20 Cans of Success

Why should I say I can't when the Bible says I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength (Philippians 4:13)?


Why should I lack when I know that God shall supply all my needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus (Philippians 4:19)?


Why should I fear when the Bible says God has not given me a spirit of fear, but of power, love and a sound mind (2 Timothy 1:7)?


Why should I lack faith to fulfill my calling knowing that God as allotted to me a measure of faith (Romans 12:3)?


Why should I be weak when the Bible says that the Lord is the strength of my life and that I will display strength and take action because I know God (Psalm 27:1; Daniel 11:32)?


Why should I allow Satan supremacy over my life when He that is in me is greater than he that is in the world (1 John 4:4)?


Why should I accept defeat when the Bible says that God always leads me in triumph (2 Corinthians 2:14)?


Why should I lack wisdom when Christ became wisdom to me from God and God gives wisdom to me generously when I ask Him for it (1 Corinthians 1:30; James 1:5)?


Why should I be depressed when I can recall to mind God's lovingkindness, compassion, and faithfulness and have hope (Lamentations 3:21-23)?


Why should I worry and fret when I can cast all my anxiety on Christ who cares for me (1 Peter 5:7)?


Why should I ever be in bondage knowing that there is liberty where the Spirit of the Lord is (2 Corinthians 3:17)?


Why should I feel condemned when the Bible says I am not condemned because I am in Christ (Romans 8:1)?


Why should I feel alone when Jesus said He is with me always and He will never leave me nor forsake me (Matthew 28:20; Hebrews 13:5)?


Why should I feel accursed or that I am the victim of bad luck when the Bible says that Christ redeemed me from the curse of the law that I might receive His Spirit (Galatians 3:13-14)?


Why should I be discontented when I, like Paul, can learn to be content in all my circumstances (Philippians 4:11)?


Why should I feel worthless when Christ became sin on my behalf that I might become the righteousness of God in Him (2 Corinthians 5:21)?


Why should I have a persecution complex knowing that nobody can be against me when God is for me (Romans 8:31)?


Why should I be confused when God is the author of peace and He gives me knowledge through His indwelling Spirit (1 Corinthians 14:33; 2:12)?


Why should I feel like a failure when I am a conqueror in all things through Christ (Romans 8:37)?


Why should I let the pressures of life bother me when I can take courage knowing that Jesus has overcome the world and its tribulations (John 16:33)?

The face in the Shroud (The Real Face of Jesus)

History Channel

A computer graphic shows Jesus' body underneath the Shroud of Turin, as reconstructed for "The Real Face of Jesus," airing on the History Channel.

Does the Shroud of Turin show the "real face of Jesus"? That claim is impossible to judge, even though it serves the title of a documentary about the 3-D analysis of the Shroud of Turin premiering tonight on the History Channel. What can be said is that the centuries-old image wasn’t just painted freehand. Computer analysis of the imprint on the shroud suggests that it had to be left behind by someone draped in cloth.

"Is this the artifact of a real person or not? Definitely it is," Ray Downing, the digital illustrator at the center of the show, told me today.

Downing worked with specialists on the shroud to come up with a photorealistic representation of the man whose body's imprint appears faintly on a famous 14-foot-long length of linen. For some Christians, the stain serves as the miraculous snapshot of their risen Lord. For most scientists, it is a cleverly done fake from the 13th or 14th century, but nothing more.

	History Channel
	A rough computer model shows the 3-D face imprinted on the Shroud of Turin.

Back in 1988, carbon-14 dating tests were conducted on a sample from the shroud in an effort to determine whether the cloth was created in Jesus' time. The verdict from three laboratories was that the cloth was produced in medieval times. But the shroud's fans have insisted that the sample was actually taken from a patch, rather than from the original linen. Just this month, a chemist proposed a new series of non-destructive dating tests that would give an estimate for the entire cloth.

From a marketing perspective, the timing of the History Channel show couldn't be better: Good Friday and Easter Sunday, the Christian holy days that mark Jesus' death and resurrection, are just a few days away. What's more, the shroud is due to go on display for six weeks at Turin Cathedral, starting April 10. The last time the relic was exhibited, a decade ago, more than 3 million people came to Turin to see it. More than a million reservations have been received already for next month's viewing.

