW someone, that you actually don’t know, you feel RIGHT about your assumed knowledge of them, without really knowing if your are in fact right. Then, you justify this self-delusion of rightness with statistics that may not even directly relate to that person you don’t know. You are in essence, hypocritically judging them because you don’t even know them- and yet, you feel right about them in your true ignorance of them.
To arbitrarily say you CAN assume knowledge of an unknown person, with stats, regarding “positive” and “harmless” ideas; but you CANNOT assume, with stats, regarding “negative” and “offensive” ideas is HYPOCRITICAL. Logically, one can do both and remain rationally consistent (the moral issue aside). So lets look at “negative” and “offensive” assumptions that one can (but shouldn’t) make justified by statistics.
The Negative and Offensive Stats
According to Jones RK and Jerman J, Population Group Abortion Rates and Lifetime Incidence of Abortion: United States, 2008–2014, American Journal of Public Health, 2017. 27% of African Americans, aged 15-44, have had an abortion. THEREFORE, If we were in a room with 4 African American females ages 15-44; I would then be justified to assume that at least one of them have had an Abortion, simply because of their race and the statistic. To have this idea, I have assumed I have knowledge of at least one of them, even though I really and truly have no idea about any.
According to the FBI’s expanded data chart of 2015 homicides [4]; African Americans kill other African Americans with a rate of 89%; while white on white homicides was at a rate of 81%. White Americans are killed by African Americans at a rate of 15.7%, but White Americans kill African Americans only at a rate of 5.8%. From this data we see that in 2015, not only did more same-race murders happen with African American, but African Americans murdered more White Americans than the other way around, and almost by triple the likelihood. Is a White American fear of African American violence justified? Is that kind of assumption/judgement right? Of course not!
There are all kinds of studies being conducted and all kinds of interpretations and assumptions people will make from all these studies BUT we will always come back to the paramount issue: SHOULD we use all these studies to justify judgements of people we have never met? and the same question can be asked again: Can we rightly judge all those who were not surveyed based on those who were?
SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS
We ARE boasting in our self-righteousness when we believe we are justified in the rightness of our judgements when applying stats to people we have never met, and have no true knowledge of, then drawing a conclusion about that person in our self presumed rightness.
We THINK we can have the knowledge of God, knowing what we do not know. We THINK we can be RIGHT in our own knowledge about someone when we, in reality, have no knowledge about that person in direct relation to our assumption and the stat. We THINK we are JUST in our judgements solely based on what other “experts” tell us about unknown people- yet, we are hypocrites because the judgement is UNJUST because the person is actually unknown and we do not know the truth about that person.
CONCLUSION
Statistics can aid us in opening our eyes to injustice and spotting unjust SITUATIONS and societal trends BUT becomes SIN in our hearts and minds when we believe we can use it and apply it to PEOPLE and know people, we do not actually know. We then use statistics to self-righteously JUSTIFY racial profiling, where we convince ourselves that we CAN KNOW an unknown person, positive or negative, which feeds our natural inclination of prejudice and self-idolatry- which only leads to one primal thing- racism and hatred. And that racism and hatred is based all on the ignorant assumptions and judgements applied to people we don’t know, all justified initially by stats, then by our sinful hearts. Collectivism is contrary to God.
To be absolutely clear. Statistics and statistical studies CAN aid us in exposing injustice and oppression within a system and society. Is there currently, within America, systemic racism? We believe that the statistical data does point to this. Is there racism of other races in other countries, we think there is evidence to support this as well. The statistical data reveals the situational issue and points us to a spiritual just focus and a gospel need. BUT to then continue on and apply the broad statistics to unknown individuals collectively is simply wrong and immoral. We have NO true knowledge of an unknown person, and therefore, we can not, before God, be just and right in any sort of judgement about that person. We can not be right, and actually in sin, when we assume all African Americans like basketball, using the example previously discussed. We can not be right, and actual in sin, when we assume all white people are privileged. Again, that would require us to apply ignorant assumptions collectively to an unknown person to which we have NO true knowledge of.
The distinction between rightful judging with statistics and sinful judgementalism with statistics is to which the assumption/judgement is applied to. Situational and cultural awareness or judgement of an individual. To expose a broken society, or to judge an individual in the society. To reveal injustice, or to unjustly judge a person. To rightly see the systemic trends, or to claim to know the unknown individual. To rightly judge conditions justified by scripture, or to wrongfully judge a person justified by self-righteous ignorance.
This goes to the heart of Social Justice and Civil Rights. The church needs to SEE the statistical support for modern systemic racism, injustice, and oppression AND stand against the oppression, and injustice; BUT at the same time, be careful not to fall into disunity, dividing the Body of Christ through prejudice, racial profiling, and the untrue falsehoods of collectivism ignorantly justified with all sorts of statistical interpretations. Ignoring or discrediting systemic racism is dishonest but breaking fellowship and supporting disunity from “white evangelicalism” is equally unjust and unrighteous. The open willfulness to segregate yourself and your family from other races is sinful for all people. Peter was rightly and justly rebuked by Paul for this!
On Sunday, go to a less diverse church, and worship with other Brothers and Sisters in Christ of a different race. Participate in diversity ministries or less diverse ministries, and serve the Lord together. Break the sinful wall of prejudice, racial profiling, willful segregation, collectivism, all of are justified by statistics; be a light in the world for unity, grace, mercy, forgiveness, and love. Actually FOLLOW Christ without favoritism or partiality for one race or another.
1. 2016-2017 http://web1.ncaa.org/rgdSearch/exec/displayResultsPercents.
2. http://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/17954156/wnba-scores-high-racial-gender-report-card
3. http://www.maxpreps.com/polls/basketball/xcellent25.htm
4. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2015.xls
How do we know Jesus died on the cross? We must look at the historical evidences recorded for us in ancient history. What evidence is there? We have the ancient accounts from Jewish historians, Syrian philosopher, ancient Roman historians and writers, and archeological evidence support; all within the 1st and 2nd century. With all this evidences, what can we reliably conclude?
Outside of the Biblical witnesses (the synoptic gospels) we first look to the closest culture associated with Jesus and his death; Judaism.
JEWISH HISTORY
Two researchers, Edwin Yamauchi and John P. Meier, have constructed a copy of the “Testimonium” of Flavius Josephus (37-101AD; wrote ~45 years after Jesus) with the probable later Christian insertions removed. In parentheses are what is found in the Arabic manuscript. The following paragraph is Yamauchi’s:
“About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man (And his conduct was good and he was known to be virtiucous) For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. (They reported that he had appeared to them after his crucifixion and that he was alive). And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”
Here Josephus the Jewish historian records that Jesus was condemned by crucifixion. Josephus does not have to be believe in Jesus in a religious sense to admit and record a historical event regarding what happened to Jesus. Being a anti-christian source, he records this event as an actual historic occurrence. Given his time of writing and area of association, he would have known witnesses of this event.
Later in Jewish records we see in The Babylonian Talmud, a commentary on Jewish laws composed between A.D. 500-600 (Neusner/Green, 69), contains a text about Jesus’ death. The Tractate Sanhedrin (43a) states:
Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously the herald had cried, “He is being led out for stoning, because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy. Whosoever has anything to say in his defense, let him come and declare it.” As nothing was brought forward in his defense, he was hanged on Passover Eve.
