This is a concept I have only just recently understood, as in a few days before posting this. It is a simple concept, yet it opened up knowledge to me that is nearly all encompassing. I am still processing the information while making new discoveries. This simple realization taught me more in a few hours than I have probably learned in the last several years.
Now, what is this concept? Pain. Pain, challenge, tribulation, trials, difficulties, etc. I recently understood the significance of it. Also, I realized how even though we were cursed, a blessing was still mixed in there. Because of the Almighty's infinite wisdom, He also included the most powerful way to teach within the changes enacted by our punishment.
The whole concept of accepting pain is something sorely lacking in modern christianity (wow... I made a pun out of that). We are told to expect trials and tribulations, yet shy away from them. If anything, we should be praying for more of them!
The reason I say this, is because when I look back at my life and consider my most painful experiences, they are held in highest esteem. The reason for this is because what I learned from them. When I came out of those troubling times, the change was phenomenal. I want them again, even though I know they paralyzed me with fear or left me curled up on the floor in pain for hours. However, when I stepped away from them, victorious, I looked back at the person I was just hours, or even minutes, before. When I do, I always see the new person as far better.
Understanding the importance of pain has taught me the importance of both pride and humility, and how they have a fine balance.
It taught me how I can become better than the majority of others, and why I will rise above them. But first, I must fall beneath them.
It taught me how I can relate weight lifting to the rest of life in a much stronger way.
It taught me why I am not satisfied with who I am now, and with how to fix that.
It taught me so much, I can't even remember it all now. I was left awake for several hours with these new realizations crashing down on me, one after another.
The most interesting part is just a week or two prior to this, I wrote a post touching on this subject and only now do I fully understand it's meaning. Here is the post for those who are interested: http://spartanlivingblog.com/inspiration-series-part-3-eminems-not-afraid/
If I were relate where I am in life to my interpretation discussed in that video, I would be at the point where I can no longer stand the reflections of myself being shown to me. I am on the verge of shattering those behaviors of my present self who are holding me back. The tension is righting, I am just waiting for the right challenge to come along.
So for those who wish to join me on this new journey of growth and discovery, pray not for lighter burdens, but for broader shoulders. Or better yet, pray for heavier burdens so that you may have broad shoulders. After all, that is how it works.
So even though the worst parts of my life arose from the curse, so did my greatest blessings. I now truly can count all things blessings. I understand why Paul could witness in jail, and why Jesus could ask the Father to forgive his murders while he hung on the cross. They understood pain, and how even amongst the curse, there is blessing yet.
Showing posts with label Curse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Curse. Show all posts
Monday, October 1, 2012
Monday, April 30, 2012
You married your relative
So, was the title catchy enough? Time to get back to my more... philosophical (?) posts now. Aren't all my posts though? Nevermind that.
Now, not everyone who will read this has been married. But something we all must realize is that no matter who you marry... you marry your relative. Whether it's your cousin or a stranger from across the globe. There are multiple ways to look at this and explain this, multiple ways to ponder this concept, so I will choose to look at it through the Bible. What else can you expect?
So, Day 6. There were two people. One male, and one female. 6,000 years later, you have over 7 billion people. That's quite the family there! But looking back, I noticed something interesting. In those early days, not only was it acceptable to marry close relatives, but common. As a matter of fact, there were at least two major times in history (creation and the flood) where it was not only common and acceptable to marry close relatives, but necessary as well.
This is a very interesting thought, considering Moses was told by God that close relatives couldn't marry, yet God made two major instances where that was absolutely vital. Now this seems very strange, a contradiction even. Well, what better reason to ponder the subject?
Everything looks different when you consider genetics. If Adam and Eve are our ultimate ancestors, that means all of the genetic material and variability for all of mankind was built into them. Also, since creation was originally "very good", there would be no faults in their DNA. We also now know that information is lost from generation to generation, and errors build up in the DNA.
A simple example I heard is two dogs, each with a gene for long hair and short hair, mate. They produce some puppies with both genes, but some with only long hair genes and others with only short hair genes. The puppies with only one type of gene have lost information and variability.
This is the same thing that happens when humans reproduce. And when you add in the mistakes and genetic diseases, then when two people with similar (imperfect) DNA reproduce, those mistakes compound on each other. However, early in history, with improved health and perfect DNA, these mistakes at first would be nonexistent, and later come about much more slowly.