Have scientists been wrong about the shroud? Downing noted that historical records referring to the shroud predate the current carbon-14 estimate. "We know the carbon-14 [test] is wrong," he said. "The question is, how wrong are they? The further back you go, the less likely it is that anybody could have faked it."

History Channel

Digital illustrator/animator Ray Downing and John Jackson look at a high-quality replica of the Shroud of Turin, displayed at Jackson's research center in Colorado.

But the dating debate isn't the focus of Downing's work: Rather, he concentrated on what the shroud shows. Could the faint outlines preserved in the cloth match up with the outlines of a specific person? Downing found that they could, and he drew up a 3-D image that fit the data.

"It's just like how a police investigator will question an eyewitness, and from that information he can draw a complete sketch," Downing said. "The shroud is a silent witness. It's like the witness in an investigation."

Downing started out with high-resolution photographs of the shroud from the Holy Shroud Guild and the Shroud of Turin Research Project. "Between the two of them we were able to come up with a good image," he said.

He also consulted with John Jackson, a physicist who has come to specialize in studying the shroud at his research center in Colorado. Once all the imagery was computerized, Downing used software to massage the 2-D data into 3-D imagery.

History Channel

A computer reconstruction shows a body image that matches up with the faint imprint seen on the Shroud of Turin. The imagery was used to develop 3-D models.

3-D visualizations of the face in the shroud have been done before, but Downing found that the data couldn't be matched up with a realistic representation if he just added another dimension to the shroud's flat plane. The image looked more like a reflection in a funhouse mirror - and that's because the cloth had to be draped around the body's form to produce a match.

Downing said the cloth "encoded" the 3-D data on a 2-D surface. "It's as if there is an instruction set inside a picture for building a sculpture," he explained in a news release.

By manipulating the computer model, Downing matched up the shroud's imprint with anatomical features drawn from more than 100 human scans. "The nose might have come from here, the nostrils from there," he told me. The result is a realistic illustration, based on the data encoded in the shroud.

History Channel / Ray Downing

Illustrator Ray Downing tweaked graphic representations of human models to come up with a realistic 3-D image of the person whose imprint is on the Shroud of Turin.

Downing said the depiction shown in the History Channel program represents his best effort to put flesh and bones on the shroud's imprint - and he would argue that it's the best effort anyone has made. "This is the closest one, anatomically," he said.

Over the years, not everyone has agreed that the shroud can fit a realistic form. Joe Nickell, a paranormal investigator for Skeptical Inquirer magazine, told an interviewer a decade ago that if the draping effect is taken into account, the body beneath the shroud would have to have been "unusually narrow ... so very long and narrow that one pro-Shroud pathologist suggested that Jesus must have had Marfan's syndrome."

If Downing's analysis played it straight, the shape beneath the shroud is at least plausibly human. But is it Jesus? Or some anonymous person from the first or the 13th century? Feel free to weigh in with your comments below, before or after the show airs.

Update for 8:18 p.m. ET: In a follow-up telephone interview, Skeptical Inquirer's Joe Nickell noted that questions have surrounded the Shroud of Turin since the 14th century, when it showed up in France. Nickell suggests that the shroud could have been forged by applying a red ochre pigment to the linen, then modeling it on a body with a bas-relief mask over the face.

Nickell said an Italian chemist, Luigi Garlaschelli, used the recipe to create a shroudlike replica. "He made a 'shroud' using the theories of mine that I told you, then artificially aged it by baking, and then he washed it to remove the pigment - and voila! There was the yellow stain," Nickell said. The effect was similar to the effect seen on the Shroud of Turin.

You can read more about Garlaschelli's experiment here and here.

"There are two approaches to this," Nickell told me. "There's ordinary science, and then there's what I call shroud science. Ordinary science starts with evidence, and lets the evidence lead wherever it will. This is the approach used by a 'CSI' team. Shroud science is quite different, and it starts with the answer. They start by saying, 'This is the shroud of our Lord,' and then they take whatever steps they need to get to that answer."

Nickell is skeptical ... not only about the Shroud of Turin, but also about the prospects for settling the shroud debate to everyone's satisfaction.

"Shroud science is backward from ordinary science," he said. "It's very discouraging to me that the media have been so willing to give it a pass."

A science professor & a student debates over Science and God

A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the students, “Let me explain the problem science has with religion.” The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.