SYRIAN HISTORY
Secondly we can look at Mara Bar-Serapion who wrote around 70AD (~35 years after Jesus); He was a Syrian philosopher and a non-christian. When giving historical examples of innocent people being killed, he gives this example:
“…Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”
The Jews never murdered their kings of the past. Jesus however was mockingly called “king of the Jews” on the cross. It was an argument that even Jewish leadership used to get Rome to approve his crucifixion. 35 years after Jesus was murdered, Rome destroyed Jerusalem. But “the wise King lived on in the teachings he enacted”. Thus Serapion was indirectly stating that Jesus was a real person of history that was killed.
ROMAN HISTORY
Third, we see as recorded by Cornelius Tacitus (56-120AD); a very trusted Roman historian, senator, proconsul of Asia, and defiantly a non-christian who wrote around 116AD (~80 years after Jesus) an interesting statement:
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”
Tacitus records that Jesus “suffered THE extreme penalty” by Rome, which was crucifixion.
Then Lucian of Samosata (120-180AD; ~115 years after Jesus) was a satirist and Roman comedian who very negative and sarcastically critical of Christians. He wrote several books and in a negative since, unintentionally affirms Jesus’ death:
“The Christians. . . worship a man to this day – the distinguished personage who introduced this new cult, and was crucified on that account. . . . You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains their contempt for death and self devotion . . . their lawgiver [taught] they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take on faith”
Lucian also affirms the historic event of Jesus’ crucifixion.
The image above is roughly 1st to the late 3rd century dating which depicts a person crucified with a donkey head being worshiped by a person to the left. The words engraved at the bottom translate “Alexamenos worships [his] God,” This was mocking a person named “Alexamenos” for worshiping “[his] God” who was on the cross. Origen reports in his treatise Contra Celsum that the pagan philosopher Celsus made the same claim against Christians and Jews:
“For the sake of such a monstrous delusion, and in support of those wonderful advisers, and those wonderful words which you address to the lion, to the amphibious creature, to the creature in the form of an ass, and to others, for the sake of those divine doorkeepers..”
Tertullian, writing in the late 2nd or early 3rd century, reports that Christians, along with Jews, were accused of worshiping such a deity. He also mentions an apostate Jew who carried around Carthage a caricature of a Christian with ass’s ears and hooves, labeled Deus Christianorum Onocoetes (“the God of the Christians begotten of an ass”).
Thus, through this insulting graffiti in ancient Roman culture, we see that Christians were worshiping someone who was crucified. The donkey head is the derogatory depiction of Jesus, as it was taught that Jesus, the king, entered Jerusalem on a donkey also the donkey itself depicted how Roman society felt about Jesus himself. None the less showed the culture making fun of someone who was crucified.
HISTORY OF ROMAN CRUCIFIXION
What we know about Roman crucifixion is that it was extremely successful. A heal bone found of a young male with a nail hammered through it was discovered in Jerusalem around 1968. The skeletal remains are dated to 1st century AD. This shows that the Romans would use nails on people to hold them to the crucifixion blank. His arm bones revealed scratches where the nails had passed between. Both legs were badly fractured, most likely from a crushing blow meant to end his suffering and bring about a faster death. The young male was a Jew. The bones were found in an ossuary, or bone box, inscribed several times with Yehohanan’s name (“Yehohanan son of Hagakol”). The tombs were part of a large Jewish cemetery of the Second Temple period (second century B.C. to 70 A.D.). Archeologist Vassilios Tzaferis describes:
“During this period, it was customary to collect the bones of the deceased after the body had been buried for almost a year and the flesh had decomposed. The bones were then reinterred in an ossuary. The practice of collecting bones in ossuaries had a religious significance that was probably connected with a belief in the resurrection of the dead. But this custom was also a practical measure; it allowed a tomb to be used for a prolonged period. As new burials became necessary, the bones of earlier burials were removed and placed in an ossuary. Reburial in an ossuary was, however, a privilege for the few; not every Jewish family could afford them. Most families reburied the bones of their dead in pits. The use of stone ossuaries probably began during the Herodian dynasty (which began in 37 B.C.) and ended in the second half of the second century A.D… We also found a considerable quantity of pottery in the tomb. Because all the pottery was easily identifiable, we were able to date the tomb quite accurately… According to Josephus, Alexander Jannaeus crucified 800 Jews on a single day during the revolt against the census of 7 A.D… Accounts of the suppression of the revolt of Spartacus in 71 B.C. tell how the Roman army lined the road from Capua to Rome with 6,000 crucified rebels on 6,000 crosses. After the Romans quelled the relatively minor rebellion in Judea in 7 A.D. triggered by the death of King Herod, Quintilius Varus, the Roman Legate of Syria, crucified 2,000 Jews in Jerusalem. During Titus’s siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., Roman troops crucified as many as 500 Jews a day for several months… In peacetime, crucifixions were carried out according to certain rules, by special persons authorized by the Roman courts. Crucifixions took place at specific locations, for example, in particular fields in Rome and on the Golgotha in Jerusalem. Outside of Italy, the Roman procurators alone possessed authority to impose the death penalty. Thus, when a local provincial court prescribed the death penalty, the consent of the Roman procurator had to be obtained in order to carry out the sentence.” (“Crucifixion—The Archaeological Evidence” by Vassilios Tzaferis originally appeared in Biblical Archaeology Review, Jan/Feb 1985, 44-53.)
Even if Jesus was to had survived after being brought down from the cross, just unconscious, the burial ritual of the Jewish culture would have suffocated him regardless. Given what we know now medically, the wounds he would have suffered, the lack of nutrition, dehydration, wound infection, and burial suffocation; he could still not have survived.
ISLAMIC RECORD
About 630 years after Jesus, Ibn Ishaq (d. 761 CE/130 AH) reports of a brief accounting of events leading up to the crucifixion. But about 200 years after Ibn Ishaq, the idea of Jesus’ crucifixion changed to the idea that he only appeared to be crucified or that he did die for only a few hours before being raised to heaven. Al-Tabari (d. 923 CE/310 AH) records an interpretation attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas, who used the literal “I will cause you to die” (mumayyitu-ka) in place of the metaphorical mutawaffi-ka “Jesus died”, while Wahb ibn Munabbih, an early Jewish convert, is reported to have said “God caused Jesus, son of Mary, to die for three hours during the day, then took him up to himself.” Tabari further transmits from Ibn Ishaq: “God caused Jesus to die for seven hours”, while at another place reported that a person called Sergius was crucified in place of Jesus. Ibn-al-Athir forwarded the report that it was Judas, the betrayer, while also mentioning the possibility it was a man named Natlianus. Al-Masudi (d. 956 CE/343 AH) reported the death of Christ under Tiberius. But then, Ibn Kathir (d. 1373 CE/760 AH) suggested that a crucifixion did occur, but not with Jesus and that ‘The servant and messenger of God, Jesus, remained with us as long as God willed until God raised him to Himself.’ It seems that the Islamic idea of Jesus’ pseudo-death follows the early traditions of Gnostic teachings in that Jesus himself did not die but was replaced at the cross by someone one else who appeared to look like Jesus on the cross. Yet other Islamic teachers such as Ja’far ibn Mansur al-Yaman (d. 347 AH/958 CE), Abu Hatim Ahmad ibn Hamdan al-Razi (d. 322 AH/935 CE), Abu Yaqub al-Sijistani (d. 358 AH/971 CE), Mu’ayyad fi’l-Din al-Shirazi (d. 470 AH/1078 CE ) and the group Ikhwan al-Safa affirm that Jesus did die by Crucifixion, and not substituted by another man. It is important to note two things: (1) The Islamic reports of Jesus not dying by crucifixion are at least 900 years after Jesus! (2) They affirm Gnostic teachings which have been proven to be unreliable historically and philosophically. The inconsistent accounts within Islam make it impossible to validate Islamic sources as historically reliable.
