Will You Let God Set You Free!?

The Power to Break the Chain of Lies so you can be FREE“ Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” Gal. 4:16! This page belongs to Minister Clarence F. Sargent

My Debate with an Atheist on Sodahead- PART 3

“prove this god exists without any biblical references or any writings by others! 

go ahead. i will be waiting.

and again with the insults from a fake minister.”
You don’t understand the Laws of evidence do you?

You cannot prove something spiritual to a NON spiritual mind, What I can do is present proof from existing evidences in nature and history that his existence is indeed possible, the rest is based upon ‘knowledgeable understanding’ through faith as it should be. YOU REFUSE TO SEE IT SO HOW IS THAT MY FAULT EXACTLY?

Atheists created an impossible idea and called it PROOF, because they know the same thing, proof is in the eyes of the beholder and anything can be denied so all you have to do is deny everything without explanation and the Christian is left with nothing!

The truth though is the opposite, the PROOF is there and ABSOLUTE, it never changes, it never goes away, its your understanding of it that changes and morphs not the evidence of God. You simply change the rules of interpretation of the evidence to suite you any time it gets close…BUT ITS STILL THERE NONETHELESS!

The ONLY reason the Bible bothers Atheists is because the witness to truth cannot be refuted, therefore its easier to eliminate the evidence than to deal with it. They would rather take their chances with the secondary proof….Nature, History, and Science because they can confuse the ignorant and create skepticism.

It is you who must PROVE HE DOESN’T EXIST since the evidence from smallest to greatest indicates he is indeed possible! I will be waiting as I have for over 30 years now!

We know that we exist because . We are irrefutable evidence that intelligent life exists in the universe, give or take a few of us.

So, is it really that much of a stretch to think that there might be intelligent life capable of creating a universe with form, structure and physical laws that always seem to remain constant? Just as its not a stretch to think that a Car that’s designed might just have a designer.

The fact that we live in a universe with reliable physical laws is a bit ironic, don’t you think? Considering that many scientists believe the universe evolved by random processes that had no intelligence of their own.

How could INTELLIGENCE come from nothing colliding with nothing over millions of years? Life comes from life, that’s simple science but you think that life came from non-life…who’s got more faith? Me or you?

To prove the existence of a higher power, we can begin by assuming there is no higher power.

What kind of universe would we have?

A random one, of course. Everything would happen without a purpose.

Nothing could be predicted; nothing could be relied on.

Mathematics and science would have no value because nothing could be reliably measured or have regularity, that’s what random means and without God everything in life if life could finally come together right would be a mixed up puzzle WITHOUT A SET PURPOSE.

A belief that there are NO ABSOLUTES only leads to disorder [Chaos] not order therefore Evolution cannot be true simply because absolutes are not allowed, the universe is FINE TUNED and even its chaotic elements obey certain order. LAWS are proof absolutes exist, evolution obeys PHYSICAL LAWS so it must have absolutes to function though it denies them outright!

And please, stop with the nonsense about insults, you OF ALL PEOPLE cannot talk, you trample peoples beliefs and feelings with each response here and then cry when your told your ignorant about something, that only means you don’t know as much as you think you know, NOT that your stupid or dumb! I stated before that you ARE smarter than your acting on here, I know that’s true!

the only reason the big book of fairytales bothers us is because the believers think its true and throw it in our faces as fact all the time!
bible  writing cartoons

We do what? I didn’t know you existed before you opened YOUR TEXT to insult my beliefs, so I guess I can use that same excuse on why I find Atheism repulsive?

Your religion is just as bad as all religion so stop pretending to be pure apart from religion, your in the same ‘UNHOLY BED’ with the hypocrites you hate!

ITS THE LAW OF THE LAND, if you deny it, well how can you, you have become your enemy….now what?

Court rules atheism a religion
Decides 1st Amendment protects prison inmate’s right to start study group.…

Atheism Is Protected As a Religion, says Court.…


I know, I know, you have heard it all before.

I read a blog post that spelled it out pretty well, enough to re post it. Kevin Childs is a DJ at The Rock ( and he did a post discussing how Atheists belong to a religion.

We, as rational individuals, all know its true except the atheists themselves. When, and only when, they understand that they indeed belong to a religion, then we can get down as to who holds the most accurate and truthful religion out there.

For Atheists to attempt to claim “neutrality”, in reference to God, is a complete cop out and disingenuous intellectually. They have indeed picked a side. They choose their religion based on what they believe is evidential to their presuppositions.

Denying what they believe, and hold as truth, may be an easier pill for them to swallow but they are only attempting to deceive themselves.

Childs makes the case:

Atheism is a religion.

Atheism IS a religion. I know that some have made that statement without much evidence. And I know that atheists themselves heatedly deny it.

I’ve heard their rejoinders: If atheism is a religion, then not playing baseball is a sport. Or, atheism is to religion what bald is to hair color. Clever. I guess I don’t blame them for denying it, but denying something doesn’t prove it is not there. (I would advise any atheist readers to re-read the previous sentence until BOTH meanings sink in.)

A religion doesn’t have to posit a god who must be identified or worshiped. Some religions are polytheistic (Hinduism, Mormonism), some monotheistic (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), some non-theistic (Buddhism). I’d say the new atheists and their religion are “anti-theistic.” But their atheism is religious nonetheless.

Consider this:

They have their own worldview.

Materialism (the view that the material world is all there is) is the lens through which atheists view the world. Far from being the open-minded, follow-the-evidence-wherever thinkers they claim to be, they interpret all data ONLY within the very narrow worldview of materialism. They are like a guy wearing dark sunglasses who chides all others for thinking the sun is out.

They have their own orthodoxy.

Orthodoxy is a set of beliefs acceptable to a faith community. Just as there are orthodox Christian beliefs, there is an atheist orthodoxy as well. In brief, it is that EVERYTHING can be explained as the product of unintentional, undirected, purposeless evolution. No truth claim is acceptable if it cannot be subjected to scientific scrutiny.

They have their own brand of apostasy.

Apostasy is to abandon one’s former religious faith. Antony Flew was for many years one of the world’s most prominent atheists. And then he did the unthinkable: he changed his mind. You can imagine the response of the “open-minded, tolerant” New Atheist movement. Flew was vilified.

Richard Dawkins accused Flew of “tergiversation.” It’s a fancy word for apostasy. By their own admission, then, Flew abandoned their “faith.”

They have their own prophets:

Nietzsche, Russell, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx.

They have their own messiah:

He is, of course, Charles Darwin. Darwin – in their view – drove the definitive stake through the heart of theism by providing a comprehensive explanation of life that never needs God as a cause or explanation. Daniel Dennett has even written a book seeking to define religious faith itself as merely an evolutionary development.

They have their own preachers and evangelists.

And boy, are they “evangelistic.” Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens (Speaking of which, our prayers goes out to Christopher Hitchens in hopes of a speedy recovery for his cancer, we need more time with him Lord) are NOT out to ask that atheism be given respect. They are seeking converts. They are preaching a “gospel” calling for the end of theism.

They have faith. That’s right, faith.

They would have you believe the opposite. Their writings ridicule faith, condemn faith. Harris’s book is called The End of Faith. But theirs is a faith-based enterprise. The existence of God cannot be proven or dis-proven.

To deny it takes faith. Evolution has no explanation for why our universe is orderly, predictable, measurable. In fact (atheistic) evolutionary theory has no rational explanation for why there is such a thing as rational explanation.

There is no accounting for the things they hope you won’t ask:

Why do we have self-awareness?

What makes us conscious?

From what source is there a universal sense of right and wrong?

They just take such unexplained things by … faith.

There are days when evil and suffering are hard to explain, even for the most ardent follower of God. There are questions we cannot answer. There are days when every honest Christian will admit doubt. But we don’t become atheists. It is because our soul JUST KNOWS that God is there. And maybe because atheism is a religion that requires too much untenable faith.

Not only is Atheism a religion, the entire premise is a negative proof fallacy.

I posted this [With Credit to the Author] to prove to others that your as phony as any hypocrite you’ve accused because its really sickening how much contradiction there is in your postings.

You see after becoming a Christian after being Atheistic in thought for years, I used to live and let live UNTIL a group of hit and run Atheists wouldn’t let well enough alone on the insulting and moronic comments THEN I decided from that moment on never to let ignorance rule a conversation. I, like most people get SICK of the crappy presentations by those who hate God!

What should bother you is that pic you used looks exactly like every Dr. of Atheism I’ve ever heard speak along with quite a few dumb religious leaders as well, and that’s a lot! Atheism and Religion without relationship offers us nothing in return for our souls, nice trade off!

Atheistic Moron

“the fact that you think atheism, no belief in a god, is a religion proves once again how ignorant you are.

we don’t think about proving anything or care about a god. so again you lose.”
Part 3- Freedom FROM Sin and INTO New Life!


I proved it was and is a RELIGION LOGICALLY its not MY BELIEF its the facts presented, but instead of proving it you insult me and my Lord? A religion doesn’t have to believe in a god at all as was stated, you DO BELIEVE IN SOMETHING, Evolution, Survival of the fittest, Mother earth and the Universe are your god because you exalt them as I would God. THAT’S A BELIEF SYSTEM PLAIN AND SIMPLE!

It is impossible to prove that there is no God. Don’t believe me? Let’s take a look at the nature of the statement, “God does not exist.”