It would take so long for these mistakes to manifest themself in a dangerous form, that for thousands of years we could intermarry with no problems. And when you look at the timing of things, it makes sense as well. Moses was told that close relatives couldn't marry about 2,000 years (I believe) after the flood. That's a long time for mistakes to build upon each other. When you consider the fact that intermarriage was allowed, and even made necessary, by God early on, and the effects of the fall on genetics, it actually seems to indicate that marrying a cousin or sibling isn't actually wrong morally. At least that's what I get out of it.
But, of course, times have changed. Now it is dangerous for close relatives to reproduce, because of what could happen to the kids. But before these mistakes existed, what reason would there be to keep close relatives from marrying? When we read the Bible, it seems God simply wants marriage to be between one man and one woman (although He also allowed multiple wives for a time... need to ponder that as well), what difference does it make how closely they are related? Assuming no genetics mistakes, of course.
My conclusion after pondering this issue? Well, we all marry our relatives anyway, what difference does it make how closely they're related to us? So I guess that means... incest isn't actually wrong (on a moral level). At least that's what I get out of it. That was really weird to say...
Now, not everyone who will read this has been married. But something we all must realize is that no matter who you marry... you marry your relative. Whether it's your cousin or a stranger from across the globe. There are multiple ways to look at this and explain this, multiple ways to ponder this concept, so I will choose to look at it through the Bible. What else can you expect?
So, Day 6. There were two people. One male, and one female. 6,000 years later, you have over 7 billion people. That's quite the family there! But looking back, I noticed something interesting. In those early days, not only was it acceptable to marry close relatives, but common. As a matter of fact, there were at least two major times in history (creation and the flood) where it was not only common and acceptable to marry close relatives, but necessary as well.
This is a very interesting thought, considering Moses was told by God that close relatives couldn't marry, yet God made two major instances where that was absolutely vital. Now this seems very strange, a contradiction even. Well, what better reason to ponder the subject?
Everything looks different when you consider genetics. If Adam and Eve are our ultimate ancestors, that means all of the genetic material and variability for all of mankind was built into them. Also, since creation was originally "very good", there would be no faults in their DNA. We also now know that information is lost from generation to generation, and errors build up in the DNA.
A simple example I heard is two dogs, each with a gene for long hair and short hair, mate. They produce some puppies with both genes, but some with only long hair genes and others with only short hair genes. The puppies with only one type of gene have lost information and variability.
This is the same thing that happens when humans reproduce. And when you add in the mistakes and genetic diseases, then when two people with similar (imperfect) DNA reproduce, those mistakes compound on each other. However, early in history, with improved health and perfect DNA, these mistakes at first would be nonexistent, and later come about much more slowly.
It would take so long for these mistakes to manifest themself in a dangerous form, that for thousands of years we could intermarry with no problems. And when you look at the timing of things, it makes sense as well. Moses was told that close relatives couldn't marry about 2,000 years (I believe) after the flood. That's a long time for mistakes to build upon each other. When you consider the fact that intermarriage was allowed, and even made necessary, by God early on, and the effects of the fall on genetics, it actually seems to indicate that marrying a cousin or sibling isn't actually wrong morally. At least that's what I get out of it.
But, of course, times have changed. Now it is dangerous for close relatives to reproduce, because of what could happen to the kids. But before these mistakes existed, what reason would there be to keep close relatives from marrying? When we read the Bible, it seems God simply wants marriage to be between one man and one woman (although He also allowed multiple wives for a time... need to ponder that as well), what difference does it make how closely they are related? Assuming no genetics mistakes, of course.
My conclusion after pondering this issue? Well, we all marry our relatives anyway, what difference does it make how closely they're related to us? So I guess that means... incest isn't actually wrong (on a moral level). At least that's what I get out of it. That was really weird to say...
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Nothing is Evil
I recently implemented something new. On Facebook I started a group called "
De' Tinker's Thoughts: Facebook Discussion Group", and asked the few members I had which post title they wanted me to write on. Well, the vote is in! So here I go...
Nothing is evil. How could that be? Don't we live in an evil world? Isn't evil all around us? What about the wars, the starvation, the lies, etc?
There is more to the saying then that. Maybe this makes more sense: Nothing was evil in it's original created form; or, nothing was created evil.
Whatever it is, it us us humans who make it evil or commit evil actions. Guns aren't evil, they are just a tool. Yet we use them for evil purposes. Eating meat isn't evil, yet we torture animals unnecessarily to get that meat or we intentionally provide low quality meat for people to eat. Even technology! Technology isn't evil, but as with the gun example, it can be used for evil purposes.