CHRISTIAN RECORD
It is easy to write off The Bible as a bias source of the historical event of Jesus’ crucifixion but the same can be said for all the non-christian sources that deny it. The fact that there exists non-christian sources that affirm Jesus’ crucifixion is compelling in and of itself. But is the biblical record of Jesus’ death unreliable? According to non-christian secular scholars and historians such as E. P. Sanders and Maurice Casey, who are bold enough to admit, that, The Bible is reliable enough to know that he did in fact die. The biblical manuscripts describing the crucifixion of Jesus were not only writing during the time crucifixion was still practiced but other ancient records of crucifixion and archeological finds all affirm what The Bible details.
The Rylands Library Papyrus P52 is a biblical manuscript dated 90AD to 150 AD records a small portion of the story of Jesus’ crucifixion. Which the fragment can be possibly dated to only 60 or so years after Jesus. Clement of Rome who wrote around 90AD and affirms the death of Jesus in Chapter 16 of 1 Clement. Ignatius (born around 35 AD and died around 108AD) affirms Jesus’ crucifixion in his letter to the Smyrnaeans. Polycarp of Smyrna (born around 69AD and died around 155AD) affirms Jesus’ crucifixion in his letter to the church in Phillipi.
THE PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
Ancient Jewish history records Jesus’ death on the cross. Syrian philosopher affirms his death as an historic event. Ancient Roman historians and writers affirm Jesus’ death as an historic event. Early church teachers affirm Jesus’ death. Later some Islamic writers even affirm Jesus’ death. Currently, well respected secular scholars affirm that the Bible’s record of Jesus’ death is reliable. We can in fact conclude given the preponderance of evidence that Jesus did in fact die by crucifixion.
In changing times and as cultural identities evolve, a constant issue has been and seems always will be the struggle of favoritism and discrimination of people who look and act different. Even God’s people struggle with this issue to this day. How we address the issue is not found in worldly political strategies and policies but in the truths in Holy Scripture and the Characteristics of God himself.
One Race
First we need to wipe our minds of what the world has taught us how to view racial favoritism and discrimination. There is only one Race, the human race. To state there is a ‘black’ race or a ‘white’ race is thinking the way the world wants you to think so that people are generalized, categorized, and marginalized. These concepts of ‘black’ people and ‘white’ people are human constructs and do not actually exist. Proven by the fact that light skin individuals can be considered ‘black’ and dark skinned individuals can be considered ‘white’. This construct of ‘race’ can not be based on where the person’s family linage is from; because we are all from the same place and same people. This then brings us to the defining factor and WHO decides what defines a ‘race’.
Humanistic Construct of ‘Race’
Someone decided to be ‘black’ you have to be descended from (a) Africa and subscribe to certain sub-cultural (b) behaviors and (c) ideals [including languages]. These three culturally normative rules define what it is to be ‘black’ (or any ‘race’). Who decided this? This construct has been around in various forms throughout human history. In ancient history, where you were from, defined you. Because where you were from incorporated the ideals and behaviors of that region. Our first big questions is; Is this social construct part of God’s original design for Humanity?
Even evolutionary biologist agree that all the different human ‘races’ came from one common ancestor and that all humans have the same melanin in our skins cells that give us the various shades of skin pigment (Gen 3:20). Biologist also know that it only takes a few generations to get very distinct people groups with various shades of melanin. From Adam to Noah, people seemed to have lived together. They shared the same language and locations. Then God dispersed them and confused their language. In this dispersion some people would have went to different climate regions and created different daily habits causing the different melanin shades, behaviors, and ideals over the generations.
9 Generations of long living people from Adam to Noah all with the same language and general regions (Gen 4,5,11,12). The children from Noah’s children became more and more diverse in culture and physical appearance by specific isolation in that gene pool in each splintered people group (Gen 10-11). This example image helps understand the genetics and the gene pool isolation possible outcomes:
The same is true for physical features such as hair and eye thickness and color. Eye shape, noise size, lip, chin, head, and muscle density; all in DNA in each isolated people group developing the common genetics over the generations. The Holy Spirit declares there is only one race but many ‘pre-appointed’ unique people groups in their regions (Acts 17:26).
So back to our question: Yes and No. Human DNA shows that even if the world did not sin, God commanded them to be fruitful and multiply. In filling the earth and multiplying, there would be these genetic variations- unrelated to sin. These genetic variations were ‘pre-appointed’ by a the Holy Almighty Creator. BUT the cultural variations in the behavior and ideals were NOT. God confused the languages and dispersed the people for a negative reason- because of the sin in the human heart.
Genetic Variations in different people groups is of God. It should be celebrated and respected. Cultural Variations in different people groups is a judgement of God. It was due to the sin in the human heart. This is NOT to say, cultural norms should not be respected and celebrated; most are not wrong inherently, some even can glorify God. BUT there are cultural norms that are sinful.
The current humanistic construct of ‘race’ is NOT of God: It dis-unifies the human race and allows for sinful cultural norms to define and influence an entire people group; which leads to conflict between people groups. The racial definitions are not transcended nor objective but evolve with the heart of whom ever is currently in control of the society that definitions it and is subjective in each generation. The current humanistic construct of ‘race’ actually perpetuates favoritism and discrimination in the human heart. How so?
Identity Confusion
You may have dark skin, adhere to all the social norms of a particular ‘race’ but may not have any linage to that race’s defined source. Then it would be said that you were not really that race. More commonly in our time is the same rejection of someone due to differing ideals. Someone who identifies as ‘black’ may be rejected and dismissed by the ‘black community’ because of having different ideals. Supporting a political candidate may cause the rejection and dismissal by the current leaders of the ‘black community’. Not supporting a subjective cause which has been declared by leaders of the ‘black community’ as a defining factor would also lead to rejection and dismissing. Labeling and insulting words such as ‘uncle tom’ are used to shun and shame that individual for not conforming to the subjective humanistic social norms of what it means to be ‘black’. It discriminates against individuality and forces favoritism of a particular subjective worldly definition. It is racist and hateful against someone of the same identity. It is hypocritical and slanderous. It is the human heart; perpetuated by a humanistic construct of ‘race’ imposed by prideful and self glorified leaders of the ‘black community’. It is oppressive and enslaving.
The truth that sets free from Identity confusion is resting your identity of what defines you and your individuality in Christ and seek the kingdom of God and his Characteristics. What defines you is not of this world. It is not based on cultural leaders formulating subjective rules that define a racial community; but is only found in Christ and defined by God alone.