Back up for just a minute and think about the difference between positive and negative statements of fact. The difference can be illustrated by a simple example. Suppose there are 10,000 clovers in a field. Person A declares, “There is a four-leaf clover in that field,” while Person B objects, “There are no four-leaf clovers in that field.” Now, how many clovers does each person have to observe and know about in order to be certain that they are correct?

Since Person A must find only one single four-leaf clover in order to be correct, in theory he could prove his statement after observing only one clover, provided that it had four leaves on it. But Person B, in order to know for a fact that she is right, has a lot of work to do! That’s because until all 10,000 clovers have been inspected, there would still be the possibility that among the clovers which remained “unknown” to her was one which boasted a fourth leaf. She could never be certain that she was right until she knew everything there was to know about that field and the clovers it contained.

The same principle holds for statements such as, “There is a God,” and “There is no God,” only this time on a cosmic scale. In order to prove the claim, “There is no God in the universe,” one would have to know everything there is to know about the universe. As long as some body of knowledge remains unknown to anyone making that statement, there will always be the possibility that sufficient evidence for the existence of God is out there, despite the individual’s ignorance of it.

And since no one can seriously claim to know everything, anyone who is honest will admit that they can never prove there isn’t a God. One Christian author put it this way: “Somewhere, in the vast knowledge you haven’t yet discovered, there could be enough evidence to prove that God does exist. . . . If you insist upon disbelief in God, what you must say is, ‘Having the limited knowledge I have at present, I believe that there is no God.'”**

It is the word “believe” in the above quotation which brings us to the assertion made in the title of this article: “Atheism is a faith-based belief system.” To be an atheist, you have to have to rely on belief, not factual knowledge. You could never amass enough knowledge to prove the nonexistence of God, so you must place your faith in the improvable assumption that there is no God. My Christian brothers and sisters, do not ever let an atheist deride you on the basis of your faith in God (as if “faith” were a dirty word!), because atheism is no stranger to the concept of faith, either. Ask your atheist friends what it would take for them to accept God’s existence. Then pray that the Lord will open their spiritual eyes to see the beauty and glory of Jesus Christ, as well as the depravity and hopelessness of their current situation, guilty as they are of sin against a holy and just God. May the Lord grant repentance to those who are strangers to His mercy and grace!

**Quotation taken from Ray Comfort’s book, God Doesn’t Believe in Atheists (1993), pp. 14-15.

“you do realize that your fanaticism is BORING?????? or maybe you don’t.”

Hey! I gave you a way out a long while back……STOP ANSWERING ME AND I’LL NOT ANSWER BACK. It can’t be all that boring to you or you’d have blocked me a long time ago? Right?

Guess that lack of real knowledge is getting you down? Don’t feel bad we’re all in that boat together, the Atheist just spends their time in the boat ALONE BY CHOICE!

If you desire to talk I’m here if not STOP ANSWERING ME, its that simple….no compulsion on my part!


“the lack of knowledge is all yours. since this is my poll,why don’t you stop answering me? you are the guest,and they definitely stink after 3 days.”


I will not stop answering until you do, your current poll has NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR CONVERSATION!

You’ll notice I said plainly that we are ALL in that boat together you simply choose to be alone with your little bit of understanding. I choose to learn more and grow.


But know I will not block you, I believe blocking UNLESS FOR PERSONAL HARASSMENT is the Cowardly way out! Anyone is allowed to attack a point made on either side, that’s the point of Sodahead in the first place.



“wow, a liar too! typical of fanatics,they go on and on after anyone has lost interest. you must have a sad boring little life.”



I beg to differ with you, and consider this my last response sense I’m bored with your lack of Interest!

You have no interest?
You can’t lose what you never had!, which brings me to the question WHY FIGHT IT IF ITS NOT REAL. There’s something real and you can’t prove it’s not, so it bothers you, get over it you’ll never prove God isn’t there!


My life is full of Joy because of Christ, and I’m CERTAIN with absolute certainty that he is real. That’s something you as an Atheist cannot say about ANYTHING, if you do you have to admit that Absolute truth exists and if it does that it points to an absolute idea in life.

Because you reject the idea of a personal maker you must believe that an impersonal one — chance — has determined your reality, that is truly sad and boring!


1. There are no absolutes that define reality. Everything is relative, and thus there is no actual reality. There is ultimately no authority for deciding if an action is positive or negative; right or wrong.

2. There are absolutes that define what is real and what is not. Thus, actions can be deemed right or wrong based upon how they measure up against these absolute standards.

Hence, the chance that forms your reality (which by definition has no standard or objective sense) is the only “real” thing in the universe.

Everything is a chance occurrence, including your ability to understand who and what you are talking about!

Your “Meaning” is a fantasy. There is no way to derive a standard of truth that has any authority. Anything goes!

Because I believe that a personal God created all things, I can know:

–I was created for a purpose

–My level of fulfillment in life will be based on how well I accomplish the objectives (“will”) of my Creator.

–Some actions are right, while others are wrong. I can discover this difference by learning about the Creator’s plan.

–I am accountable to the Creator for my behavior.

Because you believe that “forces” of chance [Evolution] randomness created all things, you can know:

–That nothing is truly knowable, since there is no standard by which to define reality or by which to measure the factual nature of any given idea.

–That no action is any better than another, hence, all actions are meaningless.

–your then life has no value or purpose, because, in a very real sense, it is an accident

–you are not accountable for your behavior, because nothing you do matters.


My Debate with an Atheist on Sodahead- PART 2

Moses was raised Egyptian, or did that escape you? Of course his NAME would be Egyptian….Duh! Really another Straw-Man? What does that prove?

“Hyksos were not slaves, but wealthy merchants and rulers of Egypt. The Hyksos, in fact, ruled Egypt for 108 years. They built palaces and temples at their capital city of Avaris, and had far-flung commercial operations.” Hardly what the Bible describes in any way

Multiple Land bridges? Wow!, you insult the man who discovered the one Land bridge right where the Bible says the Hebrews crossed, then put on your other mask and state there ARE multiple Land-bridges no one knew about until he found that one. His theory isn’t the be all end all, never said it was. Science disagrees though and states there is a LACK of Land bridges in the area, no multiples around ever!…

Science seems to agree it happened but wrongly assert something never said, Moses was never said to have done the parting, God did the work since he is master of physical laws that control nature.

“Winds may have parted the Red Sea, and not the biblical and Koran’s account of it, according to a team of researchers. Based on computer simulations, the famous “parting of the Red Sea” could have been caused by a strong pattern of winds and other land phenomena supported by the theory of “wind set-down” based on the laws of physics.”

What they missed was that the Bible said the SAME THING just not according to their VIEWPOINT! The point is there is great president to prove it occurred, and if it occurred then the Bible’s description has as much a chance of being the way as any other!

 Your Idea of the Biblical accounts dates and times being wrong, based on what? The History channel video, which I do not completely agree with proved that the date of tradition could be wrong but that’s not the bibles fault that’s a man made mistake.

Debunking “The Exodus Decoded” This is a very good rebuttal, I always look at both sides of an issue.




I’m not saying its all perfectly in line we’re still laying out the understanding, some have one part, others get other parts of the puzzle and its interesting to study!

Yes they were meticulous record keepers about their GREAT HISTORY, but like all mere men of mortal weakness they were PROUD and unable to record that slaves beat them down. If The Egyptians were so proud, would they have admitted they were beaten by their own slaves? Striking things from public record isn’t a modern occurrence only!

Here’s an answer from Yahoo Answers:

Given that the Egyptians were excellent record keepers, where is their account of the parting of the Red Sea?

“Would you chronicle how the God of slaves defeated your multitude of gods and wiped out your entire army? Here is how they documented this event……

The Egyptians picked and chose what they wanted to record. If you read the account of the Merneptah stele, it notes that “Israel is laid waste; its seed is no more.”. True?

They do the same thing today. I went to Egypt and was shocked to discover that they actually won the Six Day War.

In the ancient Egyptian days, yes, they were meticulous record keepers. But they carried these records into the next life. Do you really think they would carry an immense defeat–from SLAVES–at the hands of one single God over their own myriad of gods?

A papyrus called the Admonitions of Ipuwer describes a catastrophe like the Exodus. The author of Admonitions complains of a lack of authority, justice and social order as if the central authority no longer had the will or power to keep control. He also complains about barbarians and foreigners as if the country has been invaded. Nobody is planting crops because they are not sure what will happen. The southern most districts are paying no taxes.

He complains that the Nile has strangely turned to blood and “If one drinks it, one rejects it as human (blood) and thirsts for water.” He wrote, “Grain is perished on every side.” Gardiner dated its events to the FIP but it is conceded that the language and orthography belong to the Middle Kingdom [Wilson, 1969c, p 442]. 

Velikovsky noted the obvious similarities with the plagues of the Exodus and pointed out that, contrary to Gardiner, Sethe dated the Ipuwer Papyrus to the SIP [Velikovsky, 1952, p. 48-50]. Van Seters also argues for an SIP date [Van Seters, 1966, p103-120].

There are also records beyond the written letter you know. Ancient chariot parts were discovered in the Gulf of Aqaba. The city of Python has lower bricks with straw, mid bricks with stubble, and upper bricks with anything they could get their hands on. Exactly as the event of Exodus chronicles.”

