World View

Objectivity

Subscribe to RSS feed

Bible Vs. Science

Originally a comment I made to an article entitled "Washington Post Poll Claims Majority in Bible Belt State Support Gay Marriage," form a news website named The Christian Post.
http://m.christianpost.com/news/washington-post-poll-claims-majority-in-bible-belt-state-support-gay-marriage--96020/
Comments originally on a Facebook post which are to numerous to recite here.

After reading all of the comments here, several things stand out: 1) There are two basic groups here, one group that trusts in man (Science) as the highest authority, and the other that trusts in God (Holy Bible) as the highest authority. These are the two cited sources of authority supporting the arguments.

2) Also there is the volleying back and forth of truth and supposed truth. I say truth and supposed truth because of the disagreement. If all here were speaking truth there would be no disagreement as all truth is self agreeing. In other words truth is never in conflict with truth. Truth only conflicts with non truth, a construct outside of reality also known as a lie. Supposed truth is by default within the category of a construct lacking the total reality to define it as truth though it may have some component of truth it is not truth if tainted in the slightest. To use Biblical metaphor, this is why God by definition, who is perfect is also called Truth. Because there is no taint in God or in truth as they are one in the same. Satan, the Biblical nemeses prime of God was part of truth that became corrupted. Once the chief angel named Lucifer; God's most glorious creation before man was created, himself wanted to be coequal with God. His rebellion cost him his position, name and home. Now, Satan is twisted truth or the father of lies.

3) It is evident that truth has a quality that enables it to stand alone. It is not dependent upon interpretation to give it legs to stand if you will, rather truth gives the legs their ability. Truth is also not altered by natural forces including time. In the summation (2+2=4) which is true; it's nature of truth can never be altered by anything. Neither cosmic forces, denial, ignorance or time itself can change or somehow alter the nature that two plus two equates to four. Because of this, truth is eternal. It has always existed and will continue long after the universe.
Truth therefore has not been created by man, it can only be sought, discovered, acknowledged and received. Conversely, it can not be sought, missed, ignored or denied.

4) It is evident that man is not a perfect eternal creature (present state) but a limited, corrupted one. It stands to reason that man could not have created truth as nothing imperfect can create that which is perfect. Therefore, man can only accept or deny truth. Man cannot be depended upon for the sole source of knowledge as it is beyond man.

5) Science is man's imperfect methodology in search of truth or that which is perfect when honestly approached. Because it is man's methodology, by definition it is imperfect and therefore cannot be cited as a sole authority. It only has credibility when in agreement with truth. Because it is imperfect it is subject to scrutiny and change when unforseen truth illuminates it where it was once dark. Discoveries in science are arrived at through testing of physical material through physical processes. Conclusions are drawn from empirical data of results of the behavior of the tested processes with limited knowledge. Science is therefore limited and does not speak to all things as in that which is beyond the physical and natural or the spiritual and supernatural. There is a school of thought among scientists of not accepting the supernatural. Science however did not lead to that thought process as it does not speak to that area. It is a prejudice of only accepting the familiar, or nature, and rejecting the unfamiliar or super-nature. That belief however is not scientifically drawn through data as the the supernatural is not scientifically testable. It is a personal assertion based upon a preference. It is an act of faith.
It is reasonable to assert the existence of the supernatural as it possess the quality of truth. Truth is the brigade of both realms. It is therefore reasonable to cite the Bible as an authority of truth as it has uniquely withstood all assaults of it's integrity as concerns truth.

6) Science, when approached properly leads to truth within physical processes. It is therefore not in conflict with truth or the Bible. It is only the conclusions that some scientists have purported which were beyond the realm of science that conflict with the Bible. Evolution is a perfect example of this. Evolution is not testable, therefore conclusions drawn about it are not science, they're philosophical. This is why it is called the theory of evolution, not the law or fact of evolution.

7) Because science is limited knowledge and therefore subject to change as is evidenced by the history of science, it is reasonable to conclude science doesn't yet have a full grasp of the human genome or the supposed "gay gene." Even if it did that doesn't negate that homosexuality is the adverse condition that evolutionists would claim natural selection is in the process of eliminating, if you accept that theory. Homosexuality would tend toward the extinction of the human species not it's preservation. Homosexuality is therefore nature's adverse condition not a preferable one.