For instance, weather control technology. Some of you may not even believe we have the technology to effect the weather on any noteworthy scale. That's fine if you don't believe, it's up to you. Technology like that doesn't sound evil, does it? Well, it's not, whatever you were thinking. However, evidence suggests that this type of technology is responsible for multiple natural disasters and will also be used for a mass deception in the (near) future, with the intent of setting up a One World Government.
That brings me to another point, a Wold Government. Is that evil? Well, the idea itself isn't. However, the methods used to achieve such a government and the reason for that government are. The Almighty confused the languages of man at the tower of Babel when they created a One World Government, with the intention of being their own god. Mankind has always had that goal in mind, and is trying once again to create a modern "Tower of Babel" situation.
Getting away from the "conspiracy theories", here's another example: sex. These days I hear jokes about how Christianity means "if it's fun, stop doing it". In part this joke is talking about this very issue. The original purpose of sex was for pleasure between one man and one woman and to populate the earth. However, we have perverted it from it's original purpose, making most instances evil. Once again, it's not the idea that's evil, but what we do with it. That is why there is rape, adultery, homosexuality, etc. They have perverted the original purpose, in a similar way as was done with technology.
Since everything was originally "very good", any evil must have come afterwards. And of course, any object itself can't be evil anyway, just as an animal or idea can't. We are the ones that cursed creation through our actions, and we pervert and corrupt all of these things.
Of course other issues, such as killing and murder, are a little harder to explain. According to what I hear (to lazy to look it up myself), in the original Hebrew the same word is used for "murder" as is used for "kill". That means the commandment "thou shall not murder" could just as accurately be translated to "thou shall not kill". So does that mean killing isn't evil? Well... as I said, it's a little harder to explain, and I may be wrong on this one.
It is said that death will be the last enemy to be defeated. Also, in original creation there was no death. However, upon further investigation of science, you realized that destruction was both possible and necessary before the Fall. You see, there is a fine balance in creation. Destruction and creation. We can't even see without this balance! As light comes into our eyes, it destroys certain chemicals. When these chemicals break down, it sends an electrical signal to the brain, telling us what we see.
Before the Fall, things were probably balanced differently. Balanced in such a way that there was no net decay, meaning that things could not die of age; or die at all. However, as I said, things changed. So the act of killing also upsets the balance, but adding lots of net decay. This is against God's original plan, for He wanted no death. But we now live in a fallen world, where death not only is possible but happens every minute.
I have not fully answered the problem though, is killing evil? Digging a little deeper, we find Jesus said that even if you are angry with someone in your heart, you committed murder against them (in your own heart). So based off all this, it seems it is really a matter of the heart. Even God commanded the killing of thousands (men, woman, children, even babies). The people that were killed were of a corrupt heart, and this was a punishment. But when we kill someone ourselves, we have no power, right or authority to give them that punishment; except in the case of government (which I will get to in a moment).
An individual on his own does not have this authority by default, but circumstances can present them self, such as getting attacked and taking a life defending yourself. Although you may not have been given the authority to "punish" this person, per se, you were fulfilling a God given instinct of self defense. Things are different when someone is causing you trouble and you hire someone to "silence" them. That is a heart problem right there. Also since man is created in God's image, he also is set apart and special from the rest of creation. Doing something evil towards another human is far different than it is from an animal or plant.
However, governments have been given certain authority from above to make and enforce laws, including the death penalty. This amount of authority has been given to them, to take a life, so it is up to the governments to respect these privileges. No matter how powerful a government becomes, they still answer to a greater power. It is the same for all of us, we each answer to something greater than ourself. In the case of killing and murder, it is a hard concept to clearly understand. You've just seen some of how I think it through.
Ultimately, death and killing isn't part of the plan, but is happening now. We must live with that. But as long as our heart is following God, our actions will lead us away from these evil acts (although we are still fallible humans). This means that it is possible to kill someone and not sin. It is the heart, the intent, that God looks at. This isn't to justify those who fought in the Crusades for "the glory of God", or any other similar circumstances. I merely mean that He will reveal His will if we listen, and there is example after example in the Old Testament where killing was part of that.
The simple answer? No. Killing is not evil (oh boy, is that weird to say!). It is our heart that is evil, and often times we kill because of our evil heart. The origin of evil also has an evil beginning, the Fall and Satan. But death also began there as well, but death is not evil. It is just a balance of nature that is not part of God's ultimate plan. There will come a time where he gives creation it's proper balance, then death and killing will be impossible.
There are many other examples, but this will suffice for now. This post is plenty long. However, I will soon be writing another post talking more about this issue.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
The "Fiction" in "Science Fiction"
I had a few things in mind that I wanted to write about, on completely unrelated topics, but the most recent reading I had done immediately prior to writing this is what I decided to write on. Makes sense, write?
Okay, now what was I reading? Alright, strictly speaking the last article I read before this was about looking for the effects of the Curse in space. But beyond that, the main stuff I've been reading for the last several hours has been on things like aliens, Nephilim, science fiction, ancient technology, genetics of humans, and other things relating to all that.
Explaining the Nephilim and aliens, a friend of mine asked me to write out the back story for a game he's working on. The game is about a battle between humans and aliens in space. He wanted the aliens to attack, and he wanted the humans to have super soldiers. Simple enough, I decided; so I began writing this elaborate (that might be an overstatement, but I did go into good detail) history going back thousands of years.
However, almost immediately I noticed a problem. I wanted my story to be used as possible explanations for UFO sightings for all of human history; but in order to do that, the alien race would have had to have been around before the humans. That means I would have to make this story happen in a universe that existed for more than 6,000-10,000 years. Since this is a sub-creation of mine, I can make whatever laws and history I want, but the fact that I had to change the history of our universe to make it fit with what I needed in this story was a very unique learning experience for me.
I ended up adopting and evolutionary like history for that universe in my sub-creation for this game. How else could aliens evolve on another planet and begin exploring earth while the first civilizations were springing forth? Making a history for that universe that required an old earth and no God of the Bible was very strange for me, but I had to remember that I was making a SUB-CREATION, within the confines of my own mind.
The really strange part was in order for any of this story to be true, I had to write it out while arbitrarily defying the laws of observable science that we see in reality. The aliens? They had to evolve from non-life, and that non-living matter had to come from nothing. Same thing with the humans of earth. Now of course, matter coming from nothing and life coming from non-life are both impossible. But, this IS science fiction I'm writing, so what does it matter!
And I already arbitrarily defied the laws of physics in order to make the universe and life in that sub-creation, why stop there? I allowed both that aliens and humans to eventually overcome the "speed of light barrier". Actually, the aliens did so on at least three occasions. During earth's history, the aliens had several civil wars, the biggest of which set them back centuries in technology, meaning they had to rediscover faster then light travel. It was these set backs that allowed the humans to eventually catch up to the aliens and fight on equal ground, even though the aliens originally had faster then light travel approximately 10,000 years before that time.
Another thing I came to realize while creating this sub-creation, this science fiction universe, was that any absolutes were defined by me (as the writer). At the insistence of my friend, I may arbitrarily change any of those absolutes in order to make the physics and history of that universe fit with what he needs for his game. But of all the absolutes I can define, they obviously include things like physics (in which I already decided life can and needs to come from non-life and faster than life travel is possible), but I am also the only one who can define any moral absolutes in that universe.
In our universe, as it was created by an All Powerful God, He defines all absolutes. That means the laws of physics, mathematics, logic, reason, morals, etc. In this universe I created, this sub-creation, this story, as the creator it is my responsibility to define these absolutes. And obviously, any reasonable story needs absolutes. Why is that? Because we live in a universe that has these absolutes. Also, the most reasonable absolutes in any story are the ones that coincide with the absolutes of reality. That is why, for instance, made gravity operate the same. Without many of these fundamental absolutes, we cannot even comprehend reality, so I therefore borrow much of what I observe here in reality and use it as a foundation for anything I create.
For all these same reasons, a story like mine (requiring an evolutionary worldview) could not be the answer to our reality. The reason my world holds together is because I hold it together in my mind, despite all the inconsistencies that the science in my sub-creation would have to deal with. However, evolution as the origin story for reality requires there be no greater being holding it together; it offers no reason for absolutes like physics, reason, or morals. Even in the evolutionary universe of my sub-creation, I am still an intelligent being holding it together using logic and reason derived from a reality that contains these absolutes.
My whole point about all this? Evolution works great as a plot device; a way of explaining things that are directly against the laws of science. How else could I have aliens? So in the end, evolution makes great science fiction. However, it doesn't make good science. The only universes that molecules-to-man evolution exists in is those that we create in our minds. In reality, it defies the absolutes we observe.