Unequal Favoritism
When an ideal, behavior, or other people group interferes or threatens the defined construction of the particular ‘race’- an unequal unbalanced form of discrimination is imposed on that which is threatening, greatly favoring that which feels threatened. It sacrifices the sovereignty of one people group for the unequal favoritism of the other. This will continue to happen because it is an ever changing construct of evolving definitions of ‘races’. The humanistic construct itself has built within itself the propensity for discrimination and unequal favoritism caused by the continual conflict of people groups and their collective wants and needs. This too is oppressive and enslaving because the construct itself does not allow for an escape from conflict and peace except through forced favoritism through forced ‘justified’ discrimination. To say one people group matter while remaining silent as another people group is slandered and discriminated against is unequal favoritism as well. Long term forced focus on one people group alienates other people groups. Continues to perpetuate inequality through favoritism and the disunity of humanity.
Unholy Norms
Within each constructed ‘race’ there are norms that systematically ensures the humanistic construct continues. In each ‘race’, acceptable generalizations are made and taught. Even generalizations about the ‘race’ its self ensures that the subjective humanistic identity continues within the constructed race. The hypocrisy is when a generalization from a different people group is imposed, then generalizing is seen as discrimination; when within that group, generalizing was acceptable. For example: “Black people are criminals” is deemed racist and wrong BUT “White people are wealthy” is seen as acceptable. Both are generalizations based on a socially constructed idea about an entire people group based on the subjective definitions of their ‘race’. Realistically and logically, both statements are discriminating and hypocritical judgemental ideals.
Another form of unholy social norms taught within particular people groups are subjective ideas of justified reasons to hate and cause violence. Because the reasons to hate are ‘justified’ within the ‘race’, it is not viewed as hate. Because the justification for violence is seen as ‘just’ it is not seen as violent. Committing heinous and unnecessary crimes to ‘survive’, creating and supporting violent resistance to simple government laws, and imposing ‘justified’ generalizations of other people groups while going on witch hunts and ‘race-bait’ for undesirable generalizations are taught social norms within a people group that do harm to the people itself. These generationally taught norms perpetuate the enslaving effect of the humanistic systematic construct of ‘race’ and maintain the blindness of the morally corrupt which is justifying hate and violence.
Ultimately when a people group is taught that they themselves are not responsible for their own decisions in the society but instead is due to historic injustices or a prejudice system and then impose unjust sanctions on another hypocritically generalized people group because of unrelated historic events; that people group are prevented from individual development through accountability and correction. Essentially, lack of responsibility and accountability perpetuate their enslaving to the humanistic system of constructed races in combination with all the other effects of the constructed racial systematic divide.
Hypocritical judgementalism, blind hatred, accepted discrimination, allowed inequality, forced favoritism, condoning and committing violence, silence in the face of hypocrisy, support and action of breaking just laws, slander and generalize other people groups, lack of accountability and responsibility; all are unholy social norms built in a humanistic constructed subjective definition of races that which perpetuates the enslavement of the mind and soul of a society that believes in and embraces the humanistic constructed subjective definition of their ‘race’.
WHO Tells You What To Think
Where you taught to believe you belong to a particular racial group because you meet the qualities you were told? Are you ‘black’ or ‘white’ because you have dark skin, act, speak, and think a certain way? Are you afraid of betraying your race if you change your ideals? Who told you what it means to betray a racial definition that you did not define? Are you an individual defined by God or a humanistic subjective construct of what someone else says you are? Are you free to be an individual?
Your Source
Those who have been granted faith in Jesus Christ have put to death their flesh and raised to a new life in Christ. Their minds have been renewed and have been given a new heart. Their eyes have been opened to see God and they have been BORN AGAIN. They are not their old self. They are no longer bound to their flesh and the limitations of it. They are a NEW creation. They are given a new life and empowered by the Holy Spirit. Their identity is IN Christ, not in the flesh. They may be defined as ‘black’ by the world, but are define as a Child of God which transcends how pigmented their skins is. God is the greatest and most important defining factor in their life for all eternity. They are not a black-Christian, or white-Christian, all are equally are eternally Christian. There is NOTHING that makes being Christian better and there is nothing lacking when in Christ.
God’s Construction of ‘Race’
God made man in his image. All shades and physical features is the unique Human Race created by God and set a part from all other creation. Each person, given their own unique qualities for the purpose of serving God in the community they were called out of while simultaneously remaining unified with the rest of the body of Christ made up of all nations.
There are worldly humanistic labels and dividing distinctions that define people; and break up unity of humanity but only two ways for God; those who worship God and those who do not. The world divides up, subjectively defines and labels, then marginalizes for the purposes of unequal favoritism and unjust discrimination. God divides up for the purpose of graceful eternal salvation and the need for eternal salvation from his perfect righteous justice.
Missions
All Christians are called out of a culture in the world, reborn, renewed, and equipped to re-enter the world as a missionary to find the rest of the lost sheep; to make known the grace of God. For those who come out of the ‘Black community’ or ‘Latin community’ are specifically equipped to go back as a missionary for those communities. But again, they are no longer defined by the community they came out of. Their citizenship is of heaven now. This is the mistake Peter made and the mistakes many Christians make now. They return to their familiar community and alienate everyone else. They show favoritism for the specific community they came out of and neglect the rest of their Christian family from all other communities. Favoritism and neglect are harmful to missions and the body of Christ as a whole. This goes against the grain of the worldly constructed expectations for people. The church needs to show that Black Lives Matter for example, without neglecting, belittling, and alienating the rest of the body of Christ form all the other people groups. To show the world the unity of God that can only be seen through The Body of Christ who is made up of all people.
The simple fact of conceiving this question, using a tool (computer), and searching for an answer to the conceived question is evidence there is something already. But why is there something? Why is there something currently in existence rather than nothing at all? How did the very first iota of ‘something’ come into existence? To lead us to the answer we must ask a series of questions: Is something infinite? Did something come from nothing? Is nothing, something?
Observable Evidences
Throughout history, scientist have observed that something exists and have attempted to explain how it exists. From Copernicus and Galileo, Descartes and Newton, to Albert Einstein, Edwin Hubble, Arno Penzias, Robert Wilson, and Alan Guth. These people have proposed and brought forth evidences that show HOW a something came from a starting point. In 1925 Edwin Hubble proved that the universe was expanding and his formula is known as Hubble’s Law. Then the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson in 1965 and the Inflationary Universe articulated in 1980 by Alan Guth all showed something as the starting point for the universe.
Infinite Something?
Because we know something exists (You, your consciousness, your mind, your conceived question, and your tool) we can first ask, is it infinite? You and your tool had a beginning. Your parents. Your parents had a beginning, their parents. Is there an infinite regression of beginnings? To resolve this first issue we look at logic. Can something have an infinite past? For this to be true, the very first something, would never have a present or future because its past would never end. Logic reveals to us that having an infinite past for something in space and time is not possible. As the universe expands (Hubble’s Law) in time, then we can deduce that it expanded from a certain point in the past. Some people call this absolute beginning of the material universe the Big Bang in which all possible matter was contained in a singularity. That leads us to back to our absolute question, where did the singularity come from? Is that singularity infinite? Given the drastic change from an infinite past singularity to a sudden expansion to where we are now, we see that the singular can not be an infinite singularity. Edwin Hubble would agree.
A theory of an ever expanding and contracting universe (Oscillating Universe) attempted to explain the universe but it still never addressed the issue of the initial something before initial expansion into infinite existing universe; and was not supported by the scientific discoveries of a universe that is observably expanding at a faster rate and the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation. This idea is called a Closed Universe where after the big bang, the universe’s expansion would slow and eventually collapse. This theory was at one point popular but until more recent discoveries it has fallen out of favor.
From Nothing?
This leads us to our next question: Did this singularity or the iota of something came from nothing? First, we need to understand what ‘nothing’ is. Simply put, ‘nothing’ is the lack of existence of which has not value, purpose, or being. If there is no space or time then something can not potentially exist. The Inflationary (or Inflating) Universe theory with The Big Bang theory all point to a single point of beginning for the universe but does not attempt to explain something from nothing. If there was nothing prior to the singularity, then the singularity could not potentially exist. Because something is not nothing, logic reveals to us that nothing can not cause something to exist. Thus nothing, can not cause the existence of the singularity.
Self Generated
Given scientific observations of Hubble and others; and what we can come to know through logic, we see that the universe, and the very first something could not have come from infinity or from nothing. This leads us to our next logical question, could something just have created itself? This is partly addressed from the nothingness conclusion. Before the something created itself, that would mean there was initially nothing. That brings us back to the previous answer of can something come from nothing.
A second conclusion has been raised; the infinite possible universes. What if reality is made up of infinite alternate universes. If this is true, than this means that the potentiality of a universe to come from nothing exist infinity in one of the infinite possibilities. This extreme theory fails under the most simplest logic. This theory would require a reality where one of the infinite possibilities is that there are no other universes; and another universe where there is only one infinite universe in all reality. Hundreds of other ‘possible’ universes can be thought up that would contradict and disprove this theory.
Conclusion
Scientist observe the existence of something and have found evidences to support the HOW something came from a starting point. Philosophy leads us to rule out absurd and illogical theories and points us to the reason WHY there is something rather than nothing. If something can not just exist infinitely, or come from nothing, or cause itself to become something from nothing; that means something is caused to exist through an uncaused cause which exists outside of space and time of which would be immaterial and eternal. This uncaused cause would perfectly explain the existence of something rather than nothing and address how that something came into being. Because science only makes observations and predictions of things in space-time; the immaterial eternal uncaused cause is the philosophical proof that complements the known discoveries in science and further explains why there is something rather than nothing.
A must watch videos:
This is a hotly debated issue; was there an actual historic Great Flood or is Noah’s story just a myth taken from other cultures? To address this question we will look at the ancient flood stories of different ancient cultures, and discuss evidences in geology and fossil records. This topic requires and open mind but also requires a spiritually open mindedness.
The Great Flood is dated before 3,000BC. Noah is a historical and actual person of history who lived through an actual historical event according to the author of 1 Chronicles 1:4, prophet Isaiah (Isaiah 54:9), prophet Ezekiel (Ezekiel 14:14, 20), apostle Peter (1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5), the author of Hebrews (Heb 11:7), Luke (Luke 3:36), and Jesus himself (Matt 24:37-38; Luke 17:26-27).
To say that Noah and the Flood is a myth is to call all these people either liars or the authorship of the words a lie. Without using the bible (even though secular scholars agree the historical reliability of the bible) what other evidences can we find that validate the historical person of Noah and the Flood event?
Stories of The Flood
If one family survived the flood, then all other families after them would have been taught about it. If all the different ancient cultures of the world came from the one family that survived the flood, they would have passed down the story (Gen 9:1). Noah lived 350 years after the flood and was the last person of the pre-flood generation to live that long. For the next 350 years Noah was able to teach all his decedents the stories of the Flood. So where did the confusion of the details of the event come from?
Noah in his ignorance discovers that wine can get you drunk. His sons see this and its effects; it causes a whole ordeal, and thus, sin continues in the hearts of humanity after the flood (Gen 9:18-27). From there, the genealogies of Noah’s decedents begin to reveal the diversity in culture as time went on (Gen 10:1-21).
Sumeria was the first most visible centralized culture and people group in history which, according to the bible, come from Noah’s son Shem (Gen 10:21-22). Noah’s son Ham was the father of Cush who was the father of Nimrod (Gen 10:6-11); whom founded Babylon, traveled through Assyria and founded Ninivah. It is clear that the oral story of a world wide flood could have been passed down, but given the continued sin of mankind, the distortion and confusion of the story is clear.
The Sumerian King List is huge. Earliest sources of this list dates to around 1,000BC. There are a couple critical details about the list. (1) It states that the authority of the kingship came from heaven. (2) The life spans of the early kings were very long. (3) A flood wiped out the kingship and it had to be re-established after the flood. (4) after the flood, the kings life spans were greatly reduced. The earliest historically verified king on the list is around 2,600BC and the king after is in the Epic of Gilgamesh. But the list goes even farther back to more than 4,000BC.
It is important to state that this list was meant as a historical list and not a fictional story. It was the Sumerians attempt at recording their history.
Where did Sumerian’s get the flood idea from?
Knowing that the bible is historically reliable, we then see the Sumerian people descending from the sons of Noah. Thus, the flood story would have been passed down from Noah and his sons and their sons. That is how they could have knowledge of people who per-existed before the flood, and after the flood; also have knowledge about the longer life spans prior to the flood just, as the bible describes.
Why couldn’t have the bible got the idea from the Sumerians?
The Bible describes pre-flood and post-flood in ways that only those whom had experienced it could have described or from one whom and received the details first hand. Given the better reliability of The Bible compared to the Epic of Gilgamesh and other more ancient documents, we can see that the bible is a better source. The Bible also helps explain, if there was a flood that took out the world, how future people were even aware of pre-flood and past individuals. If the Sumerian story preceded the bible, how was the bible better, more reliably informed, and able to explain more accurate details?
The Eridu Genesis (Sumerian Creation story) came about later. One single fragment of the story was discovered that dated to about 1,600BC. It describes a distorted and corrupted view of The Great Flood. There are continued key similarities to The Great Flood account of the oral traditional story from Noah. (1) a priest learns of an impending flood sent from heaven (2) and is instructed to build a large boat (3) animals were loaded in the boat (4) and the priest performs scarifies to a deity. (5) they exit the boat and the deity gives the priest eternal life and preserves the animals and mankind.
By the time of this record of the flood, it had been over 2,000 plus years since sons of Noah; allowing for a loss of traditional Noah heritage and a change in details of the oral story.
The Epic of Gilgamesh. The discovery of Table XI of the story was carved around 700BC. On the Tablet it states very similar details about the flood theme. (1) Deity reveals plan to flood mankind, (2) instructed to build a boat in preparation for the flood (3) A great and violent flood (4) After the storm, a sacrifice to a deity was performed (5) eternal life was given.
Until recently, the Epic of Gilgamesh was only seen as a fictional story but discoveries related to mentioned kings in the story has lead to some historical features of the story. Artifacts related to Aga and Enmebaragesi of Kish have shown them to be actual people of history.
In ancient greek history, there are stories of a flood that also contains similarities to The Great Flood. Plato even states that an world wide flood was an actual historical event in Plato’s Critias. The Greek flood stories are however more mythological than the ones that proceeded them.