8) There is only one preference for homosexuality and that is the human will. The will is so powerful that often neither fact, evidence, truth or God himself can penetrate it. It takes humility to see and accept truth which is why children often can and adults can't.
This was something Jesus addressed when he said:

"Blessed are the pure in heart, For they shall see God." Matthew 5:8 NKJV

And, they shall see truth!




New Covenant Doesn't Mean New Everything

Evidently some Christians have oversimplified the old and new covenant. This is partially due to some bad teaching in the church and partially due to not studying the Word carefully on their own. They express the belief that if something is not mentioned in the New Testament that it's no longer valid like tithing. God's truth didn't change with a new dispensation , his truths are seamless and timeless. Only the agreement with man changed. Jesus fulfilled two main requirements of the old covenant which are: 1.) Complete obedience to every Command or the law, and 2.) the requirement of penalty for sin which is death. Jesus accomplished both therefore he fulfilled the covenant which man could not do. The covenant had to be fulfilled by man as it was an agreement between God and man. This is why the Word of God came in the form of a man which was Jesus. What was done away with was the old covenant and what that covenant was established upon which was the animal blood sacrifices to cover man's sin. A new covenant was drawn, also in blood, the blood of Jesus. The old covenant wasn't based on God's law which was given to man in the form of commandments, but the sacrifice, though the commandments or law was part of the covenant. God gave man the law to show us what his standard of righteousness is so that when we erred from that standard we would know we had sinned and God could point out our sin. He did this because he is just and will not hold us to sin without giving us the standard for that sin. The law was not meant to save us but to show us that we needed a savior and that man couldn't save himself, that it was impossible with his sin nature. He established the old covenant to cover our sin, not abolish it. Abolition of sin came with the covenant of grace with the forgiveness of sin.
God's principles are part of his character so they are eternal because he is eternal. One of the principles is the principle of giving and receiving or sewing and reaping. This is based on love (God's character) not upon a blood covenant. This is why God's character, principles, and law did not change between the old and new covenants. The only change was in anything that was involved in fulfilling that covenant. The law was present before the sacrificial system and is present after. Many churches today don't teach covenant they only foccus on grace. Grace is the key, however it's built on God's character and you have to understand his character to understand grace. If you don't you will inadvertantly abuse His grace and his people. It's not just about God loving you, but also about you loving God. That is relationship and God's love and grace is received, expressed and understood in this context. When you love God, like David did, you seek Him out, you want to know Him, and you want to know and carry out his will. If you you are looking for ways that you can keep your distance and keep your life, keep your time, your increase or tithe, and blessings all to yourself then you haven't died enough to self to the point of being able to submit to His will and you will find yourself looking to justify avoiding it.

What Kingdom Do You Submit To?

I was thinking a few days ago about John Lennon and his song. "Imagine" as well as his declaration to America in 1967 that, "the Beatles are more popular than Jesus Christ." Many Americans became outraged at Lennon's statement and that was the beginning of the end of the Beatles. A few short years after that they were no longer a band as in the U.S. they lost many of their supporters. A few years after the Beatles breakup John Lennon was assasinated by a man (albeit deranged) who believed he was on a mission from God.

I couldn't help but wonder that if Christians today would be indignant if they heard a declaration of that sort. Never mind secular society; I can confidently say it wouldn't bother them in the least. So what has taken place in America that in less than forty years we've gone from being a predominatly Bible believing nation to a Bible despising nation? How could that happen so quickly? I believe the church in general, out of the fear of apearing bigoted, racist, and intolerant, in the US has sold out and caved into the demands of an agnostic, humanistic culture, that has been more loud, vocal, and demanding than Christians thusly reshaping America into their vision. The church has idly sat by as the humanists have also been reshaping the church. Many Christians, as they call themselves, have not been transformed by the renewing of their minds through the Word of God; rather they have subscribed to a gospel of Humanism and caved into the pressure of the dominant influences in their lives as they feel the need to espouse the ever evolving value systems in this realm in order to be successful. Those influences would be the education system, the social order to include family and friends, the fianancial/market system (work and related), and the media. Also the breakdown of the traditional family which once cradled and nurtured a person to prepare and instill within them an arsanal to contend with the assaults from life in it's many varied forms. I shudder to think that the churchs have caved to the temptation that Christ eschewed when Satan tempted him with the kingdoms of this world, Those kingdoms of course being what I afore mentioned. In the dialogue twixt Jesus and Satan looky:

Mat 4:8-11
8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. 10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan:for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. 11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.