There is historical evidence that they tried to wipe out evidence of things that the newest Pharaoh didn’t want remembered. (i.e., Akhenaton and Hatshepsut) So much for HONESTY in reporting!

You put so much faith in the Egyptians record keeping when they had the most to lose by being honest? All that pride and all. And despise Jewish record keeping and they INCLUDE their own shortcomings along with the fact they experienced God’s miracles…..hmmmm! Seems like you don’t like where it all leads?

Your statement about the wheels is silly, really, it means nothing, is that your story? Their trade routes did go up through the sea and they wouldn’t just throw away their chariots or give them to other nations in trade, they traded food and supplies for slaves not weapons.

Why is there no Egyptian record of a LOSS of a whole armies Chariots in the sea? I’ll tell you, because they had their butts handed to them and pride has stricken it from the records!


“there was NO MOSES! get it? it seems you really are desperate to prove the book of tall tales is true. “
 bible  fairy tales
Why am I not surprised that you have nothing to back up your lame claim, is denial your only recourse?

Your still stuck on this crappy accusation? Well get ready to be owned again, Oh! I mean deny again, because that’s all you do!

Funny how I can find so much evidence of a non-existent person and non-existent Exodus without a sweat breaking out isn’t it? THIS SITE IS AWESOME!

FROM: http://www.biblicalchronologi…

ABOUT Dr. Aardsma: In case you want to study his credentials.

Ph.D., Nuclear Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1984

M.Sc., Physics, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 1979

B.Sc., Physics, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 1978

NSERC (Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada), Postdoctoral Fellowship, 1984-85, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

NSERC Postgraduate Scholarship, 1979-84, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

NSERC Postgraduate Scholarship, 1978-79, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario

E. C. Stevens Scholarship, 1983, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

Gordon Ferrie Hull Fellowship, 1982, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

E. F. Burton Scholarship, 1981, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

J. C. McLennan Award, 1979, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

Copernicus Award, 1977, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario


Is there evidence of the Exodus from Egypt?

The following article is based on the book A New Approach to the Chronology of Biblical History from Abraham to Samuel and The Biblical Chronologist Volume 2, Number 2.


Further details and references can be found there.

A Long Reign

Before the account of the Exodus itself, the Bible tells of the enslavement of the Israelite’s and the first 80 years of the life of Moses. One remarkable feature of this story is apparent from the following sequence of events:

A new king comes to power in Egypt who “did not know Joseph.” (Exodus 1:8)

This king orders the death of all newborn Hebrew boys. (Exodus 1:22)

Moses is born into this regime. (Exodus 2:2)

Moses is adopted by the Pharaoh’s daughter. (Exodus 2:5)

Moses grows up, murders an Egyptian, and flees the country. (Exodus 2:12,15)

Moses marries Zipporah and they have a son. (Exodus 2:12,15)

Eventually, “in the course of those many days”, the king of Egypt dies. (Exodus 2:23)

God meets Moses and sends him to the new Pharaoh. (Exodus 3,4)

Moses is 80 years old when he stands before the new Pharaoh. (Exodus 7:7)

The Bible indicates that the same Pharaoh whose daughter adopted three-month-old Moses died when Moses was nearly 80 years old! This Pharaoh must have reigned for a very long time.

Pepy II

Only one pharaoh in the history of Egypt can meet this Biblical requirement—Pepy II.

Pepy II is traditionally thought to have governed the country for ninety-four years… (Grimal, page 89.)

Pepy II’s Successor

From the Biblical account we would expect the reign of Pepy II’s successor to be quite short. This pharaoh had to deal with Moses and the plagues, and the Bible indicates that he drowned in the “Red Sea” with the rest of his army. Grimal makes this mention of the pharaoh who followed Pepy II:

The exceptional longevity of Pepy II resulted not only in the gradual fossilization of the administrative system but also in a succession crisis. The Abydos king-list mentions a Merenre II (also called Antiemdjaf), who seems to have been the son of Pepy II and Queen Neith.

This very ephemeral ruler, who reigned for only a single year, would have been married to Queen Nitocris, who according to Manetho was the last Sixth Dynasty ruler. (Grimal, page 89)

So there is a good fit between the secular history of Egypt and the Biblical account with these two pharaohs; an extremely long reign is followed by a very short reign, as required.

More Evidence

The Biblical account of the ten plagues is quite detailed. It describes the pollution of the water supply, and devastation of the livestock and vegetation of the land. The Israelites left, depriving the land of its slave labor, and they carried away much of the land’s wealth in the form of silver, gold, and clothing (Exodus 12:36).

Also, the army and the Pharaoh were drowned in the “Red Sea,” leaving the country with weakened defenses. The Exodus must surely have left a bold signature in Egyptian history. What do the historians find following the reign of Pepy II’s successor?

Pepy II’s successor was the final Pharaoh of the Old Kingdom of Egypt.

Grimal says: “The Old Kingdom ended with a period of great confusion.” (page 89). Summarizing an ancient Egyptian literary/historical work called Admonitions, which comments on Egypt following the reign of Pepy II’s successor, Grimal says:

It was the collapse of the whole society, and Egypt itself had become a world in turmoil, exposed to the horrors of chaos which was always waiting for the moment when the personification of the divine being – the Pharaoh – neglected his duties or simply disappeared. (Grimal, page 138)

This time period was characterized by famine, an expected result of the plagues described in the book of Exodus. This famine was limited to the Nile valley (Grimal, page 139)—as the Bible’s narrative would lead one to expect.

There was anarchy and a struggle for political power. Egypt’s foreign trade ceased and Egyptian mining in the Sinai peninsula “also seems to have been abandoned” (Grimal, page 139).

The nation of Egypt had obviously suffered a severe blow—as one would expect from what the Bible tells us of the events accompanying the Exodus.

The match between the Bible’s narrative of the Exodus and the secular history of Egypt at the end of the Old Kingdom might possibly be brushed aside as coincidence were it not for the fact that this match happens at the right date according to modern Biblical chronology.

Dr. Aardsma’s chronology places the Exodus 2447+/-12 B.C. The current “standard” chronology of Egypt places the end of the Old Kingdom—when the evidence discussed above says the Exodus happened—around 2200 B.C.

The difference of 247 years between these two dates is close enough for such ancient times to regard the dates as the same. Uncertainties of a few hundred years in historical/archaeological chronologies are normal at such early times in the history of civilization.

Nicholas Grimal notes that “The chronological span of the First Intermediate Period [which must be known to date events in the Old Kingdom accurately] is also a problem.” Haas et al. have suggested, based on an extensive suite of radiocarbon dates (totally independent of Dr. Aardsma’s work), that the First Intermediate Period should be lengthened by about 260 years.

This would push the secular date for the end of the Old Kingdom back to around 2460 B.C., indistinguishable from Dr. Aardsma’s Biblical date of 2447+/-12 B.C. for the Exodus. Pottery analysis in the Sinai Peninsula by E. D. Oren and Y. Yekuteli is also supportive of this adjustment.

Thus the qualitative match between the Bible’s narrative of the Exodus and the secular history of Egypt at the end of the Old Kingdom is supported by quantitative chronology.

Evidence for the Exodus from Egypt is plentiful—as long as one has their Biblical chronology right, and thus knows to examine Egypt’s history around 2450 B.C., rather than around the traditional 1450 B.C.


Grimal, Nicolas A History of Ancient Egypt Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc., 1993.

Pyramid of Pepy II Pyramid of Pepy II….  Pepy II

” ho hum! i see you still prefer biased sites.

[Its interesting how every site I go to, too find answers from is biased but hers, which are Atheistic thought are right on accurate]

No direct archaeological evidence has been found for Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the 400-plus years in Egypt, or the Israelites’ miraculous exodus from slavery.
No physical trace has been found of 40 years in the Sinai wilderness, and nothing outside of the bible shows Moses existed. The exodus cannot be treated as history because there is no support for it except the bible. 
The authors of Exodus would have been familiar with Egyptian conditions if the book had been written in Egypt, and exodus first appeared when the Ptolemies in the third century BC translated the scriptures into Greek for the library of Alexandria. 
The exodus was then composed from a Persian account of Jews being Egyptian slaves because Canaan had been an Egyptian colony for centuries. Israelite settlements showed no Egyptian culture in their archaeological remains. 
They were uniform with those of the Canaanites, so they were not immigrants from Egypt but native Canaanites. A reply to Christians who seek to justify the biblical exodus.”
 Excuse me,……. that’s the dumbest statement I’ve ever heard, as if you regularly read from Christian sites, YOUR BIASED! YES IT HAS ARE YOU JUST IN DENIAL OR WHAT, I’VE PROVED IT OVER AND OVER.

Atheists are simply avoiding the evidence by denial, your not even fair in your criticisms….WOW its mind numbing how blind you are!

You just argued before, that Orthodox [RELIGIOUS] Jews would not be secular in their practices under penalty of death TO PROVE YOUR ISSUE ABOUT PALESTINE, NOW YOUR SAYING THEY SHOULD HAVE EGYPTIAN PRACTICE AND CULTURE WHICH WAS AGAINST THEIR GOD, IN THEIR REMAINS? That is insane rambling at best!



“The Evidence

From 1972-1982 the Ben-Gurion University (in Israel) conducted an extensive archaeological survey of the northern Sinai area. They documented 284 sites in northern Sinai where pottery shards and other remains of ancient occupation were found. These sites were arranged in groups with larger sites in the center and smaller sites on the outer edges of the group.

