by | August 21, 2026 · 1:05 pm

Is AI Killing Writing and Making Us Stoopider?

ChatGPT

I use the Chat. I admit it. Especially when I need to quickly come up with a script for a video and I don’t have time to compose it myself.

And by “compose” I mean coming up with important facts and relevant information and putting it all together in a coherent, readable, format for a 6-minute video. When time is of the essence, I just can’t do it myself off the cuff without rambling.

Chat is also an understanding, go-my-back kind of program. It advises me when my tone is a little out of character. It makes suggestions. It tries to keep me from making a fool of myself (based on the way it has come to “know” me).

In many ways ChatGPT is like a fantastic secretary or paralegal that does all the footwork but allows you to get the credit.

Affecting Me

But as I was lying in bed last night on one of those rare occasions when I was not working the night shift, a little voice inside my head (I think that’s where it was coming from) got me to thinking. *

*As I wrote the last four words in the previous paragraph (which is not really a paragraph since it is made up of only one sentence), the thought came to me that a voice inside my head getting me to think sounds a little psychotic. But anyway…back to the flow.

Is ChatGPT and other kinds of AI subtly destroying our ability to write? Is it helping us to be better writers, to better communicate our thoughts with the written word, or is it robbing from us the skills to not only put idea on paper, but to express them at all?

If you really stop to think about it, the parallels are endless. For example, would a marksman become a better marksman if an AI program always lined up the shot? Would a guitarist ever be able to play with the skill of a master like Segovia if all he had to do was strum while AI worked the frets?

What should concern us all is that we are teaching artificial intelligence to do perfectly what we used to be able to do on our own imperfectly. And by doing that, we are gradually going to lose the skill we programed the artificial proficient to do! Pardon my French, but that should scare the merde out of us!

Why We Write

If you are reading this on a blog, you probably already know where I am going with this. Writing is a form of communication that relays information to the reader. But for a great many people, writing is more than communicating information; it’s getting out of us what is on the inside wanting to burst. It’s putting on paper or a screen our feelings and emotions and ideas so that we can look at them and better understand them.

Writing can be a key component of brainstorming. But what happens when the ability to write becomes dependent on the skill of artificial intelligence? What if we are no longer able to express our thoughts on our own? Will we not then be the puppets of thought masters?

I write for the joy of writing. It is when I write that my brain exercises its ability to imagine, to create, to describe, and by describing better understand what it is that I describe.

I write for the comfort and therapy. Often, I find myself at a keyboard, like right now, receiving the tangible satisfaction one feels when passionately pounding away on a keyboard. In the act of writing, whatever I write, I’m coming to terms with issues, I’m literally facing (looking at the words) what was heretofore stuffed inside.

What will happen…where will we be as humans…when computer chips are crafting our expressions? What happens to us when we filter our expressions of emotion (such as pain, fear, trauma, hope, and faith) through the “suggesting” and “protecting” brain of Artificial Intelligence?

It’s Really Me

I give you my word, other than for the spelling suggestions, every word you are reading has been composed by me. I unloaded every thought and physically typed them into this program on a 7-year-old Dell laptop. No AI program had anything to do with it.

If there are mistakes, then yay! I make mistakes! I am human! The real me is imperfect, flawed, yet always trying, still kicking, still surviving.

But what I am afraid of – for all humanity’s sake – is that even the “real me” within us all will be impossible to recognize as distinct from the personas developed through our use and dependency on Artificial Intelligence.

Let me know what you think …. the real you.

Let’s Experiment

As I was typing in the last few words in the above post, I thought it might be interesting and illustrative to copy the article to a few different AI programs, then ask to offer their “thoughts” about the content in 200 words or less.

Below are excerpts from each.

ChatGPT

I think this is a strong and genuinely worthwhile post, especially because you’re not writing as an anti-AI crusader. You openly admit that you use ChatGPT and explain why. That gives the argument credibility. You’re essentially saying, “I love this tool—and that’s precisely why I’m worried about what it might do to me.” That is a much more interesting argument than “AI is bad.”

The strongest section, in my opinion, is “It’s Really Me.” The line “If there are mistakes, then yay! I make mistakes! I am human!” gets to the heart of the whole piece. Your concern isn’t really about writing ability; it’s about human agency and identity. That’s much deeper.