I'm really excited to see what comes of my friends game, but it is also very reassuring that I live in a universe that has absolutes that aren't arbitrarily defied or changed; a universe created by an All Powerful, All Knowing Creator. In this universe, in reality, there are no extra-terrestials, no old earth, no big bang, just logic, reason and science. Knowledge, and the God of Knowledge, the one who knows everything.
He made a universe with a more intriguing history and future then anything I could hope to write.
Okay, now what was I reading? Alright, strictly speaking the last article I read before this was about looking for the effects of the Curse in space. But beyond that, the main stuff I've been reading for the last several hours has been on things like aliens, Nephilim, science fiction, ancient technology, genetics of humans, and other things relating to all that.
Explaining the Nephilim and aliens, a friend of mine asked me to write out the back story for a game he's working on. The game is about a battle between humans and aliens in space. He wanted the aliens to attack, and he wanted the humans to have super soldiers. Simple enough, I decided; so I began writing this elaborate (that might be an overstatement, but I did go into good detail) history going back thousands of years.
However, almost immediately I noticed a problem. I wanted my story to be used as possible explanations for UFO sightings for all of human history; but in order to do that, the alien race would have had to have been around before the humans. That means I would have to make this story happen in a universe that existed for more than 6,000-10,000 years. Since this is a sub-creation of mine, I can make whatever laws and history I want, but the fact that I had to change the history of our universe to make it fit with what I needed in this story was a very unique learning experience for me.
I ended up adopting and evolutionary like history for that universe in my sub-creation for this game. How else could aliens evolve on another planet and begin exploring earth while the first civilizations were springing forth? Making a history for that universe that required an old earth and no God of the Bible was very strange for me, but I had to remember that I was making a SUB-CREATION, within the confines of my own mind.
The really strange part was in order for any of this story to be true, I had to write it out while arbitrarily defying the laws of observable science that we see in reality. The aliens? They had to evolve from non-life, and that non-living matter had to come from nothing. Same thing with the humans of earth. Now of course, matter coming from nothing and life coming from non-life are both impossible. But, this IS science fiction I'm writing, so what does it matter!
And I already arbitrarily defied the laws of physics in order to make the universe and life in that sub-creation, why stop there? I allowed both that aliens and humans to eventually overcome the "speed of light barrier". Actually, the aliens did so on at least three occasions. During earth's history, the aliens had several civil wars, the biggest of which set them back centuries in technology, meaning they had to rediscover faster then light travel. It was these set backs that allowed the humans to eventually catch up to the aliens and fight on equal ground, even though the aliens originally had faster then light travel approximately 10,000 years before that time.
Another thing I came to realize while creating this sub-creation, this science fiction universe, was that any absolutes were defined by me (as the writer). At the insistence of my friend, I may arbitrarily change any of those absolutes in order to make the physics and history of that universe fit with what he needs for his game. But of all the absolutes I can define, they obviously include things like physics (in which I already decided life can and needs to come from non-life and faster than life travel is possible), but I am also the only one who can define any moral absolutes in that universe.
In our universe, as it was created by an All Powerful God, He defines all absolutes. That means the laws of physics, mathematics, logic, reason, morals, etc. In this universe I created, this sub-creation, this story, as the creator it is my responsibility to define these absolutes. And obviously, any reasonable story needs absolutes. Why is that? Because we live in a universe that has these absolutes. Also, the most reasonable absolutes in any story are the ones that coincide with the absolutes of reality. That is why, for instance, made gravity operate the same. Without many of these fundamental absolutes, we cannot even comprehend reality, so I therefore borrow much of what I observe here in reality and use it as a foundation for anything I create.
For all these same reasons, a story like mine (requiring an evolutionary worldview) could not be the answer to our reality. The reason my world holds together is because I hold it together in my mind, despite all the inconsistencies that the science in my sub-creation would have to deal with. However, evolution as the origin story for reality requires there be no greater being holding it together; it offers no reason for absolutes like physics, reason, or morals. Even in the evolutionary universe of my sub-creation, I am still an intelligent being holding it together using logic and reason derived from a reality that contains these absolutes.
My whole point about all this? Evolution works great as a plot device; a way of explaining things that are directly against the laws of science. How else could I have aliens? So in the end, evolution makes great science fiction. However, it doesn't make good science. The only universes that molecules-to-man evolution exists in is those that we create in our minds. In reality, it defies the absolutes we observe.
I'm really excited to see what comes of my friends game, but it is also very reassuring that I live in a universe that has absolutes that aren't arbitrarily defied or changed; a universe created by an All Powerful, All Knowing Creator. In this universe, in reality, there are no extra-terrestials, no old earth, no big bang, just logic, reason and science. Knowledge, and the God of Knowledge, the one who knows everything.
He made a universe with a more intriguing history and future then anything I could hope to write.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
School Assignment, still read it though
I had needed to do an assignment for a class, and I liked what I did since it related to subjects I enjoy discussing, so I decided to share it here. Tell me what you think (the assignment was to make a list comparing some contradictions between creation and evolution and then discuss some of them in greater detail):
Contradiction | Creation | Evolution |
Sun and Earth | Earth created first | Sun came first |
Origin of Death | Death came after sin as punishment | Death is permanent |
Origin of Man | Created in God's image on day 6 | Evolved from ape-like ancestor |
Original form of Earth | Earth started as water | Earth started as molten rock |
Noah's Flood | Is a historical event which explains fossils and much more | Is an impossible myth that contradicts with "evidence" for an old earth |
Origin of Life | Life came from the living God (life came from life, does NOT contradict science) | Life evolved from a non-living primordial soup millions of years ago (This contradicts an observable law of science) |
Origin of Matter | An all powerful ever existing God created all matter and energy | All matter and energy arose spontaneously (different theories have different answers) |
DNA | An all knowing intelligent God created the complex coding seen in DNA | Information came about without an intelligent creator (contradicts science, information must come from intelligence) |
Evolving | Everything reproduces after it's kind within it's genetic information, or even lose information which is more of devolution | One kind of animal can change into another, which requires addition of information which is impossible without intelligence |
Miracles | The very core of Creation relies on an all powerful God who created everything supernaturally | Evolution relies on there being no god and uses only natural processes, there can be no miracles or anything supernatural |
Man's Specialness | Being in the image of the Creator, man has dominion over the earth and is above all the rest of Creation, and has an eternal soul | Man is just an animal and is no more special than anything else. When man dies they die just like an animal. |
Logic and Reasoning | Logic was made to follow universal laws of order by an All Knowing God of Order | Our minds evolved randomly and are controlled by chemical processes that arose from random chance, therefore we cannot trust our own mind's wisdom |
Key contradiction 1: The order of creation (and original form of earth)
I chose to only mention the sun and earth for this, so that is what I put in the table. In reality there are many more aspects of this I could have discussed.
The evolutionary theory requires that dense gases and matter gathered around to form the sun billions of years before a ball of molten rock would form to eventually become the earth. Stars came first to evolutionists, and that included the sun. All other celestial bodies, such as planets and the earth, formed billions of years after. Another conflict that is underneath this is the fact that evolution says the earth started as fire (for simplicity’s sake), the Bible says it started as water.
Now on the other hand, Biblical creation clearly states that the earth came before the sun and stars, as well as the moon (which evolution claims formed closer to the time of earth than the sun). When the earth was formed, it began as water and land came afterward (Genesis 1:2, 6-10). It wasn’t until two days after the earth was formed that we see the creation of the sun, moon and stars (Genesis 1:14-18).
This isn’t even getting into other aspects of the order of creation that evolution gets wrong; there is birds and fish created on the same day (Gen. 1:20) vs fish evolving into land and then sea creatures, plants being created before the sun (Gen 1: 11-12, 14-18) vs evolving billions of years afterwards, man and dinosaurs created on the same day (Gen 1: 24-30) vs man evolving millions of years afterwards, etc. But I chose to mention just the sun and earth in the above table.
Key contradiction 2: The Supernatural vs the natural (and several other points)
One of the sharpest contrasts between creation and evolution is the fact that creation requires there be miracles and supernatural beings, while evolution strictly forbids it. This, I believe, is where the science for evolution falls apart, right at step one. Since evolution requires only natural processes (that follow the natural laws of physics), there is no reasonable explanation for the origin of all matter and energy, now why to explain how life came about, no way to explain logic, and no way to explain pretty much anything. Their problem is there is no way for something to come from nothing, and that is what they need to explain their world view. Where did everything we see today come from?
