The Ordination of Uncle Zeke

Down in the deep south lived a colored man known in his county as “Uncle Zeke.” He became a Christian and began to give his testimony and fill the pulpits of some of the churches in that area. He decided that if he was going to be a preacher, he should be ordained. Accordingly the preachers were called together in a council and ordination proceeded to get under way.

One of the preachers asked the question, “Uncle Zeke, does you know de Bible?”

“Does I know de Bible! Man, I knows de Bible from lid to lid and I knows de lid too, cause it says ‘Holy Bible.’”

Another preacher asked, “What’s yo’ favorite book of de Bible?”

“Well, I likes de book of Luke de best cause it contains de parable of de good Samaritan.”

“One of the preachers said, “Suppose you tells us the story of de good Samaritan.”

“Oh, yeah, there was a man going down de road from Jerusalem to Jericho. As he went down de road, he fell amon thieves and immediately de thorns rose up and choke him a hundred fold: but the angel of the Lawd strove with him and sit him free. Now about that time the Queen Aseba, she come by and give that man 30 pieces of silver. With that 30 pieces of silver he went out and bought hisself a schariot. He got in de schariot and drove furiously until he come to Jupurant tree which he caught his hair in de branches der of and der he hung many days and many nights, and the ravens brought him food ta eat and water ta drink. Till finally, one night Delilah come cut his hair off; and when he fell, he fell on stony ground- some 30 fold, some 60 fold, and some a hundred fold. “When he looked up, he saw a cloud what wudn’t no beggah than a mustard seed. And it commenst to rainin’ forty days and forty nights. But de Lawd prepared za great fish what swallowed him up for de duration of de great tribulation. Now when de seven years was complete that fish spit him out. When de Lawd had done fed him on manna and quail, he came up out of de cave and when he looked down he saw a great big giant- yeah, it was Golia, but he passed by on de other side. “As he went down the road further there was a man what told him to come get his supper. He said, ‘Man, I can’t come git my supper. I married a wife and I can’t come.’ That man went into de highways and byways and compel him git his supper. After he had eaten sumptiously, he said, ‘Did not my heart burn within me?’ “And he perceeded down the road and came to Jercho. He seen Jezebel up in de winder. He looked around and said, ‘Who is on de Lawd’s side?’ They said, ‘We is!’ He said, ‘Fling her down boys,’ and they flang her down. He said, ‘Flang her down again, boys,’ and they flang her down again. He said, ‘Flang her down again.’ and they flang he down again. He said, ‘Flang her down again!’ They took that gal to the top of the pinnacle of the Temple, and they flang that gal down 70 times 7, and of the fragments that remained, they picked up twelve baskets full.

“Now, they’s just one question I’d like to ask this council.”

“Uh, what that, Uncle Zeke?”

“Who’s wife she gonna be in the last days of judgment?”
Comment: I heard this for the first time this morning. Source . Image source


Same winning players but a bit different

  • Obviously I opened up columns G and H
  • White Knight posted at F5 provided cover
  • Note nice protection by the White Pawns
  • Black King was forced from his corner and into checkmate


Are Science and Faith Compatible?

  • Concept 1: Atheism is Self-Denying
    ... when an atheist reaches the conclusion that scientific naturalism is true, his conclusion has only the illusion of truth. Chemicals in the brain are responsible for the conclusion. Free will choice is an illusion according to scientific naturalism, there is no way to know what is true. According to atheism, a Christian has no choice but to believe in Christianity. It is just the specific mechanical unfolding of chemicals that created his Christian belief—a biochemical illusion. Same for any other worldview, including atheism. In any biochemical illusion of a thought conclusion, there may be programming influences from family, culture, and so forth, but they are also a part of this predetermined mechanical unfolding of chemicals ultimately resulting in the neurochemicals masquerading as the free will choice to decide upon a worldview. When we receive information that influences how we see the world, there is still no choice of how we will respond to that influence because everything, including thought and choice, is a result of a mechanical unfolding of chemicals. The influence is just another player in the illusion of volition. In the atheist’s philosophy of scientific naturalism, the processes of the physical world are chemically rigged from the beginning without any room for free will conclusions about what is or is not true. The problem for the atheist then becomes obvious: Any claim to truth must make an appeal beyond the deterministic unfolding of chemicals, posited by scientific naturalism. Otherwise, without transcendent validation, that truth conclusion is an illusion with no objective reliability, a simple result of ages of undirected chemical reactions. Scientific naturalism is logically self-denying. Atheism cannot rely upon its own conclusions because those conclusions would necessarily be only illusions of thought according to the limitations of scientific naturalism. Illusions are not reliable for suppositions of truth.
  • Concept 2: The Cosmological Conundrum
    If the universe has not always existed, then something had to bring it into existence. It is illogical to say that the universe could create itself because it was not around in the beginning. Nothing cannot make something.
  • Concept 3: The Programming Paradox
    We cannot expect such a designed program code to write itself by accident through random chemical events in nature any more than we could expect intelligent functional software to happen by accident without the intelligence of software programmers. There must be a Programmer for these biological software codes just as there must be a programmer for computer software codes. Furthermore, a designed code by definition indicates a personal designer, as does any deliberate design. Deliberation necessitates personal mind as well. Blind neo-Darwinian mechanisms cannot explain information that is necessary in every living cell from the very beginning of life, created fully operational!


Twice in one day

  • The effectiveness of the Black Bishop was neutralized by White Pawn at E3
  • Corridor column G was opened up 
  • Permitting White Rooks to trap the Black King into mate
  • Black never threatened 
  • Had Black Pawn advanced from H6 to H5, Black King could have escaped

I've seen this one before

A bit like


  • Note: I looked back at my victories and this one is unique to me.
  • Nice White Pawn defense
  • Black Bishop immobilized by having 7 Pawns on White spaces
  • Nice positioning of the Knight at F6: On a White space (immune from Bishop attack) and protected by Pawns


John Walvoord on "Sin"

  1. Thirty-Three Words for Sin in the New Testament Part 1
  2. Thirty-Three Words for Sin in the New Testament Part 2
  3. Thirty-Three Words for Sin in the New Testament Part 3

Victory before Dawn

  • I lost one Rook to Black Bishop
  • Nice Pawn defense and ...
  • Knight advance (well-protected)
  • Black Queen was rendered infective and never captured a piece
  • This game is unique for me as I almost always trade Queens early in a game


Saturday Win

  • Not my first win today - this just before dinner
  • My final move - didn't realize it would be a Checkmate move 
  • Thought I would pick up the Black Pawn at G7


Managed a Draw

  • I would have lost had I not kept Black King in Check
  • I fell behind in Pawns and then
  • Wasn't able to keep Black from Pawn promotion
  • How Draw was forced: White Rook G8-G7 and back