I would make one significant change: tighten the middle. You make essentially the same argument several times—AI does something for us, therefore we may lose the ability to do it ourselves. The marksman and Segovia examples are excellent, but you don’t need quite as much repetition afterward.

I also love the final challenge:

“Let me know what you think …. the real you.”

Keep that.

Perplexity

The post also makes an important distinction between writing as producing information and writing as a human practice. For many people, writing is how they think, process emotion, develop ideas, and understand themselves. If AI replaces that process entirely, it could weaken more than grammar or structure—it could reduce opportunities for reflection and self-expression.
Still, AI need not become a replacement for a writer’s voice. It can function more like an editor, research assistant, or sounding board, provided the writer remains responsible for the ideas, judgments, experiences, and final message. The danger is not necessarily using AI; it is surrendering authorship to it.

Grok

The blog post raises a legitimate worry: over-reliance on AI tools like ChatGPT risks atrophying the very human skills of composing, refining, and expressing thought. The marksman and guitarist analogies land well—outsourcing the hard practice can leave us less capable when the tool is unavailable. Writing is not just output; it is thinking made visible, a form of self-clarification and emotional processing that AI cannot fully replicate for the writer.

Yet the concern can be overstated. Calculators did not erase mathematical understanding for those who still practice it; spellcheck and search engines did not end literacy. AI is a powerful assistant, not an inevitable replacement. The author himself demonstrates the point by producing this piece without it—imperfect, personal, and unmistakably human. Skill loss occurs mainly through disuse, not through occasional leverage of better tools.

The deeper risk is cultural: if we stop valuing the struggle of original expression, we may gradually prefer polished proxies over authentic voices. The remedy is deliberate practice—writing without AI often enough to keep the muscle strong—while still using the tool where speed or structure helps. Human imperfection remains a feature, not a bug.

Created by ChatGPT with my prompts

1 Comment

Filed under Artificial Intelligence, blogging, writing

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | August 18, 2026 · 6:59 pm

Islam Is a Religion and That Matters

I know it’s controversial, but it needs to be said.

I’m attaching a video I just uploaded this morning. It’s not perfect, but it’s a good effort and at least a start.

Should you watch it, understand that the purpose is to warn America that without a common soul, a common sense of identity worth defending, Islam will most certainly destroy Western civilization.

If you can, leave a like and comment directly on YouTube. It helps.

But here is also good 🙂

Click to watch

https://youtu.be/eFWwdAKanlA?is=v-wVCIU1r7b3fghX

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

by | July 14, 2026 · 11:33 pm

I Need a Lawyer!

Speed Trap

Do you know what a “speed trap” is? Just so we can all be on the same page (or road), let me ‘splain it to you, Lucy.

Wherever you are in the world, if you have an automobile and go anywhere, I’m sure you’ve experienced a speed limit. Somewhere, usually in a visible place beside the roadway, there will be a sign on which is written the speed limit for that stretch of road.

Tracking with me so far?

However, sometimes you will come upon a stretch of road where the speed limit changes abruptly. That’s not unreasonable, especially when conditions demand it.

But when a wide stretch of interstate goes down from 65 or 70mph to 50mph without warning or graduation, THAT’S the definition of a speed trap. And that’s typically where a policeman or state trooper will park their cars and wait for unsuspecting motorists.

Caught In the Trap

You know where this is going, don’t you? Yep, I got caught in a speed trap last week.

It all happened on a stretch of interstate highway I75 in Tennessee, just above the border with Georgia. Come to find out, about a quarter mile into Tennessee, the speed limit drops to 50mph.

Yes, 50mph. On an interstate!

It’s a trap because, yes, there are posted signs, but that kind of speed is so unusual on that kind of roadway, when you see them, your brain ignores them! At best, a quick-thinking brain has to go through extra cognitive steps to process it.

Do you know how fast people here in the South drive on highways through Georgia, Alabama, and Tennessee? No? We don’t either!

The way to stay alive when driving through downtown Atlanta or Nashville, for example, is NOT to obey the posted speed limit. If you do, you’ll likely cause an accident, shut down the highway, and be hated for eternity. NO, you go with the flow of traffic, just like all the other speeders.