Satan hasn't changed his game. His temptations are still the same. Are you going to not live by bread alone but by EVERY WORD that proceedeth from the mouth of God...or not?

Inspired by this article.
http://m.christianpost.com/news/immigration-and-the-whatever-state--93913/

False Sense Of Security

This scripture in one sense, since I've been a Christian has always baffled me:

Rev 3:15-16
15 I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot!
16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.



I think the reason that it baffled me was that I always thought of it in terms of God guaging evil. In other words evil is cold towards God and lukewarm is only partially cold towards God, but there is also partial heat, which is good towards God. It confused me that He preferred a greater evil over a lesser evil, or so I thought. The other day while listening to a Christian broadcast which had nothing to do with this topic, something occured to me in an instant: God doesn't prefer straight evil over partial because He isn't guaging degrees of evil as all of our evil, no matter how slight has positioned us at so great a distance from him that in our own effort there is no hope of ever bridging that chasm. What God is guaging is the potential of not closing that distance from Him. What God does prefer is that which positions us at a greater advantage of moving ever closer towards him beginning with the confession of how utterly destitute we are without him. The danger with being lukewarm is that we have a false sense of security that we are well off with God because we are not overtly against Him, but we have become indifferent toward Him which we don't see, and God views that indifference as being against Him. He views our coldness toward him as a mechanism of exposing the truth to us of how much we need Him, how we have no life without him, how there's endless life with him, and how great He loves us.

Could it Happen Here?




In light of the social change happening in America today with a pronounced militant, secular, anti-Christian leaning being propogated by all of the major institutions in the US such as the educational, governmental, entertainment, buisness and social; it's evident that their is a progression toward completely ridding American society of any Godly or Christian influence whatsoever. Though it has been subtle and in the background since the time I believe of the Enlightenment Period picking up momentum with Darwin's evolutionary theory (which brought secular humanism into the education system) it has especially, since the 1960's with the abolishment of prayer in school, increased at an exponential rate. This in turn has sent the message that bringing God into everyday affairs is a fringe practice and not relevent to the problems of society today and requires a more sophisticated (believed to be) set of humanistic knowledge and skill not provided in religion.
I believe the foundation has been set where society has grown ever the more intollerent of Bible believing Christians (Not Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or New Age-ish beliefs) interfering with their goals such as homosexual marriage, abortion on demand, euthanasia, eugenics, infanticide, and all other death practices as well boundaryless morals; that society is on the twighlight of a Christian holocaust such as the world has never seen. Does this excerpt from a website of the beliefs and structure of the Russian Orthodox Church sound familiar at all in light of today's goings on?

By 1918 the government had nationalized all church property, including buildings. In the first five years of the Soviet Union (1922-26), twenty-eight Russian Orthodox bishops and more than 1,200 priests were executed, and many others were persecuted. Most seminaries were closed, and publication of most religious material was prohibited. The next quarter-century saw surges and declines in arrests, enforcement of laws against religious assembly and activities, and harassment of clergy. Antireligious campaigns were directed at all faiths; beginning in the 1920s, Buddhist and Shamanist places of worship in Buryatia, in the Baikal region, were destroyed, and their lamas and priests were arrested (a practice that continued until the 1970s). The League of the Militant Godless, established in 1925, directed a nationwide campaign against the Orthodox Church and all other organized religions. The extreme position of that organization eventually led even the Soviet government to disavow direct connection with its practices. In 1940 an estimated 30,000 religious communities of all denominations survived in all the Soviet Union, but only about 500 Russian Orthodox parishes were open at that time, compared with the estimated 54,000 that had existed before World War I.