They found that the larger center sites were “base sites” where central activities (such as buying and selling) occurred, that the medium-size sites were family living areas, and the small outer sites were encampments for shepherds. They found that the people who lived at these sites were nomadic, wandering from place to place. They said “In most of the sites there is no evidence of solid building, and it looks as if the inhabitants lived in booths, tents, or lean-tos.”


Gerald E. Aardsma, Ph.D., showed back in 1995 that these encampment sites were made by the Israelites early in the Exodus. They reveal, in fact, the first three stops along the route of the Exodus: Succoth, Etham, and Pi-hahiroth. These Sinai sites fit the Biblical account very well.


Chronological Issues

So why do most archaeologists say the Exodus never happened? Because the pottery they’ve found in the Sinai is from about 4,500 years ago, while the traditional date for the Exodus is only about 3,500 years ago. They assume that this pottery must not be from the Exodus because of its date.

But the traditional date for the Exodus is wrong. Dr. Aardsma has shown that a full millennium has accidentally been overlooked by biblical chronology scholars in the past. (See What is the missing millennium discovery? http://www.biblicalchronologi… When the overlooked millennium is restored to biblical chronology, the problem of the missing Exodus pottery shards disappears.

Because the archaeologists have been looking for the Exodus in the wrong time period, they haven’t found it. Unfortunately, they have then gone on to conclude that the Exodus must never have happened. This is the wrong conclusion. When you look in the right time period, there’s plenty of evidence to show that, in fact, the Exodus did happen, just as the Bible describes it.
The foregoing article was based on research reported on in The Biblical Chronologist Volume 1 [http://www.biblicalchronolog… Number 6 and The Biblical Chronologist Volume 2 [http://www.biblicalchronolog… Number 1. Full details and references to the scholarly literature can be found there.”

What’s amazing to me is that you REFUSE to believe even though I’ve proven it over and over again to you, this man is so much smarter than both of us, you saw his credentials! This is the answer you needed but you refuse to look at from a scientific mind, your mind is drowning in unbelief of even solid evidence.


Exo 17:3-7

” And the people thirsted there for water; and the people murmured against Moses, and said, Wherefore is this that thou hast brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst?

And Moses cried unto the LORD, saying, What shall I do unto this people? they be almost ready to stone me.

And the LORD said unto Moses, Go on before the people, and take with thee of the elders of Israel; and thy rod, wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thine hand, and go.

Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.

And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted the LORD, saying, Is the LORD among us, or not? “


About 3,000 years ago someone put up pillars at the site marking the place of the crossing. It was King Solomon’s pillars, he was very aware of the site and it says it in the bible here: “In that day there will be an altar to the LORD in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar to the LORD near its border.” Isaiah 19:19.


You can see the shadow on the Egyptian Side Here: 28°58’11.58″N – 34°38’32.86″E The pillar on the Saudi side was removed after Ron Wyatt showed the authorities where it was. Why? Because it proved Israels crossing there, talk about biased?

There is a place marker there set in concrete. There were inscriptions on that pillar that said: Pharaoh, Mizraim (Egypt), Moses, death, water, Yahweh, Solomon, Edom



The Evidence is overwhelming against your claims YOU KNOW IT and I know it, but you’ll do what you always do DENY, DENY, DENY its all you have! THESE EVIDENCES ARE PHYSICAL THINGS FOUND ALONG THE EXODUS ROUTE AND THERE ARE MANY MORE!

I mean really what are the odds that The name Nuweiba is short for Nuwayba’ al Muzayyinah which means “Waters of Moses Opening” wow they named it after a non-existent man? Amazing! At the exact spot where the crossing took place, we have the site confirmed by maps.……

Funny how historical physical remains don’t match your mental picture of things but that’s life! Denial has its problems when you don’t have an open mind, but that’s expected from a closed universe of the Atheist.


“wrong again. you deny reality and live with fantasy. how sad for you.…

top Israeli archaeologists contest Jewish ties to Jerusalem
[ 08/08/2011 – 05:43 PM ]

OCCUPIED JERUSALEM, (PIC)– Top Israeli archaeologist Israel Finkelstein has denied the existence of Jewish roots in the city of Jerusalem, contrary to Israel’s claims that have prompted continued Judaization of the city.

Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University, said Jewish archaeologists have failed to unearth historic sites to support some of the stories in the Torah. Among those stories are the Jewish Exodus, the forty-year wandering in the Sinai desert, and Joshua’s victory over the Canaanites.

He also said there was no archaeological evidence that concludes that the alleged Temple of Solomon ever existed.

For his part, Professor of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University Raphael Greenberg said that the Israelis should have found something after digging for six weeks in the City of David in East Jerusalem’s Silwan district, but have found nothing in two years of continuous excavations.

Prof. Yoni Mihrazi, an independent archaeologist who has worked with the International Atomic Energy Agency, agreed with Finkelstein’s findings, saying that top settler organization Elad had not stumbled upon even a banner saying “welcome to the city of David”, given that claims were made to have been relying on sacred texts to guide them in their work.


Moronic, just moronic, I just proved that every thing contained in your rant was not so, proved it by thousands of proofs and all you can do is RE POST the same nonsense, over and over again.

The mounting evidence against your thought process is getting high but still no proof against it only hearsay evidence from self hating Jews and Atheists who have a vested interest in keeping it under wraps.

Of course their are Jews who have vested interest in selling out their own country, its as simple as ‘Goggling them’ but it proves only that. There is little evidence for completely different reasons that you imply.

The Muslims, that you love so much are destroying thousands of priceless artifacts all the time, but no response from you except defending their cowardice on that I’m sure.

They don’t want the evidence to surface and neither to these archeologists you mention here, even if they did they know full well the difficulty digging in those areas and that they may never move beyond a small area where they are now, its insane to take the word of people who know that what their saying is greatly qualified by circumstances beyond their control.


“Piecing Together The Holy Temple

SINCE 1999 THE MUSLIM WAKF, which was granted de facto day-to-day control of the Temple Mount by the Israeli government in 1967, has been conducting illegal construction of an underground Mosque on the southern third of the Temple Mount. In the course of this illegal construction the Wakf has been using heavy tractors to excavate the earth. Both the construction and the excavation have been conducted without any archaeological supervision, rendering both aspects of this violation of the holy site illegal.  The stated purpose behind the Wakf’s actions has been both to “create facts” on the ground, rendering the Mount a “Moslem only” site, and to destroy any archaeological evidence of the first and second Holy Temples which stood on the Mount. This is part and parcel of a consistent policy of the Palestinian Authority to deny that the Holy Temple ever existed.

Although many have protested the brazen assault on this holiest of sites, the Israeli government has consistently followed the policy of acquiescence. Even the archaeological community which has been outspoken in its protest, has done little more than throw up its arms in resignation. A young archaeologist by the name of Zachi Zweig, however, refused to stand idly by. Led by Dr. Gabriel Barkay, Zachi organized and oversaw the transfer of the debris from where it was dumped, (illegally), in the Kidron Valley to an alternative location, where a crew of volunteers under Dr. Barkay’s supervision have been painstakingly sifting through the dirt and rubble looking for signs of the past. This constitutes the first archaeological “dig” on the Temple Mount in history. Ironically, archaeological research has been forbidden on the Mount due to the sensitivity of the location for religious, (read, political), reasons.

The Moslem attempt to obliterate any remaining physical evidence of the Holy Temple has actually enabled Zachi and Dr. Barkay to uncover priceless links to the past. It must be kept in mind, however, that the wanton Wakf destruction has severely impaired the ability of archaeologists to properly analyze the discoveries, due to the fact that they were removed from their original location.

And, of course, the archaeologists are not able to study those remnants that were pulverized into dust by the Wakf bulldozers. Yet, despite the adverse conditions, significant discoveries have been made of artifacts from both the first and second Temple era.

Bronze coins dating from the Great Revolt against the Roman authority in the year 70 CE. have been uncovered. Below are three other fascinating discoveries made by Zachi’s crew. Those of us who believe in the historical veracity of the Hebrew Bible do not require archaeological evidence to bolster our convictions, just as those that are willing to employ any and all methods in an attempt to pervert, deny, and obliterate the truth certainly won’t be moved by a few archaeological finds, however startling they may be. Yet these discoveries, as you will see below, can bring us tantalizingly close to a period in human history of nearly a thousand years, when the Holy Temple stood on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem.”

“In an unbelievable disregard for holy respect, scientific principles and simple decency, see what is permitted to go on at the Holiest site on Earth!”


Muslims KNOW that this site is Jewish alone and fear that it can and will be proved someday so they do what all cowards do they bully and intimidate those who look for that proof!

“Despite Israel’s victorious return to the Temple Mount in the miraculous Six Day War of 1967, Moslem authorities have embarked upon a campaign to destroy the Jewish people’s historical and Divinely-appointed connection to this holy site. Their efforts have reached a fever pitch, and nothing is being done to stop them!”

Each place you mentioned unsurprisingly like  East Jerusalem`s Arab village of Silwan which is called by Israelis “The city of David” are in dispute so excavations are difficult if not impossible. And with Arab sanction to destroy anything that would prove the Land belongs to the Jews how can anyone expect to get to the truth?

Its interesting how you find the only places where there are no freedoms to dig without great issues being raised, but avoid the obvious evidences I’ve presented. You quote moronic people with little self respect or historical method but avoid dealing with those whose credentials are solid. Interesting but not surprising to anyone!