So, when I was going from Georgia to Tennessee on I75, I wasn’t really paying attention to the exact speed limit. However, I didn’t think for a moment I was exceeding what was a safe speed – it’s what everyone else was doing.

How fast was I going? More than 50, allegedly.

Legal Help Needed

That’s why I need a lawyer. That’s why I need someone to represent me, to go with me, to stand before the judge in front of me. I need a defender, one who argues my case on my behalf, so that the full weight of the law is not dropped on my head.

Fact is I may have broken the law. The consequences of my alleged offense could be serious should the judge show no mercy.

But if someone comes along on my behalf, someone known and respected by the Court, and that person manages to convince the judge to find a way to avoid serious consequences, I might only receive a small fine, if found guilty, and a warning.

But it won’t be free. Legal help can get expensive. However, the long-term effects of a big speeding ticket could cost a lot more.

My Greatest Defender

What really brought me to the computer, though, was not a grievance—it was gratefulness.

Here I am facing a potential fine and points on my driving record (as of now I have none). And because of the points there could be other ramifications. But all that being said, at least I know I’m not going to Hell.

That’s right! No eternal damnation for me! How’s that, you ask? Because I have the greatest defense Attorney in the entire universe!

Jesus! (see 1 John 2:1-2)

He is like no other!

For one thing, Jesus knows my whole story. He knows me like no other. But more than that, He knows the Judge. They are actually just alike 😉

Secondly, unlike the lawyer I am going to hire, Jesus paid the price, the debt I owed for my transgressions. He doesn’t negotiate a lower fine; He paid the highest fine possible!

What we read in 1 John 1:2 is that Jesus became the “propitiation” for my sin. In other words, He didn’t just pay my fine and accept my punishment, He literally was the payment!

And you know the greatest part of all?

He did the same for you, too!

1 John 2:2 (KJV) And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.

Oh, and unlike the lawyer that hopefully will handle my case, we don’t have to pay Jesus for his services—it’s a gift by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9).

Even His retainer is good for eternity.

Leave a comment

Filed under salvation, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | June 10, 2026 · 1:19 pm

Why “Disclosure Day” Isn’t a Problem for Christianity

Full Disclosure

Oh, don’t get too excited; I don’t have anything to disclose. On the other hand, there is a new movie from Steven (Close Encounters) Spielberg that is meant to make us question our beliefs, a movie called “Disclosure Day.”

It may seem to some that I have recently relocated to a cozy dirt home under a rock, seeing that I haven’t heard of this movie until about 2 a.m. this morning. But I did watch the trailer that included Spielberg’s vision for the film. It also included the question, “What if it’s all true?”

What If Bones…?

Well, I don’t know what Steven Spielberg has been up to over the last sixteen years, but back in October of 2010 I published a post right here entitled “Dinosaur Bones Found on the Moon.” The intention of the post was to initiate thought, thought about how Aliens (or even bones on the moon) could affect our faith.

Many Christians hold a strongly anthropocentric view of creation that leaves little room for life on other planets. They limit all life, not just intelligent life, to the created life forms inhabiting Earth. The only exceptions are spiritual, angelic beings or demons. For some, even microbial extraterrestrial life would seem to create a major challenge to their faith.

However, the article I wrote back in 2010 presented reassurances that are as valuable today as they were back then. Because of God’s nature (without which He could not be God), whatever is out there would have had to have been part of His Creation.

The Creator and Sustainer

Speaking of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, the Apostle John wrote:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. – John 1:1-3 KJV

There are multiple passages which affirm that not only the earth, but the “heavens” were created by the Word of the Lord and that all creation (which would necessarily include E.T.’s home planet) was made by the Word (Jesus) and for His pleasure.

If God’s sovereignty extends to the stars named in Scripture, then the question becomes: how far does that reach?

Heavenly Property Line

In Job 9:9 and Amos 5:8 we read that God, OUR God (the one in which we Christians place our trust), created “the Bear, Orion, and the Pleiades.” These verses remind us that the God revealed in Scripture is not a local deity confined to Earth, but the Creator whose authority extends across the heavens themselves.

