EXCERPT:
ONTARIO, Calif. — Jack Chick, author of Christian tracts, made a surprise purchase of some of the world’s best-loved comic strips and is spreading the gospel in typical Chick fashion through the Sunday funnies.
Author: Jimmy Akin
Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live."
LARK NEWS: The Rapture Has Taken Place!
OTTAWA — The Rapture occurred March 31, 2005, at 9:43 a.m. Greenwich Mean Time and took both people on the planet whose theology was exactly correct.
Dan Wilson of Ottawa, Canada, was snatched away while sleeping.
"He spent years refining his eschatological scheme," says his wife. "Just last week he told me he had it all right, but I still disagreed with him on a minor point. I regret that now."
In The Beginning: John Paul II's First Homily
A friend of mine who is a priest and a Benedictine (and a really good guy!) writes:
I obtained from the Vatican website the Homily that Pope John Paul II preached at the Mass for the inauguration of his pontificate, October 22, 1978. I’ve translated it from the Italian (minus his brief greetings in several other languages). It has turned out to be a prophecy of his person and work as pope. In case you are interested in it, I have attached it to this e-mail in two forms so that you can open at least one.
GET THE HOMILY.
Continue reading “In The Beginning: John Paul II's First Homily”
In The Beginning: John Paul II’s First Homily
A friend of mine who is a priest and a Benedictine (and a really good guy!) writes:
I obtained from the Vatican website the Homily that Pope John Paul II preached at the Mass for the inauguration of his pontificate, October 22, 1978. I’ve translated it from the Italian (minus his brief greetings in several other languages). It has turned out to be a prophecy of his person and work as pope. In case you are interested in it, I have attached it to this e-mail in two forms so that you can open at least one.
GET THE HOMILY.
Continue reading “In The Beginning: John Paul II’s First Homily”
Viva Le Difference
FLASH! GIRLS AND BOYS ARE NOT THE SAME!
Yes! That’s the shocking conclusion reached by
He’s confirmed something that other studies have shown before–that girl babies respond more to faces than boy babies do–but the twist is, he’s shown it earlier in life than previous studies have. Specifically: He’s shown that the phenomenon exists 24 hours after birth.
It’s interesting to see the politically correct environment he has to deal with in his field. Folks have been so determined to explain ALL sex differences based on training and environment that he actually feels the need to say things like this:
The results of the experiment were that we found more boys than girls looked longer at the mechanical mobile. And more girls than boys looked longer at the human face. Given that it was a sex difference that emerged at birth, it means that you can’t attribute the difference to experience or culture. Twenty-four hours old. Now you might say, well, they’re not exactly new-born, it would have been better to get them at 24 minutes old — or even younger. But obviously we had to respect the wishes of the parents and the doctors to let the baby relax after the trauma of being born. And let the parents get to know their baby. So strictly speaking, it might have been one day of social experience. But nonetheless, this difference is emerging so early that suggests it’s at least partly biological.
His story also goes into a lot of related, interesting subjects, such as the origin of autism and the effects later in life of prenatal exposure to testosterone. Fascinating reading.
Viva Le Difference
FLASH! GIRLS AND BOYS ARE NOT THE SAME!
Yes! That’s the shocking conclusion reached by
He’s confirmed something that other studies have shown before–that girl babies respond more to faces than boy babies do–but the twist is, he’s shown it earlier in life than previous studies have. Specifically: He’s shown that the phenomenon exists 24 hours after birth.
It’s interesting to see the politically correct environment he has to deal with in his field. Folks have been so determined to explain ALL sex differences based on training and environment that he actually feels the need to say things like this:
The results of the experiment were that we found more boys than girls looked longer at the mechanical mobile. And more girls than boys looked longer at the human face. Given that it was a sex difference that emerged at birth, it means that you can’t attribute the difference to experience or culture. Twenty-four hours old. Now you might say, well, they’re not exactly new-born, it would have been better to get them at 24 minutes old — or even younger. But obviously we had to respect the wishes of the parents and the doctors to let the baby relax after the trauma of being born. And let the parents get to know their baby. So strictly speaking, it might have been one day of social experience. But nonetheless, this difference is emerging so early that suggests it’s at least partly biological.
His story also goes into a lot of related, interesting subjects, such as the origin of autism and the effects later in life of prenatal exposure to testosterone. Fascinating reading.
Careful, Star Wars Spoiler-Avoiders!
I was in a bookstore last night, and right there in the first display inside the main door was the novelization of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.
It was sitting right there.
With a complete novelization of what will go down on movie screen across the country just over a month from now.
It had all the spoilers one could want (shy of a bootleg copy of the finished film itself, of course).
And it’s available not only in hardback but also in CD and audiocasette, both abridged and unabridged.
At very reasonable prices.
Next day shipping available.
But be warned: If once you start to read it, forever will it dominate your experience of the film.
Some Random Thoughts On The Death Of The Holy Father
Guestblogger <Rule 15b>Sal</Rule15b> writes:
When I went up to go to confession Saturday, someone had placed a picture of the Pope on an easel in the narthex and draped it in black. The picture was “the red and gold” photo – one of the earliest official portraits. When I looked closer, I saw that the face and body were in bas relief: the picture was made of pressed plastic. And it was in one of those frames that aren’t even real wood, but wood-grained contact paper over pressboard. It had probably been hanging in the church office for twenty years., or someone brought it from home. Which is one of the things I love about the Church – we can be tacky and magnificent at the same time.
Sunday morning, my oldest daughter – the one I was expecting when John Paul II was elected- came over with our granddaughter to pick up some moving boxes.