But things are found nonetheless:
“Salvage excavations

Prior to any construction, laying of infrastructure or development in an area designated as an antiquities site, the developer must underwrite a “salvage excavation”. The purpose of such an excavation is to reveal archaeological remains and document them before they are destroyed or covered by modern construction. By contrast, research excavations are undertaken in order to address specific research issues at sites that may not be in danger of destruction. A dig undertaken for tourism development is termed salvage work, because although some of the remains are preserved and accessible, the motive for excavation and the methods used are often not oriented toward research.

Occupation layer

An archaeological site is composed of superimposed deposits or layers. Layers containing remains of material culture such as pottery or stone vessels, especially when they can be related to structures, are identified as occupation layers, i.e. strata that represent daily human activities. The term distinguishes it from layers of earth that piled up over this layer after it was abandoned.

A floor that abuts a wall and does not cover it or is not cut by it may reasonably be assumed to date to the same period as the wall. Finds on this floor would therefore serve to date the walls that it abuts. Finds made on, in or beneath floors are archaeologists’ main dating tools.
In situ finds

A find discovered in its original location. Often, archaeological artifact are displaced by human activity or natural processes. In order to associate an artifact with the place in which it was found, it is necessary to confirm that it is “in situ” (in its place). If it is not in its original place due to past events such as erosion, theft or an unsupervised excavation – the significance of the find is compromised.”

Get real here even if half of this is the case it is clearly done to block, obstruct or otherwise slow down evidence from surfacing and ANYONE JEWISH OR ARAB SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES FOR ALLOWING IT TO HAPPEN!

Archaeological and Historical Evidence of Jews in Jerusalem:



“you have NOT proven anything.
tel Dan Inscription of the Aramean King Hazael?

Three fragments of a 13-line Aramaic inscription discovered by archaeologists of the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology in 1993/4 purportedly refer to the “House of David.” One interpretation is that stele records King Hazael’s 842 BC killing of “Jehoram, son of Ahab, king of Israel, and Ahaziah, son of Jehoram, king of the House of David. I set their towns to ruin, their land to desolation.”

The inscription appears to confirm that a chieftain called David was not pure invention yet even so, it contradicts the biblical story that it was Jehu who assassinated the tribal leaders in Jezreel.

“And Jehu drew a bow with his full strength, and smote Jehoram between his arms, and the arrow went out at his heart, and he sunk down in his chariot … But when Ahaziah the king of Judah saw this, he fled by the way of the garden house. And Jehu followed after him, and said, Smite him also in the chariot.” – 2 Kings 9:24,27

But this interpretation of the fragments has been challenged, both by a realignment of the 3 fragments and a corrected rendering of the word “BYTDWD” – not “House of David” but a place-name meaning “House of Praise”.

One problem with the early Aramaic of the inscription (which pre-dates the adoption of the square-form developed in Babylon) is the absence of a dot separating words. “DVD” could mean many things, including, for example, uncle, beloved and kettle.

“The desire to read the letters bytdvd as house of david is … a classic example of scholars working backwards from the Bible rather than forwards from the evidence.”

– M. Sturgis, It Ain’t Necessarily So, p129.

“This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel … the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.”

(Ha’aretz Magazine, October 1999)
In contrast, to the myth of the Israelite empire, the cities of Assyria, Phoenicia and Nabatea have left extant and extensive ruins



I DON’T DISAGREE that the evidence SO-FAR is sparse, but it is nevertheless there with more to be found as time goes by! You say in Contrast as though there has been NO DESTRUCTION of important artifacts by rival Nations around Israel which if you honest you know IS AND HAS HAPPENED.

This evidence is only a small fragment of the total evidence and will no doubt bring out the nay-Sayers in herds, but its only their desperate attempt to save their secular view from banishment!

“House of David” Restored in Moabite Inscription

A new restoration of a famous inscription reveals another mention of the “House of David” in the ninth century B.C.E.

The recent discovery at Tel Dan of a fragment of a stela containing a reference to the “House of David” (that is, the dynasty of David) is indeed sensational and deserves all the publicity it has received.a The Aramaic inscription, dated to the ninth century B.C.E., was originally part of a victory monument erected at Dan, apparently by an enemy of both the “King of Israel” (also referred to in the fragment) and the “[King of the] House of David.”

The inscription easily establishes the importance of Israel and Judah on the international scene at this time—no doubt to the chagrin of those modern scholars who maintain that nothing in the Bible before the Babylonian exile can lay claim to any historical accuracy.

This so-called evidence by you proves little as well, its conjectural at this point not PROOF.

“The desire to read the letters ‘bytdvd’ as house of david is … a classic example of scholars working backwards from the Bible rather than forwards from the evidence.”

This alone is suspect because it can be said of their results as well, they are working backwards from a secular base instead of a Christian or Jewish one.

So that being said your statements are biased in your favor since it is interpretative at best! I NOT SAYING IT ISN’T TRUE, I’m saying its not in any way a fact as yet so stop using it as a fact.

The House of David Inscription

The House of David Inscription (also known as the “Tel Dan Inscription”) was discovered in 1994 during excavations at the ancient city of Dan. It is considered by many to be the first reference to the “House of David” discovered outside the biblical text.

The House of David Inscription appears to be a fragment of a victory monument erected by a king of Damascus (Aram) during the 9th century BC, some 250 years after King David’s reign. The fragment specifically mentions victories over a “king of Israel” (probably Joram) and a king of the “House of David” (probably Ahaziah).
The House of David Inscription (Tel Dan Inscription) currently resides in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem.

House of David Inscription

Was king David’s name inscribed on this black stone slab?

An inscription containing the words “house of David” was found on a black basalt stone slab called the Tel Dan Stele, from Tel Dan, Israel, 9th Century B.C.

It was a victory stele erected by an Aramaean king north of Israel. The inscription contains an Aramaic writing commemorating his victory over Israel. The author is most likely Hazael or his son, Ben Hadad II or III, who were kings of Damascus, and enemies of the kingdom of Israel. The stele was discovered at Tel Dan, previously named Tell el-Qadi, a mound where a city once stood at the northern tip of Israel.

The Israel Museum, Jerusalem
House of David Inscription, Biblical Archaeology

1 Kings 2:11 – And the days that David reigned over Israel [were] forty years: seven years reigned he in Hebron, and thirty and three years reigned he in Jerusalem.

Material – Basalt Stone Stele
Israel Period of the Kings
Date: 858-824 BC
Language: Aramaic
Height: 32 cm
Width: 22 cm
Tel Dan, Galilee
Excavated by: Avraham Biran 1994
Location: Israel Museum, Jerusalem

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs Excerpt

The Aramaic Stele

Fragments of the Aramaic stele

Fragments of a large inscribed basalt stele were found in the square located in front of the Israelite city gate complex. The largest of these fragments measures 32 x 22 cm. and, of the original inscription, thirteen lines have been partially preserved. The language is ancient Aramaic.

The 9th century BCE and the beginning of the 8th century BCE were marked by military conflicts between the kings of Israel and the expanding kingdom of Aram-Damascus. (1 Kings 15:20) Thus the stele was erected by one of the Aramean kings of Damascus who captured Dan – although which king cannot be ascertained as yet. It is probable that in lines 7-8 two kings of Israel and Judah, who ruled at the same time, are mentioned: Jehoram, king of Israel and Ahaziah, king of Judah, referred to as a king of the House of David. These two kings were allies and were defeated by Hazael, king of Aram-Damascus. (2 Kings 8:7-15, 28; 9:24-29; 2 Chronicles 22:5)

The stele describing Hazael’s victory over his enemies was, in all probability, erected by him when he conquered Dan in the mid-9th century BCE. It is reasonable to assume that Jehoash, king of Israel, who fought the Arameans three times and defeated them (2 Kings 13:25) recovering territories previously lost, including the city of Dan, symbolically smashed the stele erected there by Hazael, king of Aram-Damascus.

Although the broken stele raises serious historical problems, it is one of the most important written finds in Israel and the first non-biblical text which mentions the House of David by name. It is hoped that more fragments of this unique stele will be uncovered in future excavations.

A line by line translation by André Lemaire is as follows (with text that cannot be read due to being missing from the stele, or too damaged by erosion, represented by “[…..]”):

1′. […………………]…….[……………………………..] and cut […………………….]
2′. [………] my father went up [………………..f]ighting at/against Ab[….]
3′. And my father lay down; he went to his [fathers]. And the king of I[s-]
4′. rael penetrated into my father’s land[. And] Hadad made me—myself—king.
5′. And Hadad went in front of me[, and] I departed from ………..[……………..]
6′. of my kings. And I killed two [power]ful kin[gs], who harnessed two thou[sand cha-]
7′. riots and two thousand horsemen. I killed Joram son of Ahab
8′. king of Israel, and I killed [Achaz]yahu son of [Joram kin]g
9′. of the House of David. And I set [……………………………………………….]
10′. their land …[……………………………………………………………………………]
11′. other …[………………………………………………………………. and Jehu ru-]
12′. led over Is[rael………………………………………………………………………..]
13′. siege upon [……………………………………………………]

 Look, I know you don’t agree but I am compelled to try to convince you, NOT TO AGREE WITH ME, but with the point and purpose of Jesus’ life and death.