The Pleiades cluster is about 400 to 450 light years away. The stars in the Bear, or Ursa Major, are mostly around 80 light years away. But the stars in Orion vary widely, ranging anywhere from 500 to over 1,300 light years away!

So, just to put the whole idea into perspective, aside from all the other bodies of light in the sky, the God of Christianity would still be the God of any alien coming from a planet up to and including over 1,300 light years away.

Yet, that’s nothing compared to V762 Cassiopeiae. This one star, the farthest we can see with the naked eye in a dark sky, is at least 16,000 light years away!

But all this astronomical math becomes secondary when we remember that God, to be the God of the Bible, must be wholly distinct from time, space, and matter. Only God is eternal. Only God is omnipresent. Only God exists independently of creation and reigns over all things.

Even little green—or gray—men, if they exist, would still be part of the created order and would ultimately bow before the Holy One of Glory.

So no, I’m not afraid of a movie like Disclosure Day. What should concern all of us, including Steven Spielberg, is that Scripture repeatedly teaches that one day everything hidden will be revealed (Matt. 10:26; Mark 4:22; Luke 12:2–3; 1 Cor. 4:5).

One day, all that is hidden…will be disclosed.

If extraterrestrial life were ever confirmed, it would not dethrone God or undo the Gospel. It would simply mean that God’s creation is larger and more astonishing than we imagined.

1 Comment

Filed under Aliens, Movie review

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | April 15, 2026 · 3:41 pm

My Initial Thoughts After Reading the Quran

Does the Quran intimidate you?
Do you worry that reading it might somehow weaken your Christian faith?

I understand that concern. But having begun reading it for myself, I want to pause and offer an honest assessment—not as a final verdict, but as a thoughtful set of early observations.

One book needs a sword. The other IS a Sword.

One Book Needs a Sword. The Other Is a Sword.

That line captures my instinct so far—but it needs explanation.

1. On Beauty and Readability

Reading the Qur’an in English, I do not find it beautiful in the way I expected. It does not strike me as rich, layered, or narratively compelling like the Bible often does.

Now, to be fair, Muslims would strongly object here—and not without reason. The Qur’an’s primary claim to beauty lies in its original Arabic form, not its translation. Even some non-Muslim scholars acknowledge its rhetorical power in that language.

Still, as an English reader, my impression stands: it does not read as something extraordinary.

2. Repetition and Tone

The Qur’an is highly repetitive. Core themes—belief, disbelief, judgment, obedience—appear again and again.

In an oral culture, repetition makes sense. It reinforces memory and emphasis.

But as a modern reader, the repetition can feel less like structured teaching and more like constant reassertion. The same warnings and claims return so frequently that it raises a natural question:

Why the need to restate the same points so often?

3. Treatment of Women and Social Order

There are passages that, at face value, seem to place women in a subordinate role and permit forms of discipline within marriage (such as Qur’an 4:34).

There are also references to slavery and to relationships with those “in one’s possession.”

Now, these are debated areas:

  • Some argue these verses regulated existing practices, not endorsed them absolutely
  • Others argue they reflect a moral framework that is difficult to reconcile with modern ethics

At the very least, these texts demand careful and honest examination. They are not as easily dismissed—or defended—as some might suggest.

4. Familiar Stories, Limited Development

The Qur’an repeatedly references biblical figures—Abraham, Moses, Jesus—but often in abbreviated or fragmented ways.

Rather than expanding on these narratives, it seems to assume prior knowledge and then reuse select elements.

To me, this gives the impression not of deeper revelation, but of partial familiarity—as though the stories are known, but not fully developed in this context.

5. A Text in Conversation with Its Critics

One of the most striking features is how often the Qur’an addresses opposition directly.

The Muhammad is accused within the text of:

  • inventing the message
  • being taught by others
  • being a poet or madman

And the Qur’an responds—frequently.

This creates a pattern:

  • accusation
  • denial
  • reassertion of divine authority
  • warning or challenge

It reads less like a detached theological work and more like a real-time exchange with skeptics.

6. Authority and Assurance

The Qur’an strongly emphasizes obedience:

  • believe
  • pray
  • give
  • do good

At the same time, it also speaks of God guiding whom He wills.

This creates a tension between:

  • human responsibility
  • divine determination

That tension isn’t unique to Islam—it exists in Christian theology as well—but it is very present here and worth deeper study.