“You know what we did last night? “ she asked. “ We just lay in bed and watched the coverage of the Pope’s life for hours. Jake said ‘Why are we doing this?’ but we couldn’t turn it off. It was so fascinating.”
Now you need to understand that our son-in-law is completely unchurched and innocent of any religious background at all. He’s not hostile towards religion – just doesn’t know anything about it. For him to watch hours of cable news about a man who didn’t even touch the periphery of his experience means something.
“You just can’t help but like him, “he said.
I didn’t convert until 1985, six years into this papacy. I credit the Pope’s unwavering stand on the things that actually matter with reassuring me that the Church really was indefectible, that rough patches could be overcome, and that God does provide- in this case, the right man for the job. And that in spite of the surrounding seeming chaos, it was still perfectly possible to be a good Catholic. At the time, my friends cautioned: “Oh, he’s okay – but what about the next guy? Huh?” After twenty years in the Church, I’m sure the “next guy” will do just fine.
A "Mystery" Solved?
So the other day I’m sitting around watching a Stargate SG-1 episode, and they’re going through this wormhole. Looks like this:
And I’m thinking: Why does it look like that? Why does it look like anything? The event horizon of the Stargate wormholes is supposed to disintegrate you into your component molecules and transmit them thorugh the wormhole. If you were totally discombobulated, you shouldn’t see anything.
But then we have evidence on the script-level of folks experiencing things in the wormhole, talking about what a "wild ride" they are and such.
So I think: Maybe when the wormhole disintegrates you, it doesn’t totally de-pattern you, it simply restructures your body in such a way that it can travel through the wormhole, but all the while you and your consciousness are still functioning. Your body’s been re-arranged, but it’s all still operational.
So then I thought: Hey, there’s evidence of the same thing on Star Trek. In that there Realm of Fear episode of Next Gen, Lt. BroccoliBarclay has some unusual experiences in the transporter beam (which he’s deathly afraid of [left]).
He even gets into a tussle with some critters that are up to no good in the transporter beam, though they later turn out to be something other than they appear (right).
The thing is: He’s conscious during all of this. So on Star Trek, like on Stargate, we have evidence of people remaining conscious and in some sense "together" during a period of de-materialization.
Now that may shed light on a long standing "mystery" in Star Trek: Namely, why you don’t simply die and get cloned each time you enter the transporter.
They recently referred to this problem in the episode of Enterprise where they had the inventor of the transporter guest star. During one scene they referred to all the "metaphysical" worries of folks about whether the transporter killed you and made a copy, at which point Trip looked around the dinner table and noted that, if that were true, "We’re all copies here."
Well, despite the fact I once saw a very neat cartoon on PBS exploring this premise (an animated character made a transporter transmitter and receiver out of two refrigerators then transported herself and pondered the moral implications of having done so, only to discover that despite the fact she died in the transmitter, she is now a "guiltless clone"), it would seem that Trek (and SG-1) ahve both provided evidence that this is not the case.
It seems to me that if your consciousness remains functional through the experience of being de-materialized then that’s at least presumptive evidence that it’s still you on the other end.
So the transporter and the Stargates are not killer+cloner devices.
Of course, since consciousness can exist independently of physical form, this leaves open the question of whether they are killer+resurrecter devices or just "repackaged for easy transport" devices.
A “Mystery” Solved?
So the other day I’m sitting around watching a Stargate SG-1 episode, and they’re going through this wormhole. Looks like this:
And I’m thinking: Why does it look like that? Why does it look like anything? The event horizon of the Stargate wormholes is supposed to disintegrate you into your component molecules and transmit them thorugh the wormhole. If you were totally discombobulated, you shouldn’t see anything.
But then we have evidence on the script-level of folks experiencing things in the wormhole, talking about what a "wild ride" they are and such.
So I think: Maybe when the wormhole disintegrates you, it doesn’t totally de-pattern you, it simply restructures your body in such a way that it can travel through the wormhole, but all the while you and your consciousness are still functioning. Your body’s been re-arranged, but it’s all still operational.
So then I thought: Hey, there’s evidence of the same thing on Star Trek. In that there Realm of Fear episode of Next Gen, Lt. BroccoliBarclay has some unusual experiences in the transporter beam (which he’s deathly afraid of [left]).
He even gets into a tussle with some critters that are up to no good in the transporter beam, though they later turn out to be something other than they appear (right).
The thing is: He’s conscious during all of this. So on 
Star Trek, like on Stargate, we have evidence of people remaining conscious and in some sense "together" during a period of de-materialization.
Now that may shed light on a long standing "mystery" in Star Trek: Namely, why you don’t simply die and get cloned each time you enter the transporter.
They recently referred to this problem in the episode of Enterprise where they had the inventor of the transporter guest star. During one scene they referred to all the "metaphysical" worries of folks about whether the transporter killed you and made a copy, at which point Trip looked around the dinner table and noted that, if that were true, "We’re all copies here."
Well, despite the fact I once saw a very neat cartoon on PBS exploring this premise (an animated character made a transporter transmitter and receiver out of two refrigerators then transported herself and pondered the moral implications of having done so, only to discover that despite the fact she died in the transmitter, she is now a "guiltless clone"), it would seem that Trek (and SG-1) ahve both provided evidence that this is not the case.
It seems to me that if your consciousness remains functional through the experience of being de-materialized then that’s at least presumptive evidence that it’s still you on the other end.
So the transporter and the Stargates are not killer+cloner devices.
Of course, since consciousness can exist independently of physical form, this leaves open the question of whether they are killer+resurrecter devices or just "repackaged for easy transport" devices.