China
Even in ancient China, we see all the regions ancient dynasties end or change together probably due to reconstruction and recolonization after the flood, around mid 3rd millennia BC. Something forced China’s ancient people groups from Neolithic age and transition into the Xia dynasties. The Yellow Emperor, legend or a true historical person, even includes a story about a massive flood all throughout China. His supposed reign was around the late 2nd millennia BC. Given that these people groups were separate and isolated from other cultures closer to the Noah’s semi continued secularized traditions; their stories would be more different. This is reflected in the Yellow Emperor’s tale of a great flood as it was vastly different.
Other Cultures
In just about every major civilization since the Sumerian story has had some sort later version of the flood story. The African culture of The Maasai have a similar great flood story with the same themes. In India, in the Shatapatha Brahmana which was recorded not too long after the Babylonian story also contains the same key themes of The Great Flood. The people group of Malaysia, known as the Temuan, have a very similar flood story despite their isolation from middle eastern cultures. Even Mesoamerica and Hopi stories of their ancestors maintain a story of a great flood caused due to mankind angering a deity.
Why the different accounts if it was the same event?
After the flood, Noah, his sons, and their families began to spread out around the world. The different family groups moving to different geographical locations over time would develop their own unique traditions and stories; eventually into their own distinct culture group and nation.
How accurate is Google Translate? To some, it is helpful, to others it does not use the correct words and does not get across the most accurate translation of what is being stated. Imagine all people generally speaking the same language, then a few generations later, speaking a completely different language. How easy would it then be to communicate past stories accurately? The story of The Tower of Babel explains just that. The different people groups, descendants from the sons of Noah, were lead to create their own unique languages. This would have also contributed to the confusion and distortion of the account of The Great Flood between the different cultures. As the people groups lost their connection to the traditions of Noah, they continued to pass down their own versions of the event and embellish them to fit their own situations and culture.
Did Moses get the flood story from Sumerian and Babylonian myths?
The answer to this question greatly depends on your faith. Is God able to reveal historic truths to those whom he ordained to record them? Is God then able to influence the writers to accurately record what he reveals to them? If the answer is “no” or “maybe” to those questions, than for you, finding God will be very difficult; and finding the biblical account of The Great Flood just as difficult. More specifically, the question is: Is God able to reveal prehistoric truths to Moses, and influence him to accurately record them? This is a critical and deep spiritual question that everyone will be confronted with when pondering the flood story. If someone is atheist or agnostic, their obvious answer would be “no” because of their anti-spiritual bias. For God to be God, he must be able to this; or he is not really God and the whole bible is irrelevant. This is where it depends on your faith or lack of.
The answer is, God can and did reveal prehistoric truths to Moses; God can and did influence the one who He chose (Moses) to accurately record what He revealed. Because Jesus is God, and Jesus validated Noah and the flood as an actual historic person and event, it must be true- or Jesus is not God. THEREFORE Moses recorded exactly what God revealed to him about the historic event; and all the other stories of the same historic event came from corrupted descriptions stemming from Noah’s son’s families and their generations of decedents. In fact, the correct true explanation of the event may have been already orally passed down within the people group that kept the traditions of Noah and finally recorded by Moses.
To assume and jump to the concision that Moses stole or borrowed from the Sumerian or Babylonian myths, or parts of the Egyptian great flood myths, only reveal anti-spiritual bias in the assumed conclusion without considering the faith aspect. Because IF God IS able, why could he not have?
What Evidence is there for a world wide flood?
Marine fossils found on mountains: How did marine fossils end up in the middle of continents miles above sea level? For example, there are marine fossils found in layers of the Grand Canyon, 1 mile above sea level [5]. Shellfish fossils found in the Himalayan mountains of Napel [6]. How did ancient sea life climb a mountain?
Mass plant and animal death and fossil groupings: Chambered nautiloids’ are found in the Grand Canyon along with millions of other sea creatures burred in the same layer spanning 10,500 square miles. Hundreds of thousands of marine creatures were buried with amphibians, spiders, scorpions, millipedes, insects, and reptiles in a fossil graveyard at Montceau-les-Mines, France [1]. More than 100,000 fossil specimens, representing more than 400 species, have been recovered from a shale layer associated with coal beds in the Mazon Creek area near Chicago [2]. This spectacular fossil graveyard includes ferns, insects, scorpions, and tetrapods buried with jellyfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and fish, often with soft parts exquisitely preserved. There are locations around the world were not only are there mass death and burial of creatures, but these creatures are both land and sea creatures, buried together. Also in Florissant, Colorado [3] and Green River Formation of Wyoming [4].
Sediment layers are spread over vast areas world wide: The famous Cretaceous chalk beds of southern England that form the white straight cliffs is the same Cretaceous chalk with the same fossils and the same distinctive strata above and below them are also found in the Midwest USA, from Nebraska in the north to Texas in the south. They also appear in the Perth Basin of Western Australia. The Cretaceous Chalk sediment layer was spread all over the world at the same time to achieve the same layer and fossils. Wind and gradual erosion could not produce this, in this vastness all around the globe in the same time frame.
Where are Pre-Flood Human fossils?
This takes an unbiased approach to address this question, and is ignorantly used as a ‘gotcha’ question. Do humans commonly get buried with Elephants or Tigers in modern times? No. The percentage of dinosaur fossils found, out of all fossils found, is 0.01%; what are the odds we will find a human fossil when there was a smaller amount around the same time? That would be more exceedingly rare than finding dinosaur fossils, and finding dinosaur fossils is rare already [7]. Also, dinosaurs were more spread out, and according to Gen 4:17 we see people already lived close together instead of spread out.
Secondly, God made it absolutely clear he was going to “blot out” mankind from the face of the earth in Gen 6:7 and Gen 7:23. That is an absolute destruction. Do you think it will be easy or possible to find something that God has “blot out” from the earth? If anything, the fact we have not found a single human fossil from that time period only validates what the Bible said God would do.
The 2004 tsunami in Southeast Asia was a known localized event that happened only 12 years ago and still 43,000 victims were never found [8]. Now think of how difficult it would be to find 150,000 to 250,000 prehistoric people who were swept away by a world wide flood covering the face of the earth over 5,000 years ago. Biased people expect to find pre-flood human fossils from over 5,000 years ago searching for unknown locations world wide, to be convinced; yet, in our modern times we can’t find 1/3 amount of people in a known localized event that happened only 12 years ago.
Before dinosaur fossils were discovered, did that mean they did not exist? Has humanity discovered everything there is to discover? Does that mean, what we have not discovered, does not exist? Apply the same logical conclusion to the issue above.
Conclusion
The Great Flood is an actual prehistoric event. From the bible, the event of the Great Flood is supported by its divinely inspired authors and Jesus himself. Outside of the bible, it is a historical event according to The Sumerian Kings List and the recently semi-historical validated Epic of Gilgamesh. Different cultures from around the world, separated and isolated, still have some sort of story that contains similar key elements. The fossil record and sediment layers are also explained by a great world wide flood. Given the evidences, it is true that there was a world wide flood.
Noah was instructed to build a large vessel by God. He did and a world wide flood came. He and his family survived with vegetation seeds and animals. They then repopulated the earth. Their decedents spread throughout the world and their decedents continued the Great Flood story but lost the source (true oral traditions from Noah). They injected their own messages and details to fit their own culture. The oral traditions from Noah was then recorded by Moses, guided by God as it was revealed by God to Moses.
We can be confident today that we have the true recorded oral traditions of the events of creation and the flood in the Bible; and that it was revealed by God, and securely recorded with God through Moses. With the spiritual truth aspect of the flood; Noah’s Flood in the Bible explains what is observed in history, archeology, and geology. Without the truth in the spiritual context of faith in God’s security and divine revelations to Moses; all the stories and fossils are just unexplained, oddly convenient, confused, and oddly consistent myths.
sources:
Not only do Christian scholars and historians find The Bible to be historically reliable (of course they would) but also some secular historians as well. Not every historian makes their religious beliefs (or lack of them) known but the historians below make it clear they are not Christian but have determined the The Bible to historically reliable. Not just any Historian with a degree but well respected secular historians in their field.
EP Sanders, Arts and Sciences Professor of Religion at Duke University, Jesus and Judaism and One of the most respected and influential New Testament scholars wrote The Historical Figure of Jesus. He is a Fellow of the British Academy. In 1966 he received a Th.D. from Union Seminary in NYC. In 1990 he received a D. Litt. from the University of Oxford and a Th.D. from the University of Helsinki.
“I shall first offer a list of statements about Jesus that meet two standards: they are almost beyond dispute; and they belong to the framework of his life, and especially of his public career. (A list of everything that we know about Jesus would be appreciably longer.) Jesus was born c 4 BCE near the time of the death of Herod the Great; he spent his childhood and early adult years in Nazareth, a Galilean village; he was baptized by John the Baptist; he called disciples; he taught in the towns, villages and countryside of Galilee (apparently not the cities); he preached ‘the kingdom of God’; about the year 30 he went to Jerusalem for Passover; he created a disturbance in the Temple area; he had a final meal with the disciples; he was arrested and interrogated by Jewish authorities, specifically the high priest; he was executed on the orders of the Roman prefect, Pontius Pilate.”
“Historical reconstruction is never absolutely certain, and in the case of Jesus it is sometimes highly uncertain. Despite this, we have a good idea of the main lines of his ministry and his message. We know who he was, what he did, what he taught, and why he died. ….. the dominant view [among scholars] today seems to be that we can know pretty well what Jesus was out to accomplish, that we can know a lot about what he said, and that those two things make sense within the world of first-century Judaism.”
Maurice Casey, Emeritus Professor of New Testament, University of Nottingham and atheist: wrote Jesus of Nazareth
“He argues that those (generally non-experts) who think otherwise base their conclusions on
ludicrously late dates for the Gospels, incorrect comparisons with pagan myths, tampering with ancient texts to removeinconvenient evidence, poor application of accepted historical methods and disregard for the work of major scholars in the field.”
Michael Grant, historian of the Roman Empire and worked at Ankara University, chairman of Humanity (Latin) at Edinburgh University, vice-chancellor of the University of Khartoum, vice-chancellor of Queen’s University of Belfast, and an expert of ancient Greek, Roman and Israelite history: wrote Jesus: an historian’s review of the Gospels
“we can no more reject Jesus’ existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned. ….. In recent years, ‘no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus’ or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.”
Grant and Casey add in addition to Sanders:
M A Powell wrote The Jesus Debate
The Merneptah Stele is the most widely recognized and accepted earliest inscription of “Israel”. The inscription is from the ancient Egyptian king Merneptah who ruled between 1213BC to 1203BC. This stele is estimated to have been carved around 1208BC.
Prior Egyptian Kings enjoyed control over their cities but a Libyan king boldly invaded in 1208BC. The stone describes the Egyptian victory over that invasion but also describes a conquest to the east in an effort to retain control of those rebelling regions. One of the people groups who were “smitten” was a nomadic people called “I.si.ri.ar”, or Israel.
Arguably this is the oldest widely accepted reference to Israel. But there is an earlier fragment on a column in which may also name Israel prior to this one.
The Berlin Column base fragment is dated around 1453BC to 1401BC and to the far right may record when Israel was enslaved in Egypt. The other shields record other nations and people groups who were conquered as well. The half viable characters are very similar to the characters used to name Israel but given the earlier date may explain the variation as Egyptian inscriptions and names evolved.
Due to the character similarities to Israel, the timing of the history in Israel, and no other people group in that region with that similar characters; “Israel” would be the most logical concision given the limited information. But due to the partial fragment and limited information, some scholars are hesitant to assign that name to this fragment.
A fragmented slab of stone found in Israel with Aramaic characters carefully engraved in the stone describe a military victory of the Aramein King over southern nations; one of which is stated as: “The King of the House of David”. The stone is date to the late 9th Century BC. Sadly the undiscovered portion of the stone presumably records the names of the kings but most scholars believe the stela recounts a campaign of Hazael of Damascus, king of Aram, in which he defeated both Jehoram of Israel and Ahaziah of Judah.
Why is this discovery so important?
This simple inscription proves the historical person of King David out side of the bible while at the same time validating the bible’s historical reliability. It also reveals the influence and respect of King David. Over 100 years later, even his enemies still recognize him as the foundation of that dynasty. The inscription corresponds to 2 Chronicles 22. This discovery is ranked as one of the top 10 most important archeological finds of that year.
The theory that King David was a fictitious Israelite hero or embellished minor person in Israels early history become less creditable and less reliable because of the discovery out side of the Bible’s witness of him.
Secular and Non-christian ancient writers were made witnesses without even knowing it. Now it is easy for these and any ancient account to be attacked but think about this: We talk about and teach about Plato as if he was a real person of history who lived and taught around 400-300BC; yet the oldest manuscript we have of ‘his’ is around 800AD. That is roughly a 1,200 year separation. Yet, historians consider mentions about him in other earlier ancient writings as creditable and useful. Below are lists of mentions of Jesus that are within 17-115 years after Jesus. Closer and more reliable than most sources of other ancient persons and are accepted as reliable.
Quick and Simple History Lesson:
Initially Jesus was a no body. Later in his life crowds of Jews followed him (and some Romans). And then he was put to death. So from 3-35AD no one would have really known anything about this guy name Jesus out side of that local region.
Then suddenly, the apostles and others were going around saying he rose from the dead and came to them. The Jews admit there was no body found and Rome could care less. As the news spread (without internet or cell phones) apostles and disciples made it to Rome, Africa, Asia minor, and continue to teach what this unknown guy Jesus taught and did.
Meanwhile the known world is caring more about the Jewish Revolt (its second attempt against Rome). In 70AD Rome got tired of Israel and their riots and destroys their capital Jerusalem.
By this time with that problem gone, Roman citizens were converting to Christianity, and it is becoming more talked about publicly. For a Syrian Philosopher in 70AD to know about Jesus, for Jewish and Roman Historians to recognize Jesus as history, and for a comedian to feel the need to patronize a religion; it was growing.
Its not until after Jesus’ death that he gets talked about and focused on outside of the broad region he and his apostles came out of.