Because he did not come to ARGUE about anything he came to seek you out and save your essence from destruction and death. He did not have to do it but wanted to leave glory to be born in this mess so that God could experience what we have to go through.

His love for all of us is so much greater than our hatred for him and not until we open our hearts to see it can we experience that love.

I remember well sitting in a church back in 1979 Drunk and High out of my mind, immersed in the Darkness of Witchcraft, not having any thought about a god existing, I had wandered in at the behest of two Christians who lived in my Dorm with me.

At some point during the service some spiritual force overwhelmed my mind in an envelope of light, a warmth of Love I had never felt before. I am certain that the drugs and the Booze didn’t affect me during that time because seconds after I was totally sober of both, that was my first miracle from that God I didn’t believe cared at all.

For the first time in years I could think clearly and understand God’s care and Love for me, tears fell from my eyes and I weep for a long time, getting out all the abandonment and pain that I had built up in my soul.

I’m not SELLING anything, its a free service that God provides and you keep the power to reason and think for yourself, God requires you to choose for yourself, he requires thinking, skeptical Human beings to come just as they are without giving up anything but their dark souls to him so he can give them light.

If you wish NEVER to speak again I’ll fully understand and respect your choice. But please know that I care about you from my heart, you matter in the larger scheme of the universe. I will leave you with this FINAL PLEA!

“well your compulsion will get you nowhere! nada ,zilch ,zero! you cannot convince me of what i KNOW is a lie!

love?? love doesn’t create a world such as this with hucksters and shysters sucking the life out of people so they follow what you claim without proof. there never was any proof and there never will be any proof. thats why its called FAITH! because you want to believe its true.

see your problem is you are desperate to convince someone,me,of something i absolutely KNOW is false. i KNOW this as surely as you don’t know it. a creator would not create a soap opera for anyone to follow. what ever created this universe has moved on.”
 You know very little if anything at all, what you do is a disservice to Atheism, you prove nothing, you present NO evidence to prove it and then CLAIM you know something, that’s called circular reasoning my friend and your infested with it!

circular reasoning

In order to prove the assertion ‘No God exists’ experimentally, one would need to comprehensively know all of reality.

Comprehensive knowledge which you claim to have because you said you knew ABSOLUTELY that God didn’t exist, that’s called omniscience. One would need to be omniscient in order to prove there is no God, but if one were omniscient one would, by definition, already be God!

According to Atheism THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE TRUTH which would include Atheistic thought which means you know NOTHING absolutely!

So, based on empirical methodology, the only one capable of disproving the existence of God would be God himself! Pesky fact if you ask me!

Atheism exalts reason, but it is actually irrational.

Atheists tend to put a lot of stock in the empirical method and in logic. One cannot disprove God exists using the empirical method.

You might reply: “But I can’t disprove a giant purple frog on Mars controls the universe, either.”

Granted, one can NEVER disprove anything exists. The atheistic position of denying God’s existence, if based on the empirical method, is absurd…plain and simple, its a ‘Straw Man’ builder nothing else.

And just so you know I am not the desperate one here, judging from your lack, complete and utter lack of proof [Because insults are no substitute for substance] Its simply a matter of my evidence vs your accusations and which one wins in the minds of those who see these comments!

Your right its not love that made this world the way it is it was DISOBEDIENCE TO THAT LOVE that God gave. The ‘hucksters and shysters’ you speak of are human beings WITHOUT God’s love in control of their lives that’s just plain fact, no matter what they claim to be.

You cannot prove God at fault at all, it US NOT HIM, so where do you go with this lame excuse against God? Atheists have always used FALSE religious principles as an evidence against God but that is utter nonsense since the Bible speaks about these people NEVER HAVING BELONGED TO HIM in the first place.

People who speak in his name CANNOT disprove what is already clear in black and white, they represent NOT GOD but their own agendas, false religious people are not in ministry to acknowledge themselves at Gods expense.

Job 8:13

“So are the paths of all that forget God; and the hypocrite’s hope shall perish:”

Isa 9:17

“Therefore the Lord shall have no joy in their young men, neither shall have mercy on their fatherless and widows: for every one is an hypocrite and an evildoer, and every mouth speaketh folly. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still.”

Pro 11:9

“An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbor: but through knowledge shall the just be delivered. “

God hates hypocrisy NOT the person but the act!

What is hypocrisy? It is acting like one thing while claiming something else as your intention, kind of what you did pretending to be sympathetic to the plight of the Orthodox Jew to advance an agenda of Palestinians.

One of the ways that Atheists TRY to disprove God is the riddle of Epicurus a simple straw man creation.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence comes evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

In its first step, Epicurus states, “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.”

God is either able to prevent evil, or He is not, this is one of those paint a Christian into a corner arguments that fizzles out once certain facts are seen.

# 1 You are presupposing that there is a God who can’t do everything, that seems strange since he doesn’t exist to do anything in the first place!

# 2 You assume that God IS willing to eradicate Evil AND THAT GOD MUST DO IT THE WAY WE THINK HE MUST DO IT! How arrogant of the Atheist with no understanding of God whatsoever to predetermine how to deal with evil in a world looking for a way to do it. LET’S HEAR JUST HOW TO DO THAT FROM ATHEISTS IF YOUR SO SMART?

God’s way is nothing like our way, we do not and will not get it, so who are we to know the WAY of God plainly shown in scripture and how do Atheists know it isn’t working?

The second step says “Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.” this is another bad reasoning on your part, that God could but won’t deal with evil.

Malevolent means wanting to cause harm: having or showing a desire to harm others, harmful or evil: having a harmful or evil effect or influence hence according to Atheists God is Evil. Again they ignore the Devil in scripture who is plainly that very thing.

NOT TRUE on any count, the Bible reveals that God hates evil and that he made a place for evil to be SELF tormented, no different than our prisons which were built to KEEP EVIL FROM THE OUTSIDE WORLD.

Hell is not a torture chamber that God uses to ‘get off’ torturing us forever. The torture of hell is SELF INDUCED BY US KNOWING THE JUSTICE OF GOD FOR SIN. We would truly be tortured if we went to heaven instead of hell, because Hell was created for the specific of keeping evil within its hold, hence God is both willing and able and IS ERADICATING EVIL! In fact God is the sole eradicator of evil in existence.

Step three of the riddle states, “Is he both able and willing? Then whence comes evil?”

A straw man argument in the making, the bible clearly states that EVIL came from the heart of Lucifer, the first lawbreaker, evil is disobedience to the Laws that God created to contain creation within its perfect operational function, NOT TRAP IT AS EVIL DOES IN A DYSFUNCTIONAL TAILSPIN!

This argument only works with those who can’t think their way out of a straw-man creation, it assumes to much is true without proof that this is how God acts against evil!

The Bible is completely ignored with this argument, the chief evidence to refute it, how typical. Its obvious to anyone that you have to assume to much so what is the point here?

The FORTH and last part of this nonsense riddle [Straw Man] “Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” For one thing Why not knowing this is based upon faulty reasoning and character assassination, totally against the facts of scripture!

This was enough to disprove God to the unintelligent listening to the so-called intelligent?, in the arena of human reason and logic that’s amazing!


My debate with an Atheist on Sodahead! PART 1


  The following information was gathered on Facebook from a former Muslim who chillingly warns America about the Muslim threat and unlike Ron Paul’s head in the sand approach to dealing with Islam I think its very important that we take the threat seriously. 
Diane M. George

I was born and raised as a Muslim. My whole family is still Muslim. I know every genetic code of Muslim. I know Islamic brain. I live and breath with them. I am an insider. I left Islam when I understood that Islam is a sick and evil religion. 

The following is the Islamic message to the West.

To the infidels of the West:

The Constitution for the new Islamic Republics of Euro Arabia and Amer-Islamism are under construction.

We will fight the infidel to death.

– Meanwhile American laws will protect us.

– Democrats and Leftist will support us.

– N.G.O.s will legitimize us.

– C.A.I.R. will incubate us.

– The A.C.L.U. will empower us.

– Western Universities will educate us.

– Mosques will shelter us

– O.P.E.C. will finance us

– Hollywood will love us.

– The leadership of the UN and most of the United Nations will cover our asses.

Our children will immigrate from Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Indonesia and even from India to the US and to the other Western countries. 

They will go to the West for education in full scholarship. America is paying and will continue to pay for our children’s educations and their upbringing in state funded Islamic schools.

We will use your welfare system. Our children will also send money home while they are preparing for Jihad.

We will take the advantage of American kindness, gullibility, and compassion. When time comes, we will stab them in the back. We will say one thing on the camera and teach another thing to our children at home. We will give subliminal messages to our children to uphold Islam at any cost. Our children in America will always care more about Islamic Country’s interest than US interest.

We will teach our children Islamic supremacy from the very childhood. We will teach them not to compromise with Infidel. Once we do that from the very early age our children won’t hesitate to be martyr. We will take over the Europe first and then US will be the next. We already have a solid ground in the UK, Holland, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Germany, and now in the US.

Our children will marry Caucasian in Europe and in America. We will mixed with intricate fabric of the Western society but still will remember to Jihad when time comes. Who are we?

We are the “sleeper cells”.

We will raise our children to be loyal to Islam and Mohammad only. Everything else is secondary.

At the time of the real fight we will hold our own children as our armor. When American or Israeli troops shoot at us the world will be watching. Imagine,… Imagine the news in the world “Death of Muslim babies by infidels”.