“You’re a Christian, aren’t you, son?”

“Yes sir,” the student says.

“So you believe in God?”

“Absolutely.”

“Is God good?”

“Sure! God’s good.”

“Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?”

“Yes.”

“Are you good or evil?”

“The Bible says I’m evil.”

The professor grins knowingly. “Aha! The Bible!” He considers for a moment. “Here’s one for you. Let’s say there’s a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?”

“Yes sir, I would.”

“So you’re good…!”

“I wouldn’t say that.”

“But why not say that? You’d help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn’t.”

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. “He doesn’t, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?”

The student remains silent.

“No, you can’t, can you?” the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

“Let’s start again, young fella. Is God good?”

“Er…yes,” the student says.

“Is Satan good?”

The student doesn’t hesitate on this one. “No.”

“Then where does Satan come from?”

The student falters. “From God”

“That’s right. God made Satan, didn’t he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Evil’s everywhere, isn’t it? And God did make everything, correct?”

“Yes.”

“So who created evil?” The professor continued, “If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.”

Again, the student has no answer. “Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?”

The student squirms on his feet. “Yes.”

“So who created them?”

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. “Who created them?” There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. “Tell me,” he continues onto another student. “Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?”

The student’s voice betrays him and cracks. “Yes, professor, I do.”

The old man stops pacing. “Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?”

“No sir. I’ve never seen Him.

“Then tell us if you’ve ever heard your Jesus?”

“No, sir, I have not.”

“Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?”

“No, sir, I’m afraid I haven’t.”

“Yet you still believe in him?”

“Yes.”

“According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?”

“Nothing,” the student replies. “I only have my faith.”

“Yes, faith,” the professor repeats. “And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.”

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. “Professor, is there such thing as heat?”

“Yes,” the professor replies. “There’s heat.”

“And is there such a thing as cold?”

“Yes, son, there’s cold too.”

“No sir, there isn’t.”

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. “You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don’t have anything called ‘cold’. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees.”

“Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.”

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

“What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?”

“Yes,” the professor replies without hesitation. “What is night if it isn’t darkness?”

“You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it’s called darkness, isn’t it? That’s the meaning we use to define the word.”

“In reality, darkness isn’t. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?”

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. “So what point are you making, young man?”

“Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.”

The professor’s face cannot hide his surprise this time. “Flawed? Can you explain how?”

“You are working on the premise of duality,” the student explains. “You argue that there is life and then there’s death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can’t even explain a thought.”

“It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.”

“Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?”

“If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.”

“Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?”

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

“Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?”

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.

“To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.”

The student looks around the room. “Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor’s brain?” The class breaks out into laughter.

“Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor’s brain, felt the professor’s brain, touched or smelt the professor’s brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.”

“So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?”

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.

Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. “I guess you’ll have to take them on faith.”

“Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,” the student continues. “Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?”

Now uncertain, the professor responds, “Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man’s inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.”

To this the student replied, “Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.”

The professor sat down.

This students statements are true, can you or can you not make night darker?

Is it possible for it to get colder after absolute zero -458 degree’s F.

Can you feel,taste,see,hear,or smell your brain.

If anyone can contest this please do.

Illuminati (New World Order)

Illuminati (plural of Latin illuminatus, "enlightened") is a name that refers to several groups, both historical and modern, and both real and fictitious. Historically, it refers specifically to the Bavarian Illuminati, an Enlightenment-era secret society founded on May 1, 1776. In modern times it is also used to refer to a purported conspiratorial organization which acts as a shadowy "power behind the throne", allegedly controlling world affairs through present day governments and corporations, usually as a modern incarnation or continuation of the Bavarian Illuminati. In this context, Illuminati is often used in reference to a New World Order (NWO). Many conspiracy theorists believe the Illuminati are the masterminds behind events that will lead to the establishment of such a New World Order. Confusing the issue further is the fact that there are also several modern fraternal groups which include the word "Illuminati" in their names. Darwinism was a big help to change the cause of mankind in order to place new world order (Under one ruler) .