7. The Nature of “Truth”

Truth is repeatedly referenced in the Qur’an, but often in a way that assumes agreement rather than builds a case step-by-step.

The central claims seem to be:

  • God is one
  • the Qur’an is from God
  • Muhammad is His messenger

Those are asserted with authority, but not always argued in a way a modern reader might expect.

8. A Self-Aware, Self-Defending Text

Perhaps the most noticeable characteristic is this:

The Qur’an frequently reaffirms its own authority, especially in the face of doubt.

That doesn’t automatically discredit it—but it does define its method. Its primary validation is internal, not external.

That stands in contrast to how many readers experience the Bible, which often presents its claims through narrative, history, and eyewitness testimony.

Final Thoughts (For Now)

I am still reading. These are not final conclusions.

But I would say this:

  • The Qur’an is not something Christians should fear reading
  • It is a text that invites scrutiny because it repeatedly addresses scrutiny itself
  • And engaging it directly is far more valuable than forming opinions at a distance

Whatever one ultimately concludes about it, the honest path forward is the same:

Read it. Think carefully. And test every claim.

Leave a comment

Filed under Islam, Quran, Reading

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | April 12, 2026 · 8:08 pm

Christian Democrats: Balancing Faith and Politics

Preface

Before we go any further, understand that I am writing primarily to those who identify as both Christian AND Democrat. You can be one or the other, or you can be both, but it’s really intended for those who claim Jesus as Lord and the Democrat Party of the United States as their political camp.

Also, it is not my intention to discuss whether or not a true Christian can be a Democrat. How one decides to vote is completely up to him. As we often say, it’s a free country.

Are You Really a Christian?

So, let’s start with the most basic question. Are you really a Christian?

Don’t try to skirt the question. Don’t try to redirect. It shouldn’t be a problem for you to answer in the simplest of terms. It’s either a “yes” or a “no.”

If you are already feeling the need to qualify your answer for fear of offending someone or getting cancelled, I see a big, red flag.

If you are a Christian, you are a follower of the historical crucified-and-risen Jesus Christ. It means you have believed Him to be the Son of God, the Word of God made flesh, and the Redeemer of your soul. It means you identify with Christ and seek to become more like Him.

You are NOT a genuine Christian if you believe all it takes is to be born in America and eat at Chik-fil-a. If you would like to be sure, please refer to my article.

What Christians Do

Only God knows your heart, but if you are a follower of Jesus Christ, then you naturally want to obey His commands If you are a Christian, becoming more like Jesus is a natural process of spiritual maturity that can be seen by all.

But what about government? What about those in authority over us? Does the Bible have anything to say about how a Christian should address those that occupy the White House?

I urge you, first of all, to pray for all people. Ask God to help them; intercede on their behalf, and give thanks for them. Pray this way for kings and all who are in authority so that we can live peaceful and quiet lives marked by godliness and dignity. This is good and pleases God our Savior, who wants everyone to be saved and to understand the truth. For, There is one God and one Mediator who can reconcile God and humanity–the man Christ Jesus. – 1 Timothy 2:1-5 NLT

So that leads me to the main point of writing: Do you pray for President Donald J. Trump?

What Democrats Do

It takes no effort at all to find those who hate Donald Trump. It’s not only Democrats, but also some Republicans. There’s even a name for the level of pathological hatred that has consumed the Democrat Party and leftists of all stripes for the past decade. It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Democrats HATE Trump. Democrats HATE him more than they love America.

Before Trump became President, the Democrats said something needed to be done about the border, illegal drugs, violent crime, and a nuclear-equipped Iran. The moment Trump addressed these issues, Democrats; took the side illegal aliens; condemned the use of force against murderous drug cartels; labeled our police as terrorists; and defended the sovereign rights of those sworn to our destruction.

When Trump is for it, the Democrats are against it. When he condemns it, they praise it. It’s as predictable as rain.

What a Christian Democrat SHOULD Do

Do I even need to say it? Isn’t it obvious by now? If you call yourself a Christian, regardless of party affiliation, Jesus demands you submit to authority, pray for your enemies, love your neighbor, and even if he is a king, pray for your President.