We know CNN, ABC, CBS are broadcasting live. Al-Jazeera will pour gasoline on the fire. The news will spread like wildfire. “Americans killed 6 babies, 10 babies”. “Jews killed two women”,

Keep your Nukes in your curio cabinets. Keep your aircraft carrier or high-tech weaponry in the showcase. You can’t use them against us because of your own higher moral standard. We will take the advantage of your higher moral standard and use it against you. We won’t hesitate to use our children as suicide bomber against you.

Visualize the news flash all over the world, …Muslem mother is sobbing, …crying. …her babies are killed by Jews and Americans, the whole world is watching live. Hundreds of millions of Muslims all around the world are boiling. They will march through Europe. We will use our women to produce more babies who will in turn be used as armor/shield. Our babies are the gift from Allah for Jihad.

The West manufactures their tanks in the factory. We will manufacture our military force by natural means, by producing more babies. That is the way it is cheaper.

You infidels at this site cannot defeat us. We are 1.2 billion. We will double again. Do you have enough bullets to kill us?

On the camera:

– We will always say, “Islam is the religion of Peace.”

– We will say, “Jihad is actually inner Jihad.”

– Moderate Muslims will say there is no link between Islam and Terrorism and the West will believe it because the West is so gullible.

– Moderate Muslims all over the world will incubate Jihadists by their talk by defending Islam.

– Using Western Legal system we will assert our Sharia Laws, slowly but surely.

– We will increase in number. We will double again.

You will be impressed when you meet a moderate Muslim personally. As your next-door neighbor, coworker, student, teacher, engineer, professionals you may even like us. 

You will find us well mannered, polite, humble that will make you say, “wow, Muslims are good and peaceful people”, But, we will stab you in your back when you are sleeping as we did on 911.

There will be more 911 in Europe and in America. We will say, “We do not support terrorism but America got what it deserved.”

Muslims, CAIR, ISNA, MPAC and other international Islamic Organizations will unite. We will partner with Leftist, ACLU, with the UN, and if we have to then, even with France. Fasten your seat-belt. The war of civilizations has just begun.

We will recite Quran and say Allah-Hu-Akbar before beheading infidels, as we have been doing it. We will video tape those and send it to all infidels to watch. They will surrender – ISLAM means surrender.

We will use your own values of kindness against you.

You are destined to loose.


This is the wildest. Remember the video of that great patriot telling folks to protect the constitution and take back America? 
Obama calls this kind of talk disturbing, perhaps because he is a disturbed progressive Liberal with communist leanings.
This brings me to my next subject, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin. I know, I can hear the Liberal teeth grinding, and the Media lies expanding as I write, but trust me its to no avail I’m saying it anyway!

Scott Walker is the greatest example of a near perfect leader, who sees like no other the great damage that private sector Unions cause in America. They leach BILLIONS from taxpayers to give it to well feed members at the expense of America’s freedom to be great.

“Everything You Know About Unions Is Wrong: 12 Labor Union Myths”


  Unions work to ensure a level playing field for employees.


  Unions advocate for laws which tilt the playing field in ways that are unfair to both employers and employees. 

Those laws often impair economic growth and innovation, as well as destroy the freedom to contract, according to Randall G. Holcombe and James D. Gwartney, economics professors at Florida State University.

Over time, these labor laws actually cause a shift in employment from union jobs to nonunion jobs. In fact, research shows that the growth of labor unions during the Great Depression actually increased unemployment. Unions are still destroying jobs today.

“In the short run, because labor law has given to unions an advantage in the bargaining process, union contracts have had the effect of increasing the wages and benefits of union workers,” they wrote.

“In the long run, the higher cost of union labor brought on by those union contracts has resulted in a steady decline in private sector unionism, and has eroded U.S. manufacturing in unionized industries — most visibly, the railroad and auto industries.”


  Unions bargain on behalf of their members to get employees the wages and benefits they deserve.


  Unions “bargain” with the guns of government in hand, to get employees more wages and benefits than they deserve, with a little for themselves on the side. 

By crawling in bed with government to pass laws which benefited the unions at the expense of employers — and, in the long run, employees — union leaders have drained American businesses dry.

The long, slow decline of private sector unions reflects the economic destruction they left in their wake as they searched for fresh blood to leech. And today they’ve found the biggest source yet, the government.

Armand Thieblot, an economic consultant who has written books on union corruption and violence, writes:

“When Samuel Gompers, then head of the American Federation of Labor, was asked in the early 1920s what unions wanted, he famously replied, “More.” At the time, everyone correctly understood that unions’ targets were the capitalists from whom additional wages and benefits would be wrested by force, and also that if unions were successful, capitalists would have to be content with “Less,” thus, just a transfer of economic rents within the system from one factor to another.

By the 1980s and 1990s, however, when unorganized capitalists had become thin on the ground and those already organized had mostly been rendered uncompetitive by past concession to union demands, unions’ new guiding trope became “More government.” To achieve it, unions became mordantly political. In economic terms, after unions had absorbed all of the readily available economic rents from their capitalist opponents, they have turned to seeking rents from new sources beyond the system — from the polity at large (from taxpayers), using government as the intermediary.”


  Project labor agreements reduce project costs and delays and are good for construction workers as a whole.

Project labor agreements increase costs and only help union workers. 

PLAs are agreements between construction project owners and unions that contractors on the project must use union labor, even if they otherwise would not. David G. Tuerck, economics professor and chair at Suffolk University, cites numerous examples of how nonunion workers were harmed when they worked under PLAs, “first by forcing them to pay twice for benefits already offered their workers and second by forcing pay cuts on their workers.”

Then, unions use veiled threats to “labor peace” to intimidate project owners into accepting PLAs for “job stability.” Further, PLAs increased costs for every project studied which used them, sometimes as much as 20 percent.

“PLAs are motivated by a desire on the part of the construction unions to shore up the declining union wage premium against technological changes and other changes that make traditional union work rules and job designations obsolescent,” Tuerck writes. “Now the PLA has evolved into an instrument that the unions employ in tandem with the prevailing wage laws in order to reduce the competitive advantage of nonunion contractors.”


  Prevailing wage laws are good for competition, improve safety and quality, and help train new workers.


  Prevailing wage laws stifle competition, have no effect on job safety and quality, and do nothing to help train new workers. 

The Davis-Bacon Act of 1931, signed into law by President Herbert Hoover, mandates that on federal construction projects, workers be paid the so-called “prevailing wage” for similar local workers. In practice, the wage is set far higher than the actual prevailing wage, closely mirroring union pay scales. This virtually locks out nonunion construction workers from federal contracts.

George C. Leef, director of the Pope Center for Higher Education Policy, finds that all of the arguments for prevailing wage laws fail to stand up to even the slightest scrutiny. Worse, the Davis-Bacon Act was racially motivated:

“The hearings and debate on the legislation revealed some ugly racial overtones with comments on how ‘cheap colored labor’ was driving down wages of white workers.” Robert Bacon originally proposed the bill because he was upset that a construction firm from outside his district, employing black workers, built a veterans’ hospital in his district.


  Organized labor has worked to promote racial equality.


  Unions have used racial discrimination as a tool to enrich themselves, and continue to do so today. 

In 2008, Richard Trumka, who is now the president of the AFL-CIO, said, “We know, better than anyone else, how racism is used to divide working people.” He should, because the unions have been doing it for their entire existence, and still are, as Paul Moreno, history professor at Hillsdale College, illustrates.

It isn’t — and probably never was — the employers oppressing the black, or the Chinese, or the Hispanic people. Most employers, as it turns out, really are color blind, as Martin Luther King, Jr., noted in 1957:

“With the growth of industry the folkways of white supremacy will necessarily pass away. Moreover, southerners are learning to be good businessmen, and as such realize that bigotry is costly and bad for business.”

As racism goes, unions made the KKK look like amateurs. Big Labor lobbied for, and got, special laws to make them completely immune for whatever they did — all the way up to outright murder. In United States v. Enmons, in 1973, the Supreme Court held that unions were immune from prosecution under the Hobbs Act if their violent acts were in furtherance of a “valid union objective.”

And Trumka?

He talked a good game about ending racism in organized labor, but whether anything will change remains to be seen.


Unions help preserve manufacturing jobs.


  Unions were a contributing factor in the decline of American manufacturing, especially in the automobile industry. 

Detroit makes a great example. At the start of the 20th century, Detroit was a boom town and its manufacturing jobs were paying 33 percent above the national average. Union organizers brought their message of capitalist greed and exploitation to already highly paid auto workers, where it largely fell on deaf ears. Until the Great Depression, when union organizers used a variety of underhanded tactics to force automakers, steel plants and other manufacturers to unionize.

(Interestingly, Henry Ford at the time threatened to break up his company rather than submit to union demands; he finally gave in when his wife threatened to leave him.)

Stephen J.K. Walters, economics professor at Loyola, explains what happened next. Companies, squeezed hard and struggling to survive, would move their operations out of Detroit and other cities, and later, out of the country entirely.


Public sector unions work for the general prosperity of their members and all Americans.


  Public sector unions dramatically increase the cost of government to unsustainable levels. 

The cost of employee wages and benefits accounts for half of the $2.2 trillion that state and local governments spent in 2008, and that number is set to grow dramatically as employees retire and generous pension packages kick in. Though, calling them generous is an understatement.