Creation, on the other hand, has a reasonable answer for this. Since creation relies on the supernatural, which by definition supersedes the natural (and it’s laws of physics), it is very easy to explain the origin of everything. It goes something like this, “In the beginning God created…” (Gen 1:1). Right there we have our answer; an all powerful, all knowing supernatural being, which is above nature and it’s laws (and which actually created those laws), is the one responsible for everything we see today. A more detailed answer to this problem may be found in John 1:1-5
“In the beginning the Word already existed. The Words was with God, and the Word was God. He existed in the beginning with God. God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him. The Word gave life to everything that was created, and his life brought light to everyone. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness can never extinguish it”
“God created everything. . . and nothing was created except through him”, that makes our answer pretty easy. Provided God had the power to do so (which of course He did) and was telling the truth when He wrote this down (and of course, He was), then creation has no problem answering this.
Key contradiction 3: Man
The final point I will discuss is the conflict between Man’s place in creation. When we compare the worldviews, we see two drastically different opinions. On one side we have creation which says Man was created in the image of the Creator Himself (Genesis 1: 27), and was also created perfect to live forever with the Almighty, and later turned away from the Creator and had to live with death and suffering (Genesis 3); while on the other side we have evolution, which says man evolved from an animal and his life has no meaning, when he dies he dies and there is nothing left, that he is no more important than an ant or a leaf. There is a drastic contradiction between these two beliefs, isn’t there?
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Adolf Hitler, A Miracle To Mankind
To be honest, I'm hoping this post stirs up a little bit of controversy. I do rather enjoy having debates about my views, as it gives me a great oppurtunity to refine my arguments and hopefully teach someone something.
Anyway, to the actual reason of this post. There are many discussions (some of which I've actually started) about who defines morals without God, and other similar things. What's right and wrong without the Bible? If God doesn't say it's wrong, then who does? We can't trust the Bible and it's morals, it's changed to much. I think you get the point. It comes in many shapes and forms, but it all centers on morals in a world without the Almighty.
So now, let us pretend for a moment that there is no All Powerfull and All Knowing Creator above us all right now. Then the only other commonly accepted solution is evolution. And according to that, Hitler is one of the greatest things that happened to mankind, and someone we should all strive to be like. If there is no God, the Hitler is one of the greatest role models.
Don't believe me? Let's take a closer look.
The theory of Evolution is all about survival of the fittest, right? Well, purging the species of the weak would certainly guarentee less competetion for the strong, therefore keeping the entire species stronger. If you take out all the old, sick, deformed, ect. the species as a whole is "improved". What did Hitler do?
If evolution is the answer, then anyone who furthers the cause of the species should be seen as a hero. So then why do we see Hitler as a villian? Probably... because ever since man breathed his first breath right and wrong was defined by the Creator in his heart. Only later did the pagans think of things like evolution or a pantheon of gods and goddesses to replace the one true God.
As the Creator of everything, the Almighty has the right to declare right and wrong. And all of us, as part of creation, are obligated to obey His laws. However, He did give us the option to choose otherwise, a right we did not and do not deserve. Also, as the Absolute Authority, He is the only one can can declare an absolute moral principle. So if He says murder is wrong, then it's wrong, not matter what we think. If He says (as He told the Jews before Christ) that the punishment for adultery was being stoned to death, then we have no authority to say this is unjust or to extreme a punishment.
However, if you remove this absolute authority, then we decide for ourselves. So if one person says he believes murder is wrong, I can just kill him and move on with my life. I have no reason not to, especially if I am a fitter part of the species. Then I would simply be doing my job as the superior being! This is also what Hitler and many other people thoughout history have done. So if there is no God, who says they were wrong? If you remove God and the Bible, then simple logic dictates that they should be commended.
Think about it. They (being Hitler and the Nazi's) killed thousands of weaker people who were sick, old, deformed, or otherwise "inferior" subjects. They did experiments on these subjects which helped further science. They used weapons and tactics that allowed them beat back their "inferior" enemies. They weeded out the weak to allow for the stonger members of the species to continue without the weak gene pool. All those left wounded, sick and dying all around Europe, or even the world, were all a good thing because with them out of the way the species would be improved.
Now if you look at this same scenerio with the morals cleary defined by the Creator, you can see that what Hitler did was dispicable. When you look at it through the Almighty's high moral standards, I can't even describe how horrible the things Hitler did were. I wouldn't know where to begin! And since America was founded on Chistrian principles, and Christianity (or at least Judiasm) was such a major part in the history of the rest of the world (considering it was the same Creator for the entire world and all of mankind), it is no wonder we see Hitler as such a horrible man!