As it is, rampant, illogical, and a seething hatred for Donald Trump that defies all reason is the motivating force behind everything the Democrat Party does. And it is not just the Party, per se. It is the rank-and-file Democrat, too!

Friend, if you cannot find any good in President Trump, yet you can see the positives in people like Bill Clinton, Hugo Chaves, trans school shooters, and Luigi Mangione, then your hate has blinded your heart and seared your common sense.

Love, Not Hate

Before I finish, may I remind you that Scripture is very clear about something?

Are you familiar with the concept of knowing people “by their fruit”? If so, there is a list of “fruit” which every real Christian who follows Jesus should produce. They are called the “fruits of the Spirit” because they are supernaturally produced by the Holy Spirit in the Christian’s life.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. – Galatians 5:22-23 KJV

It is really pretty simple. If you are a Christian, you should exhibit fruit that is commensurate with a changed heart. If you are a Christian Democrat, then you should be a Democrat who exhibits the same fruit.

Hate is a bitter fruit. A bitter fruit, indeed.

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , ,

by | February 24, 2026 · 10:49 pm

Theological Differences: Born Again vs. Salvation

Thank you for reading this. I’m trying something a little different here. I am speaking into text while at work, so I will most certainly need to edit this later. If you find anything totally crazy or uncharacteristic, please extend a little grace—or kindly let me know.

The last thing I want to do is make a theological assertion that crosses into heresy.

Some of my Calvinist and Reformed friends (and I could rightly call them brethren) will likely never read this. I wish they would. The ones who do rarely comment, perhaps for fear of starting a debate.

Let me be clear: I do not want to debate, argue, fight, hurt feelings, or start a war. None of that advances the cause of Christ (2 Timothy 2:24–25).

But I do want to address what appears to me to be an inconsistency in the way many of my Calvinist friends present the gospel. I doubt they are aware of it. If they are, that would be more concerning.

Let me explain.

A Little Personal Background

The first 26 years of my life were spent in churches that identified as IFB (Independent Fundamental Baptist). My father was a preacher and pastor. My mother was always the pianist or organist. If the church doors were open—even for cleaning—I was there.

Because of that upbringing, I am deeply familiar with the words of Jesus to Nicodemus:

“Ye must be born again.” (John 3:7)

Those words were printed on tracts, painted above pulpits and choirs, and preached in countless sermons. Everyone knew what they meant. They were synonymous with being “saved.”

Jesus came “to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10).
He came as the propitiation for our sins (1 John 2:2), the Lamb of God (John 1:29), so that we might be reconciled to the Father (2 Corinthians 5:18–19).

It is no wonder that “Ye must be born again” became a well-worn phrase among those who could sing all 50 verses of Just As I Am during an invitation.

When Nicodemus was confused—imagining a second physical birth—Jesus gently corrected him:

“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” (John 3:7)

The new birth was not a return to the womb, but the work of the Spirit:

“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” (John 3:6)

What “Born Again” Means in Baptist Theology

Whether IFB or now SBC (which I am), Baptists have never implied that being born again involves re-entering a physical womb. Rather, we teach that to be saved, one must be born again.

The phrases are interchangeable.

To be born again is:

  • To become a new creature (2 Corinthians 5:17)
  • To pass from death unto life (John 5:24)
  • To be adopted into the family of God (Romans 8:15)
  • To be redeemed (Ephesians 1:7)
  • To be grafted in (Romans 11:17)
  • To be justified (Romans 5:1)

We are not saved by baptism or by partaking of communion.
We are not saved by works, “lest any man should boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9).

We are saved by grace, through faith in Jesus Christ.
And once saved, we are secure (John 10:28–29).

Spirit baptism places us into Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13), and water baptism pictures that reality.

In short, in this theological framework, being born again is salvation.

The Calvinist Distinction

Here is where the tension arises.

In Calvinist theology, being born again is not synonymous with being saved. It is the prerequisite to salvation.

Regeneration precedes faith.

In that system, one does not believe and then receive new life. Rather, one receives new life so that he can believe.

The terms are not interchangeable.

Yet when listening to a Reformed Baptist or Presbyterian preacher call sinners to repentance—to “seek and save the lost,” to “compel them to come in” (Luke 14:23)—you will often hear the same words:

“Ye must be born again.”

But here is my question: is that consistent with their theology?

If a Calvinist were to frame his appeal strictly according to his system, it might sound something like this:

“If you have been regenerated by God, you will believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as evidence that you were chosen before the foundation of the world” (cf. Ephesians 1:4).

But that is not how the appeal is typically made.

Instead, the language used is almost identical to that of the non-Calvinist evangelist.

Where the Difference Shows

The greatest visible difference between the Calvinist and the non-Calvinist emerges in the appeal to the lost.

The non-Calvinist genuinely believes the lost man can respond. He urges him to repent (Acts 17:30), to believe (Acts 16:31), to receive the free gift of salvation (Romans 6:23). He speaks to him as one who is spiritually dead but able—by grace—to respond to the gospel call.

The Calvinist, however, believes the lost man cannot respond unless first regenerated.

Yet the language in the pulpit often sounds the same.

My concern is this: if regeneration and salvation are not the same thing in one’s theology, should they be spoken of as though they are?

A Plea for Consistency

I write this with hope—not hostility.

If a professing Calvinist happens to read this, perhaps he might consider whether using one set of terms in one setting while defining them differently in another creates confusion.

At best, it may be inconsistent.
At worst, it may blur important theological distinctions.

We owe the lost clarity.
We owe our brethren honesty.
And we owe Christ precision in the proclamation of His gospel (Titus 2:7–8).

11 Comments

Filed under baptist, Theology

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

by | January 25, 2026 · 10:16 pm

15 Signs You’re Not from Minnesota

I’m Giving In

Before I started recording on YouTube, I did a lot more writing.

And before I started creating content for video, I used to tackle issues of the day on a more regular basis.

Neither one of my YouTube channels have a format open to my thoughts on current events and complicated social issues. They are geared either to Bible study and/or preaching or watch-related material.

Nonetheless, here I can say what I really think. Here I am free to express my feelings more freely and with transparent honesty.

So, I am now giving in to the call of the commentary starved. Yes, even though nobody has asked for my opinion, I’m going to give it. How else are those hungry for more opinions going to survive?

The Crazies

Why is it that most of the country can look at what is going on in the State of Minnesota and see what those living there can’t? Do they not realize that they are becoming the very definitions of every kind of crazy one can think of?

Have you ever heard of the term “Walmartian”? That’s not Wal-Martian, like a price saving alien from Mars. No, it’s a name that has been given to the most stereotypical examples of Wal-Mart shoppers whose water has been tainted for generations.

You know a Walmartian when you see a Wal-Mart shopper that causes you to look away, then look back, then look away again only to tell your neighbor to look without looking. They ain’t normal.

Well, it seems that we have found the source of the polluted gene pool from which Walmartians drink – it’s Minnesota.

How to Tell You Are Not from Minnesota (and probably not a Crazy)

Early in my life I was little embarrassed of my country/hillbilly/redneck upbringing in the mountains of Tennessee. However, eventually I grew up and out of the culturally imposed shame. Now, because of Minnesota, I am thrilled to know where my ancestors copulated!

But how do I know none of my forefathers and foremothers ever drank of the same polluted water that’s obviously quenching the thirst of screeching gender-confused protesters out west? Easy!

Here are 15 Things I DO NOT DO that prove I, nor my America-loving ancestors, never came from Minnesota.

  1. I do not support relocating pirates to my hometown.
  2. I have never had the desire nor inclination to change my hair color to pink, purple, or blue.
  3. I do not consume illegal substances.
  4. I do not hire unsavory individuals to tattoo my face with offensive images or language.
  5. I do not put myself in harm’s way by intentionally entering into the danger zone where law enforcement officers are attempting to arrest a known criminal.
  6. I do not harbor criminals, nor do I assist them in fleeing from law enforcement.
  7. I do not threaten to start a second Civil War when I know how the first one turned out.
  8. I do not enter places of worship claiming it is my right to interfere with the rights of others.
  9. I do not use my vehicle to block roads.
  10. I do not use my vehicle as a weapon against law enforcement.
  11. I do not spit on other people, especially those who are allowed by law to use deadly force when threatened.
  12. I do not get into fights with police.
  13. I do not hate capitalism and propose to “tear down the system.”
  14. I do not have Trump Derangement Syndrome.
  15. I do not think Hillary Clinton should have been President.

I could have kept going, but the list would be too long to read in one sitting. Just know that what I didn’t include are automatically covered because I bathe regularly, worship a biblical Jesus, and have job that does not include community organizing.

So, Minnesota has been on my mind. Thankfully, I still have enough IQ points not deducted by listening to Tampon Tim and Ilhan Omar.

3 Comments

Filed under current events, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | December 22, 2025 · 8:49 pm

If You’re NOT a Bot, PROVE You’re Not

This might seem a little strange, but since I have been receiving sooooooo many more views over the last several months, I would REALLY appreciate if you could either like a post (like this one), leave a comment, or both.

Oh, and subscribing to one of my YouTube channels would be WONDERFUL, TOO!!

If you want to know a little bit more about being a follower of Jesus Christ, check out The Humble Word.

If you would like to follow my watch collecting journey and learn more about watches, then go to my channel called The Humble Horologist.

Thanks!

Merry Christmas, too!!

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

by | December 22, 2025 · 2:25 pm

Understanding LUCA, Our 138-millionth Grandparent

Several days ago, an article was published by Popular Mechanics and posted online by MSN.com. The title was: “All life on Earth comes from one single ancestor. And it’s so much older than we thought.“

This story is about a lengthy research paper published back in July of 2024 by an international group of scientists. Here’s the citation, should you need some reading material before you go to sleep.

Moody, E.R.R., Álvarez-Carretero, S., Mahendrarajah, T.A. et al. The nature of the last universal common ancestor and its impact on the early Earth system. Nat Ecol Evol 8, 1654–1666 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-024-02461-1

Look, I’m gonna be completely honest… I could barely understand anything these people (in the actual study) were saying. I sucked in biology (and math). When it came to scientific experiments, the only ones I enjoyed were the ones that involved rapid exothermic reaction and fragmentation, but those were not conducted in controlled environments and it’s just possible a few laws were broken (but that’s the nature of the redneck life).

So, upon reading some of the research material and upon viewing several of the very complicated charts, it became clear that I am in no position to argue the science. These guys could think circles around me and correctly pronounce words I can’t even spell. In comparison, I’m a dummy.

However…..

How is it that my 138-millionth grandparent (based on generational averages and 4.2 billion years), LUCA, came to be? I am not really sure that’s explained, but like I said earlier, I’m a dummy.

Probabilistic estimates of metabolic networks from modern life that were present in LUCA.

But how is it that LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor), although the first of a long line of my ancestors, didn’t just pop into existence, but popped into a system already in place to not only to support LUCA’s life, but for LUCA to have purpose?

Consider the following excerpt from the scientific paper’s abstract (italics added):

Our results suggest LUCA was a prokaryote-grade anaerobic acetogen that possessed an early immune system. Although LUCA is sometimes perceived as living in isolation, we infer LUCA to have been part of an established ecological system. The metabolism of LUCA would have provided a niche for other microbial community members and hydrogen recycling by atmospheric photochemistry could have supported a modestly productive early ecosystem.

I don’t know about you, but something sounds a little strange. Maybe it’s the dummy in me thinking out loud. Didn’t the Popular Mechanics tell us that “All life on earth comes from one common ancestor…“? Then what am I to make of “an established ecological system“? I mean, honestly, how did this system come to be? How long did it take to get “established” and how did the “community members” get by without LUCA?

I’m beginning to wonder if Susan Vega is somewhere behind this. Reference too vague?

Well, one thing’s for sure, and it’s not that LUCA got a black eye by being clumsy (see earlier vague reference). Somebody needs to do in investigation to find out where LUCA’s community went! If all life on earth came from our 138-millionth ancestor, I first grandparent might have been the very first serial killer!

But don’t listen to me, I don’t know anything. It’s just, I mean, you know…

Systems are not random. Non-life can’t produce life. Something can’t come from nothing, for if it did, that nothing would be something. And as best I can tell, the Genesis account of human life (my real ancestors) does describe a first ancestor entering an already established ecosystem. Interesting, eh?

Just thought I’d share. Have a blessed day!

2 Comments

Filed under Apologetics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,