Moreover, according to Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, those pension obligations are grossly underfunded, which will make the fiscal crisis even more acute this decade.

Businesses can and do mitigate the inefficiencies of a unionized workplace, but governments are much more constrained and have less incentive to do so, driving up taxpayer costs even further.

And public sector unions use their large war chests to buy influence and protection. “So the problem with public sector unions is not just that they block compensation reforms, but that use their privileged status to control broader policy debates.”

Myth: Right-to-work laws harm employees and prevent employers from freely contracting with unions.

Fact: Right-to-work laws improve the economy, and employers freely contracting with unions is prohibited by the Wagner Act. 

That Act forces employers to bargain with unions “in good faith,” which is interpreted to mean that employers must capitulate to virtually every demand of the unions or be accused of acting in bad faith.

This is hardly freedom of contract. Right-to-work laws mitigate, but do not entirely fix, this problem.

I have some experience with this, since I once worked in a non-right-to-work state and was forced to join the union. I would rather have negotiated my own terms; I’d likely have gotten a better deal.

It seems many Americans agree, as millions of them have moved from non-right-to-work states to right-to-work states in the last decade, a migration that shows no signs of stopping. Richard Vedder, economics professor at Ohio University, found that both predictive models and real world evidence show that right-to-work states experience more economic growth than non-right-to-work states.


  Labor unions support trade liberalization because it lowers the prices of goods that workers buy.


  This used to be true, but today’s labor unions oppose trade liberalization. 

They believe that increasing globalization has directly led to the decline of their unions, and thus their power. This isn’t exactly true, according to Daniel Griswold, director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute.

“Although the evidence is lacking to implicate globalization as a whole, two aspects of the trend have been found to have significant negative effects on labor unions: inward foreign direct investment (FDI), and ‘social integration’ across borders.”

When foreign companies invest in the U.S., companies here realize that they can also invest in other countries. “The correlation of FDI and declining rates of union density suggests that ‘many workers feel greater insecurity from seeing capital mobility in their sectors, even if not in their own particular firms,’ Slaughter (2007: 344–45) concluded.”

And social globalization, “the spread of ideas, information, images and people,” a natural result of advances in communications and transportation, “reinforces what Dresher and Gaston (2007: 176) call a ‘growing normative orientation towards individuals rather than collectivism [which] makes collective organization more difficult.’ 

Adding to the trends are rising levels of immigration and perceptions of younger workers who view unions as old-fashioned and anachronistic institutions.”


  Paying workers higher wages will reduce unemployment and stimulate the economy.

Fact: The “high-wage doctrine” increases unemployment and drags down the economy. 

This doctrine originated with a 1921 report that Hoover commissioned while he was Secretary of Commerce dealing with what was, in retrospect, a minor recession.

In addition to recommending higher wages, the report also said that government spending (now known as the stimulus package) can help the country recover from a recession. Neither is true, of course, and the report might have been completely forgotten had Hoover not become President. He put his disastrous ideas into practice, and the rest, as they say, is history.

Worse, proponents of these theories, which John Maynard Keynes gleefully signed on to, are more concerned with theories than facts, according to Lowell E. Gallaway, economics professor at Ohio University. That’s just a polite way of saying they’re full of crap. Galloway writes:

In the intellectual world, the high-wage doctrine continues to have its appeal. Prior to his appointment as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Ben Bernanke, collaborating with Martin Parkinson, noted:

“Maybe Herbert Hoover and Henry Ford were right. Higher real wages may have paid for themselves in the broader sense that their positive effect on aggregate demand compensated for their tendency to raise costs” (Bernanke and Parkinson 1989: 214).

More recently, Paul Krugman reiterated this view in a New York Times oped (3 May 2009), arguing, “Many workers are accepting pay cuts in order to save jobs.” He then asks, “What’s wrong with that?”

His answer refers to what he calls “one of those paradoxes that plague our economy right now . . . workers at any one company can help save their jobs by accepting lower wages, but when employers across the economy cut wages at the same time, the result is higher unemployment.” This is simply a reprise of Klein’s (1947) views.

Never mind the existence of more than a century of empirical evidence to the contrary. Krugman’s concern is not with the empirical problem, but with the theoretical connection between wage rates and employment.

The high-wage doctrine still lives. In all probability, this persistent adherence to an incorrect doctrine once again will prove to be detrimental to the U.S. economy, just as it was in the 1930s.


  Unions currently operate in a free market.


Unions are heavily dependent on the government to provide them unfair leverage over employers and control over their members. 

It is possible for unions to exist and provide valuable services to their members in a market free of government-sponsored violence and control, but those services would likely have to be geared toward helping employees improve themselves, rather than extracting undeserved compensation from employers.

Charles W. Baird, professor emeritus of economics at California State University, East Bay, examines what constitutes a free market, how existing labor laws destroy freedom, and what a union might look like in a true free market. It won’t happen any time soon, though, he says:

“It is politically impossible, at this time in America, to repeal the Norris-LaGuardia Act and the National Labor Relations Act and replace them with any sort of free-market union law. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to prepare the ground now for doing so in some future, more enlightened time.”

If you’re wondering why you’re out of a job, why Detroit is a wasteland, and why the economy is on the verge of collapse, don’t be so quick to blame Wall Street: Some of the blame belongs to the labor unions.

[“AFL-CIO building, Washington, D.C.” photo by Derek Blackadder; CC BY-SA 2.0]

  “The whole process is pretty unusual. We had one of the local affiliates here [reporting] about someone signing it, proudly saying they signed 80 different recall petitions,” Walker said on “Fox and Friends.” “As we see it, you should only be able to sign it once and only once, and it should be for a legal citizen.”

Not if your a Progressive Liberal, they can cheat, steal and get away with most Illegal stuff simply because of ‘Rules for Radicals’ protocols and the fact that Unions rule supreme, the ends justify the means so the rules are like water to them, they shift whenever it suits them.

“If we fail, I think it sets back courage in government by at least 10 years and maybe a generation. People will be too afraid to do the hard things.” -Gov. Walker

If the American people do not put their foot down on the necks of these Union thugs soon, it will be to late to stop it. They are trying to gain control of private sector Jobs to the point there will be no more freedom for employers to hire or fire based upon BAD BEHAVIOR and that means a more dangerous world for the rest of us!

The FACTS about Governor Walker’s Responsible Budget Repair Plan, this man should get an award!


The current state of affairs is not a sustainable one for maxed-out taxpayers footing the bill. The average Wisconsin state employee compensation (salary and fringe benefits) in 2010-11 was $76,500. Employee salary and fringe benefits comprises more than 60% of state government general fund operating costs. The average Wisconsin teacher compensation (salary and fringe benefits) in 2009-10 was $74,844. (Source: Department of Public Instruction website)


But the cost to taxpayers keeps growing. Wisconsin taxpayers pay over $1 billion per year for state government employee health insurance; more than double what was paid only 10 years ago. But employees themselves pay only 6% of that amount.


Big savings are needed to fill a big hole this fiscal year. Governor Walker’s Budget Repair Bill contains more than $30 million in savings over a three month period by requiring state employees to contribute to their pension and health care benefits.


Public protections for state employees will remain. Wisconsin’s statutory civil service laws, among the strongest in the nation, will remain in force to ensure Wisconsin can maintain a professional and experienced state workforce. In addition, employee sick leave, vacation, and retirement benefits will remain unchanged.


Fundamental reforms are needed for a sustainable path forward. While pension and health care contributions are a vital part of solving our current deficit problems, the long-term structural problems facing the state and local governments cannot be solved without a fundamental reform of Wisconsin’s labor relations. 
As Governor Walker said today in a national press conference, in the past public union contracts have taken an average of 15 months to pass. With a $3 billion budget deficit, we don’t have that much time.


Simply requiring pension and health care contributions does nothing to solve crushing problems such as the Department of Corrections out-of-control overtime costs, the Madison bus driver making more than $150,000 per year, or the outstanding first year teacher who was laid off by MPS because she lacked seniority. The time is now to put Wisconsin on a sustainable path, and Governor Walker is the conservative leader to do it.


During tough times, Walker is protecting our most vulnerable citizens. As Department of Health Services Secretary Smith outlined in a memo on February 8, 2011, alternative plans to achieve the type of savings needed to balance the books would be dire.


Other alternatives would require:

–  Eliminating services for 194,539 children on Medical Assistance; or

–  Eliminating services for 92,599 adults on Medical Assistance; or

–  Eliminating services for 16,284 elderly, blind or disabled persons.

Walker is saving thousands of public employee jobs. To achieve similar savings in the state’s general fund over three months would require laying off more than 1,500 state employees. Governor Walker knows there have been enough layoffs across the state already – 250,000 Wisconsin jobs have been lost since the beginning of the recession.


No wage cuts, layoffs, or furloughs. Governor Walker said in an email to state employees that both the Budget Repair Bill and the 2011-13 Biennial Budget will contain no wage cuts, no layoffs, and no furloughs for state employees.


That’s right, no more furloughs. Walker’s sensible solutions effectively mean the 3% of state employee wages lost through Jim Doyle’s unpopular furloughs will offset the increased pension and health care contributions Governor Walker is asking of public employees to help balance the state’s budget.



These protestors should be the ones who show shame, supporting Communists and America haters over common sense Budget cuts! 

Blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: