I was reading an article written by an atheist who is not quite as honest as he sees himself. Nevertheless, the article was interesting as it is definitely looking at the subject of God from the opposite direction. I hadn't read very far when he started claiming that there are many Gods in the Bible and that God is basically jealous of them. Okay.
We meet God in Genesis in which He is spoken of as creating everything that we know. There He is first referred to as Elohim (judges), a plural noun. The catch to that is that the verb connected to the seemingly plural noun is singular. Sometimes the word elohim is used as judges and has a plural verb. Therefore He is still one. Throughout chapter one He is called Elohim.
The first reference of another name being applied to God is in 2:4 where the two names Elohim and YHVH (which most Christians pronounce as Jehovah) are used together (Lord God in the King James). YHVH is usually defined as Lord (meaning master, one who is superior to you).
Yes, it is possible that God was assigned the name YHVH from previous beliefs. However, assuming it matters, do those references predate the name YHVH? In ancient times most cultures did not know how to communicate through writing. These cultures passed their knowledge down to succeeding generations orally - storytelling. There is no way to say which beliefs came from which in ancient times. And there is no reason to say that those entities did not exist before the myths. In fact, if you'll think about it for two seconds, you should be able to understand that those mythical references could have been stories that distorted the original stories long before the written ones.
There are many references to other gods in the Bible but they are creations of men. There are lots of idols which are referred to as gods but they aren't. There are people such as Pharaoh who were seen as the embodiment of a god. But there were no other gods. There was only the belief that there were gods. The God of the Bible stands alone and He doesn't like idols and He doesn't like people worshiping what He created instead of Him. His jealousy is that we assign more importance to anything than to Him. He gave us the free gift of life, which we screwed up, and He deserves to be number one. I'm sure you would get angry, too.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Sunday, February 3, 2013
I read a letter the other day which was self-acclaimed as enlightened, moral, and objective. That may have been the intent but there were certainly some apparent lack of control in places.
The person who wrote the letter claims to have been a Christian and went "to university" (he didn't specify which kind) where he had the means to reason everything out and come to the conclusions that there is no god, we don't need God, we don't need to be ignorant, and the Bible and all religion is a tool to control the masses and is useless.
There were a few points on which he was correct but not for the reasons he proclaimed. For example, his stance that everything that is wrong with religion and with mankind is God's fault. After all, we know He makes us do all these bad things, right?
He starts by lifting up humanity saying that we have so much potential to learn and understand the world through science and philosophy but are ignorant and are taught at a young age to be that way. He argues that we shouldn't teach them anything at all about religion until they are old enough to apply logic and reasoning to all the things we didn't teach them.
Apparently he doesn't understand how society works. Every moment of a child's life with its parents should be used to teach them how to mature properly and to grasp basic skills and basic knowledge about how to live in an acceptable manner. His argument that waiting until they mature into properly ascertaining the difference between facts and fiction does not leave any room for teaching children to have respect for their Creator and for other human beings. Public schools, if he hasn't noticed, do not teach this sort of thing. And that university he went to is not likely a stronghold on those subjects. Throughout history cultures have taught their children the difference between right and wrong and the proper way to live. So, no, not teaching your children what you believe is not rational thinking and certainly not beneficial to society.
The potential he speaks of can also be invested in the purposes of religion - having a relationship with one's Creator and having a proper relationship with one's fellow human. I have noticed sites on the Internet that whose only existence is to try to persuade people that religion is bad and their way is good. Those sites of which I am speaking use all sorts of facts, events, etc, to try to disprove religion that I use to try to understand God. It's all in the intention. All things can be used for good purposes or bad ones. The irony is that their side constantly screams for us to leave them alone while they attack us.
This man argues that man's mind can be better occupied on science and that religion is a waste of our limited brain space. I don't understand that because I like science and I believe there was a Creator. I can consider both arguments to see how they fit together while he can only provide space for one or the other. He makes the claim that there is no proof for many religious beliefs. I disagree. One thing he complains about is relying on ancient manuscripts. Guess what? the more manuscripts and the older, the more we can learn. Apparently history was not one of his favorite subjects other than to find bad things people did and blame it on God.
He says that religion relies on fear mongering for survival. Excuse me, sir, but I believe you are stereotyping. You are claiming that everyone who believes in God does so out of fear. The only fear I have comes from your side. It is true that fear mongering (which actually means to sell fear) has been, is being, and will always be used to promote certain belief systems. That is not God's fault. That is not the fault of the concept of religion. That is not my fault. People are people and some of them are evil. They will seek a means to get an advantage over society's rules by any means possible, including infiltrating and controlling religion. How far they get depends on how good of liars they are. That's not religion's fault. That's like saying that you have money in your pocket and when I attack you to take it, that it's your fault. Pointing out how many have been brainwashed and how many have been murdered, tortured, banished, or imprisoned doesn't change what I just stated one iota. The Arab world is going through the same thing Christianity went through during the Crusades. Does that make Islam and the common Muslim evil? Of course not. It's like the gun argument. Guns don't kill. People kill.
You say the religious person demands you prove there is no God. You say the onus is on them to prove there is. There's just one problem with that argument. It has boundaries outside which it doesn't apply.