If you are a born again Christian and you pray, now is the time to really stat praying for these United States!

http://www.sacred-destinations.com/russia/russian-orthodox-church.htm
[

Chick Flicks





I might be the first guy to admit that I like "chick flicks" (to a point). Last night I watched The Help which is a wonderful film that is very moving and powerful. I mean some would call it a chick flick, but as any of you know that have seen it it's much more than that. If you haven't seen it, you must!
Don't get me wrong, I like "Man movies," but not the ones based on juvenile humor laced with profane situations and language throughout.
It's just that "chick flicks" seem to be more about the human (instead of ego) experience centered around relationship. An example of what I mean are romantic comedies. I love romantic comedies which deal with the complicated issues that affect relationships with comic relief added to ease the tension and be entertaining while still communicating a powerful message about relationships. Most or all of Adam Sandler's films (Mr. Deeds, 51st. Date, Big Daddy) are based on this concept. I love the movie "The Proposal" with Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds where when prejudgment and misunderstanding are worked out the two find love.
I think men are taught by male role models that emotion and showing tenderness equates to weakness and that displaying a hard outer shell and hiding or denying tenderness equates to strength. My father wasn't like this. He didn't model being fake to me so I don't value that. When I see it in men I can't relate and those men usually can't relate to me. I believe real strength is meeting the appropriate situation with the appropriate response. Being able to show tenderness and appreciate it is having strength and being real as it is part of our makeup. I believe the models for being a real man are Jesus and David. Now I
could see Jesus and David going to "chick flicks!"

"

Olive Tree and Branch

I was just listening to the Mike Huckabee radio show and he brought on a guest speaker that talked about the four "apocalyptic" horses of the Obama administration where fundamental changes of our government are well underway and are being swiftly ushered in by Barack. Those changes, according to the guest speaker, whom I happen to agree with, are as follows:

1.) The way Americans view government and it's roll in or lives.
2.) What Americans expect from government and the dependency upon it, i.e. welfare in it's many expressions like free condemns and, I would add, the expectation to be rescued by government agencies (FEMA, etc.) as a primary measure instead of self rescue during natural disasters. "Where's my money? I want my muuuny!"
3.) Foreign Policy. Our position and influence in the world is being weakened by a policy that is downplaying our relationship with Israel and linking arms with anti-American belligerents like Hamas (in Gaza), the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Syrian Rebels (Al Qaeda is known to be in that mix) and Iran by remaining idle.
4.) The right to life issue. You all know what that is. He said abortions were going down, before the Obama administration, but now the tend swinging back the other way.

Something that I thought was very interesting was that the guest speaker himself being Jewish said that the Jewish community in the US is mostly secular, liberal, and actually less suportive of Israel than the Christians who are more concerned about the goings on there and our foreign policy with. Immediately when he said that this scripture came to mind:

Rom 9:3-7
3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: 7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

God however has a salvation plan for (literal) Israel:

Romans 11:1-11 NKJV

I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, “ Lord , they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life”? But what does the divine response say to him? “I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work. What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded. Just as it is written:
“God has given them a spirit of stupor, Eyes that they should not see And ears that they should not hear, To this very day.” And David says: “Let their table become a snare and a trap, A stumbling block and a recompense to them. Let their eyes be darkened, so that they do not see, And bow down their back always.” I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.

Israel is very much on God's heart and agenda therefore it should be very much on the gentile church's which has been engrafted in as a branch to the olive tree.

Cold or Hot Please!



This scripture in one sense, since I've been a Christian has always baffled me:
Rev 3:15-16
15 "I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot!
16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth." (ESV)

I think the reason that it baffled me was that I always though of it in terms of God guaging evil. In other words evil is cold towards God and lukewarm is only partially cold towards God, but there is also partial heat, which is good towards God. It confused me that He preferred a greater evil over a lesser evil, or so I thought. The other day while listening to a Christian broadcast which had nothing to do with this topic, something occured to me in an instant: God doesn't prefer straight evil over partial evil because He isn't guaging degrees of evil as all of our evil, no matter how slight, has positioned us at so great a distance from him that in our own effort there is no hope of ever bridging that chasm. What God does prefer is that which positions us at a greater advantage of moving ever closer towards him beginning with the confession of how utterly destitute we are without him. He views our coldness toward him as a mechanism that He can use to expose the truth to us of how much we need Him, how we have no life without him, how there's endless life with him, and how great He loves us. I was pleasantly surprised to see this expressed in the next verse when I went to these scripture passages to confirm my revelation:

Rev 3:17
17 "For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked." (ESV)