“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)
Julius Africanus quoted this because the date of this event coincides with the crucifixion of Jesus. The same darkness and earthquake that occurred when Jesus died on the cross as recorded by scripture.
Mara Bar-Serapion wrote around 70AD (~35 years after Jesus); He was a Syrian philosopher who was writing to his son. He used real life examples of the persecution people have faced wrongly for their beliefs. He uses Athenians against Socrates to death, the people of Samos against Pythagoras and then states:
“…Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”
The Jews never murdered their kings of the past. Jesus however was mockingly called “king of the Jews” on the cross. It was an argument that even Jewish leadership used to get Rome to approve his crucifixion. 35 years after Jesus was murdered, Rome destroyed Jerusalem. But “the wise King lived on in the teachings he enacted”. Thus Serapion was indirectly stating that Jesus was a real person of history, that his death was wrong, and that his teachings that he enacted are still taught and lived out.
Flavius Josephus (37-101AD; wrote ~45 years after Jesus) was a Jewish Historian whom was captured by Romans in Jerusalem, taken to Rome, and was freed. There he wrote his books. In one of his books he talks about Jesus. This is called the Testimonium. Down through history though it is argued that Christians added to his writings and the Testimonium. Two researchers, Edwin Yamauchi and John P. Meier, have constructed a copy of the “Testimonium” with the probable Christian insertions removed. In parentheses are what is found in the Arabic manuscript. The following paragraph is Yamauchi’s:
“About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man (And his conduct was good and he was kown to be virtiucous) For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. (They reported that he had appeared to them after his crucifixion and that he was alive). And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”
Keeping in mind, Jesus was respected as a person and as a teacher in Jewish history until Christianity grew. It was not until later in history that Jewish Rabbis began slandering him and writing negative things about. Removing all positive statements about Jesus and assuming they were imputations by Christians is anti-christian bias in itself. Jews would have been positive about Jesus in Josephus’ day. They would however disagree on his actual resurrection but would not disagree that his apostles would claim he did. The reconstructed Testimonium above is what a Jewish historian would have said without Christian bias in that day.
In another place we see another mention of Jesus and an important identifier:
“Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James,”
Jesus was a common name in that culture at that time. To know which person was the subject, the author would attach a family name or in this case a notable related person. Here Josephus attaches ‘of Jesus’ to the subject but because that was still a common name, he includes which Jesus, “who was called Christ”. This is not an affirmation of belief. Josephus did not believe that Jesus was Christ but he records that Jesus “was called” Christ. Thus this is how his readers would know which James he was talking about.
In this record we see that Jesus was an actual person of history and was in fact crucified. That his disciples fell away after he was crucified but then later reported Jesus appearing to them. This account (minus any kind of imputation suspicion) validates the synoptic gospel accounts.
Cornelius Tacitus (56-120AD); a very trusted Roman historian, senator, proconsul of Asia, and defiantly a non-christian who wrote around 116AD (~80 years after Jesus) an interesting statement about Christianity
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”
From this statement alone we can learn a lot about Christianity. There was a class of people called Christians who got their name from someone who was named Christus. He suffered the extreme penalty during a specific and actual time of Pontius Pilatus. Christians also had a very “mischievous superstition” about this Christus guy. And that this class of people first started in Judea and spread to Rome.
Anyone who claims Jesus never existed or was not crucified must then disprove Tacitus. The problem is that Tacitus is proven reliable and is a major source for a majority our knowledge about ancient Rome. To question him is to question most of what we know about Roman history now.
Pliny the Younger (61-113AD; ~65 years after Jesus) a Roman non-christian wrote a letter to emperor Trajan and mentioned some things about Christianity. He states:
“They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god”
Pliny can tell that these Christians have a ‘fixed day’ of the week in the morning where they meet up and sing “to Christ, as to a god”. Pliny unknowingly records that Christians worship Jesus Christ as God. He also shows that Christians met up on a selected day (Sunday) in the mornings, “before it was light”.
Suetonius (69-140AD) a Roman historian records how Christians were treated in Roman society. He mentioned a disturbance in Rome around 49AD (~14 years after Jesus) and then the fire of Rome in 64AD where Nero blamed the Christians.
“Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” (Life of Claudius, 25:4)
“Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.” (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)
Suetonius even states that the Christian religion is “new”. Rome was a mecca of culture of that time. He would be fully aware of Egyptian religions, Babylonian religions, and other eastern religions including Greek and Romes’ own; yet, Christianity was “new”. The disturbance of 49AD was also recorded by Luke in Acts 18:2
Lucian of Samosata (120-180AD; ~115 years after Jesus) was a satirist and Roman comedian who very negative and sarcastically critical of Christians. He wrote several books and in a negative since, affirms Christianity. He states:
“The Christians. . . worship a man to this day – the distinguished personage who introduced this new cult, and was crucified on that account. . . . You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains their contempt for death and self devotion . . . their lawgiver [taught] they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take on faith”
Just from his derogatory account we still see that Christians worshiped Jesus as God. That Jesus was in fact a real person of history and was crucified. He also states that Christianity is “new” and not just a blend of past religions.
The Jewish (Babylonian) Talmud was written around 375 to 427 AD. It records that Jesus was crucified in Sanhedrin 43 and that he had close disciples.
“On the eve of the Passover Yeshu (Jewish for Jesus) was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, ‘He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.’ But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!35 — Ulla retorted: ‘Do you suppose that he was one for whom a defence”
“Our rabbis taught Jesus the Nazarene had five disciples, and these are they: Matthai, Naqqai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah:
In other places of Jewish texts we see more mentions of Jesus:
Shabboth 14:4/8 – “someone … whispered to him in the name of Jesus son of Pandera”
Abodah Zarah 17a – “One of the disciples of Jesus the Nazarene found me”
Sanhedrin 103a – “that you will not have a son or disciple … like Jesus the Nazarene”
Sanhedrin 107b – “The master said: Jesus the Nazarene practiced magic
We can almost see a negative expression of the gospel. Jesus had disciples and went around doing unexplainable things (which Jews understood them to be sorcery and magic). People were healed in his name and Jesus was later “hanged” on the eve of Passover. This account supports the synoptic gospels accounts.
Why are there no writings of Jesus (out side of the bible) while he was alive?
A valid question. Joseph Caiaphas was the Chief Priest during the time of Jesus. According to the apostles he organized the trial of Jesus. Josephus records that he was the son of Annas who was deposed and Caiaphas was then appointed by Roman authorities. There is no mention of him ever writing anything. Pontius Pilate is mentioned by Roman, Jewish, and Christian historians is who presided over the trial of Jesus. By Jewish accounts he was very insensitive to Jewish culture but tried to maintain order. A document called Acts of Pilate is a later writing has no authentic qualities or support. Besides this later attempt to attach his name to a document, there are no known authentic writings from him. As mentioned in the introduction; during this time, he was a no body. It was not until he did what he did and told his followers to go make it known that things started to be recorded. God made him the only voice during this time. The apostles were his writers during the time he was alive.
The synoptic gospels are supported by the outside biblical sources above and by archeologically findings. Secular modern historians like EP Sanders, Michael Grant, and Maurice Casey, find the synoptic gospels to be historically reliable. Thus, the synoptic gospels are the written account of Jesus while he was alive
THE AMERICAN LIFE JOURNAL 