Darwinism

The Victorian Age in England was a time of dramatic changes, new inventions, the Industrial Revolution, and an introduction to new ideologies, all of which would transform the way significant portions of society lived and thought of life forever. The overwhelming external changes in daily life during this period would match in intensity the nature of changes happening in the internal lives of the public. Charles Darwin, as a naturalist, helped usher in this change after a long voyage to the South Seas where he observed several widely unknown species. In 1859, a year after his return, he presented his observations in a book, The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. In it he deduced from their widely diverse natures a common thread that linked all species to a single ancestor; the Theory of Evolution as he called the phenomenon soon became a household word and stirred up massive controversy and debate, still resounding today. The implications of Darwin's theory created a deep divide in culture, a conflict of natural versus supernatural order. Not only did it offer an alternate account of the genesis of life from the Old Testament, but it also gave a sense of moral freedom from the divine Creator and His judgment; it became a cause unto itself in society among leaders in political and industrial circles, effecting science and academia. Darwinism, as the collection of theories was called, changed the course of man's history forever.

Why Illuminati Against God &  The Bible

The Bible teaches that in the final moments of earth’s history the entire planet will be under the control of a one world government. Ultimately an autocratic world ruler code named “the beast” will dominate world affairs. Through his agencies he will determine who is to live and who is to  die. This despot will not bring peace. He will be the agent of chaos, destruction and despair. 

The one called the beast will bring about a unity of all humanity by means of terror. We are told, that he will “cause as many as do not worship the image of the beast to be killed.”[i][1] His one concession to those who obey him will be the right of access to sufficient food, not to banish hunger, but only to maintain life. Food will be rationed for some, for others it will be totally denied. A situation will exist in which “no one should be able to buy or sell, except the one who has the mark, the name or the number of the beast."[ii][2] During the reign of the beast there will be what Daniel described as “a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then.”[iii][3] It is not too dramatic to say that at a timenot far from now the world that now is will be transformed into a house of horrors. And hardly anybody believes it will happen.

That's why they are against the Bible they know it's true. Establishing new world order not easy when people believe in the bible. Darwinism helped them to change mans view about the bible attacking the vary first page genesis of life even though evolution cant be proven. They funded so much money in research to prove that we came to existence without a creator. Even though there are many scientist can disapprove that theory they have taken into Childs education.

Do Human and Chimpanzee DNA Indicate an Evolutionary Relationship?

While many evolutionists proclaim that human DNA is 98% identical to chimpanzeeDNA, few would lie by idly and allow themselves to receive a transplant using chimpanzee organs. As a matter of fact, American doctors tried using chimp organs in the 1960s, but in all cases the organs were totally unsuitable. The claim of 98% similarity between chimpanzees and humans is not only deceptive and misleading, but also scientifically incorrect.

In 2003, the completed human genome study is scheduled to be published. Before this massive project was created, scientists estimated that humans possessed 90,000 to 100,000 genes (a gene is a section of DNA that is a basic unit of heredity, while the genome constitutes the total genetic composition of an organism). With preliminary data from the genome project now in hand, scientists believe that the actual number of genes is around 70,000 .It appears that only about 1.5% of the human genome consists of genes, which code for proteins. These genes are clustered in small regions that contain sizable amounts of “non-coding” DNA (frequently referred to as “junkDNA”) between the clusters. The function of these non-coding regions is only now being determined.

These findings indicate that even if all of the human genes were different from those of a chimpanzee, the DNA still could be 98.5 percent similar if the “junk” DNA of humans and chimpanzees were identical.
Therefore a human and any earthly DNA-based life form must be at least 25% identical. Would it be correct, then, to state that daffodils are “one-quarter human”? The idea that a flower is one-quarter human is neither profound nor enlightening; it is outlandishly ridiculous! There is hardly any biological comparison that could be conducted that would make daffodils human—except perhaps DNA.

Considering the very close genetic relationship that has been established by comparison of biochemical properties of blood proteins, protein structure and DNA and immunological responses, the differences between a man and a chimpanzee are more astonishing than the resemblances. They include structural differences in the skeleton, the muscles, the skin, and the brain; differences in posture associated with a unique method of locomotion; differences in social organization; and finally the acquisition of speech and tool-using, together with the dramatic increase in intellectual ability which has led scientists to name their own species Homo sapiens sapiens—wise wise man.

During the period when these remarkable evolutionary changes were taking place, other closely related ape-like species changed only very slowly, and with far less remarkable results. It is hard to resist the conclusion that something must have happened to the ancestors of Homo sapiens which did not happen to the ancestors of gorillas and chimpanzees

That “something” actually is “Someone”—the Creator.