The Lord here is clearely expressing his dissatisfaction of our thought processes and the understanding of our position in Him, not our degree of evil. The danger here lies in our thinking we are close enough to him that we are safe and don't need to pursue any farther. We become comfotable in our security and that's where the danger lies in our attention being diverted to other things more urgent than him. We begin to formulate our walk with him and religion and ritual are birthed. Soon if gone unchecked the religion takes over and becomes more important than our relationship. There are many examples of this in the church today, never mind the world.
I'm not trying to say here that at every given moment we are in danger of loosing our salvation, au contrere; God himself is ever working to cause us to walk in his ways and keep us saved! What I am saying is that he doesn't want us to become complacent to where we are rendered ineffective. God doesn't want us to loose our first love which is being hot! I'm not pointing fingers here, I'm guilty which is probably why the Lord is showing me this, but I thought to share it others in the case someone may be shaken out of lukewarmness like the Lord has been shaking me. May you be shaken so that only that which can't be shaken remains. May you return to your first love, and may you not be lukewarm or even cold, rather, may you be a burning bush!




The Math Adds Up

Hello girls and boys 4+4=8 and 4+3.99 will never equal 8 no matter how close it seems. You can argue it and dress it up all you want but you can never change the sum. You can get a consensus of a majority to agree with you that 7.99 is the same as 8, that it's close enough, but anyone who knows the truth and is reasonable will see right through the consensus no matter how popular or politically correct it is. You're told that you're bigoted, intollerant, rigid, even a hater, and steeped in tradition because you won't tollerate other "truths" like 7.99 =8 because for some people their truth is that 7.99 is also 8. So one is left with a coice: either believe truth (4+4=8) or deny it and believe a lie, but don't really think that 7.99 will ever be the equal to 8 simply because it's fashionable and you prefer it to be.

Holy Land, Holy Cow!



I remember during my trip to Israel, specifically when I was in Jerusalem, I walked up to the Mt. of Olives as it was on my itenerary for that day. When I arrived I was the only one there and I stood there for a few minutes looking at the "old city" (Jerusalem inside the walls). The olive trees are on more of a hill really than a Mountain in spite of the name. There's a chapel there as well where pilgrims and tourists pray and pay homage. Anyway three or four young boys came running in chasing one another and giving the appearance that they were at play. I noticed that they all looked Arabic so I think they were Palestinian. They appeared to be between the ages of six and eight. What I saw next absolutely stunned me! One of the boys picked up a rock a little larger than a golf ball and from about thirty feet away and with the arm of a little league pitcher launched it and hit another one the boys square in the middle of the forehead and almost knocked him out. Immediately blood started pooring down his forehead. The boy stood there for a few seconds in a daze! I thought he was going to fall over. As I ran over to him, I shouted at the little villain kid, "What the hell...get out of here" He and the other two ran away laughing. I thought to myself that there's something terribly wrong with these children.
I went over to the injured boy and removed his t-shirt to use as a compress bandage and put pressure on his wound for several minutes untill the bleeding stopped. The child was scared and crying and babbling a bit in Arabic. I asked him a few times if he spoke English. He just kept on in Arabic, so I don't think he understood me. As I stayed with him for a while he began to calm down and eventually stopped crying. I think he began to feel safe and just looked at me for a while like children do when they know you're looking out for them. I told him a few times that he was going to be alright then after a while sent him on his way. He was one of the boys of about six years old. The whole time no one else came, it was just us two. I'm glad I was there.
I can't help but think that somewhere in Jerusalem today is a man of about thirty that thinks not all Americans are bad and when his friends ask why he says: "have a seat boys, let me tell you a story..."

Its a true story, no exaggeration! It happened just like that. A few other very unique things like that happened during the two weeks that I was there. I wasn't there with an organized tour, but by myself. The first week I was with a buddy from the Army that I ran into in Greece. He was going to Israel as well. I mean this in the best of ways, but sometimes when I hear stories of people who take "Holy Land" tours, how much it costs, where they stay, and what they do, I just kind of laugh. I did it for a lot less and experienced a lot more. What I mean to say is that if you go to Israel, not on a tour, you'll probably see and experience a whole different side because you'll interact with the locals much more.
May 2013
S M T W T F S
April 2013June 2013
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31