Oh, but there's more. If we take the Creator and the Bible out of the picture, hospitals should be closed. So should orphanages. And so should so many other things that we consider "good". Because if it's survival of the fittest, then these things are merely allowing the weak to water down the gene pool and drain the resources of the strong! So those people starving in Africa that I hear so many people talk about, if evolution is the answer, we should let them starve. After all, if they can't take care of themselves, why should we do it for them?
But once again, if you look at it through the morals defined in the Bible, we know that things are far different. All these people, no matter how weak or strong, are made in the image of the perfect Creator. Each of these people would be loved to an unimaginable extent, and allowing them to die without care would be a pretty bad thing.
I could go on for awhile with examples from either side, but the final decision is up to in your mind. Who defines moral absolutes? Us or the Creator? Was Adolf Hitler a curse... or a blessing?
Anyway, to the actual reason of this post. There are many discussions (some of which I've actually started) about who defines morals without God, and other similar things. What's right and wrong without the Bible? If God doesn't say it's wrong, then who does? We can't trust the Bible and it's morals, it's changed to much. I think you get the point. It comes in many shapes and forms, but it all centers on morals in a world without the Almighty.
So now, let us pretend for a moment that there is no All Powerfull and All Knowing Creator above us all right now. Then the only other commonly accepted solution is evolution. And according to that, Hitler is one of the greatest things that happened to mankind, and someone we should all strive to be like. If there is no God, the Hitler is one of the greatest role models.
Don't believe me? Let's take a closer look.
The theory of Evolution is all about survival of the fittest, right? Well, purging the species of the weak would certainly guarentee less competetion for the strong, therefore keeping the entire species stronger. If you take out all the old, sick, deformed, ect. the species as a whole is "improved". What did Hitler do?
If evolution is the answer, then anyone who furthers the cause of the species should be seen as a hero. So then why do we see Hitler as a villian? Probably... because ever since man breathed his first breath right and wrong was defined by the Creator in his heart. Only later did the pagans think of things like evolution or a pantheon of gods and goddesses to replace the one true God.
As the Creator of everything, the Almighty has the right to declare right and wrong. And all of us, as part of creation, are obligated to obey His laws. However, He did give us the option to choose otherwise, a right we did not and do not deserve. Also, as the Absolute Authority, He is the only one can can declare an absolute moral principle. So if He says murder is wrong, then it's wrong, not matter what we think. If He says (as He told the Jews before Christ) that the punishment for adultery was being stoned to death, then we have no authority to say this is unjust or to extreme a punishment.
However, if you remove this absolute authority, then we decide for ourselves. So if one person says he believes murder is wrong, I can just kill him and move on with my life. I have no reason not to, especially if I am a fitter part of the species. Then I would simply be doing my job as the superior being! This is also what Hitler and many other people thoughout history have done. So if there is no God, who says they were wrong? If you remove God and the Bible, then simple logic dictates that they should be commended.
Think about it. They (being Hitler and the Nazi's) killed thousands of weaker people who were sick, old, deformed, or otherwise "inferior" subjects. They did experiments on these subjects which helped further science. They used weapons and tactics that allowed them beat back their "inferior" enemies. They weeded out the weak to allow for the stonger members of the species to continue without the weak gene pool. All those left wounded, sick and dying all around Europe, or even the world, were all a good thing because with them out of the way the species would be improved.
Now if you look at this same scenerio with the morals cleary defined by the Creator, you can see that what Hitler did was dispicable. When you look at it through the Almighty's high moral standards, I can't even describe how horrible the things Hitler did were. I wouldn't know where to begin! And since America was founded on Chistrian principles, and Christianity (or at least Judiasm) was such a major part in the history of the rest of the world (considering it was the same Creator for the entire world and all of mankind), it is no wonder we see Hitler as such a horrible man!
Oh, but there's more. If we take the Creator and the Bible out of the picture, hospitals should be closed. So should orphanages. And so should so many other things that we consider "good". Because if it's survival of the fittest, then these things are merely allowing the weak to water down the gene pool and drain the resources of the strong! So those people starving in Africa that I hear so many people talk about, if evolution is the answer, we should let them starve. After all, if they can't take care of themselves, why should we do it for them?
But once again, if you look at it through the morals defined in the Bible, we know that things are far different. All these people, no matter how weak or strong, are made in the image of the perfect Creator. Each of these people would be loved to an unimaginable extent, and allowing them to die without care would be a pretty bad thing.
I could go on for awhile with examples from either side, but the final decision is up to in your mind. Who defines moral absolutes? Us or the Creator? Was Adolf Hitler a curse... or a blessing?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)