Try to use that open mind you brag about having and think about this. In the Judeo-Christian tradition God created everything that exists. It doesn't say whether He created it from something or from nothing. The language seems to me to imply that He shaped everything out of something. What was that something? Before God created the universe, Mr. Deep Thinker, what was there? What is God made of? You can't rely on the universe and what we know about it. We only know what we have been provided the means of using to understand the world. What might be beyond this universe is a mystery. You are assuming everything can be answered with your chart of the periodic table. What if there are things beyond that which we cannot perceive? And if this is the case, how can a Christian prove it and how can you disprove it? I am imagining that it is very difficult for you to think about at all because it isn't in your little box of pretend omniscience. Russell's teapot is out the window on this one. And how can you say that the Creator of the universe would be subject to what He created?
In fact, the argument about the existence of a Creator will never end because there is no way to find out what's outside the box. The means of knowledge, including our senses, that we have been given is simply not enough to understand all things. The ole boys club of science gets offended if you so much as consider the possibility of a Creator. Scientists who think so are often scoffed at and blacklisted. Any mention of the possibility brings taunts and threats from the doubters. Quite frankly, it reminds me of the Catholic church and Copernicus. And, quite frankly, I think the church is more open-minded than the scientists.
I am glad that you have found happiness trusting in your own mind and isolated set of morals. (Society needs more than that; it needs for everyone to have the same set - otherwise, one man's right is another man's wrong.) I'm glad you have looked inside and are doing things that are moral. That, of course, doesn't mean it's the only way. And I'm glad you feel ethically obligated to yourself and to humanity. However, I also think you've turned your back on the most important One because you haven't studied as much as you should have to form your outspoken opinion. Unfortunately, you don't appear to me to know as much about religion as you claim you do. I have a friend that spouts out all your claims as well as you do and she doesn't know diddly about religion or the Bible.
It is my own personal philosophy that God chooses our paths. He may lead us to some places where it is difficult to understand that they are on the path to Him but it's not in our ability to understand why. I am pretty sure that that is what is happening to you. You seem to be very angry and only time and experience will resolve that as you unknowingly follow God's lead.
And, then, there are your claims of the church using condemnation, fictitious principles, stereotypes, and dogmas ... all of which I've seen in your own letter. Talk about hypocrisy. I do agree that if you suddenly discovered there is a Creator He wouldn't condemn you to Hell (if it even exists) but give you mercy. However, that mercy comes from love and He expects something in return - your love and your gratitude. It amazes me how ungrateful our society is for what it has. It's all about what we don't have. First of all, God gave you a life. Any moment of joy, any happy memory is his free gift to you. How can you not be grateful? And here in America the poor are rich. They just don't know it. And if they need things it is our job to take care of them, not to go around gloating of how we don't need God and how we have superior morals. In fact, nothing you have is really yours and what you have is owed to the next person who is needy. People need people. That's how we were designed.
Yes, Christians must serve God. They owe Him for their very lives. Yes, we need to trust Him. That takes a lot of practice. I no longer have that problem. I've experienced things your science cannot explain. Yes, we die for Him one way or another. I don't see that changing. After all, you owe God one life. And I don't think calling God the magic man in the sky is an insult that would ever come from my lips.
Atheists say funny things. One complains that God made man from dirt. The next says He wouldn't stoop so low as to care anything about us. Opposite ends of a spectrum. There is no arrogance in a sincere believer thinking God made everything for mankind. It is called humility.
The part about Jesus is something it does take faith to accept. We know he existed. We know he was a Jew by the words and actions in the text and he was probably of the Pharisaic party. We do not know much more than that. However, what would be the best way to relate to the creatures to whom you gave life other than to experience it yourself? His role was supposed to be the ultimate sacrifice. In other words, he's opening the door wider for us to come to God. He didn't make sin as you claimed but he gave us the choice to follow him or do what you're doing. He didn't arrange to have himself killed. That was also people's choice. Where is logic missing as you claimed? If the story of Jesus is true, there is no story that can top it.
Some people have experienced things which were unscientific. They feel a connection to their Creator. Your scientific explanations can't take that away from them. Why would anyone even write a letter like yours except to hurt people who don't fit into your religion of how the world should be? Where is your compassion for them? Where is your humanity? Why are you calling all religious people ignorant? Ignorant means that you don't know something. It could be that you would be ignorant of something. This is just more hypocrisy. And why are you painting all religion with a broad brush based only on arguments against Christianity?
As far as the "semi-literate desert dwellers" go, don't you think God could give wisdom to whomever He pleases? Lately we've been finding out that the ancients weren't quite as dumb as we supposed. They had technologies that enabled them to find out things many modern Americans don't even know. Yes, most Christians couldn't list the Ten Commandments but they probably know more about kindness and compassion and gratitude than you do.
No, religion was not made by man for the control of man (your words). Religion is the way to connect with the Creator. It is not some sort of magic or ritual. You just talk to Him and treat Him to the respect He deserves. Evil people are why religion is often used to control people. Do you think the leaders of the Middle East are really Muslims? Really? How about the Crusades? People are people. There are evil ones who will use any means necessary, even religion, to get what they want. They don't care about people. They don't care about God. They care about themselves. That is the doing of humanity, not God. By the way, God and religion are two different things but in your letter you sometimes can't tell them apart.
And, no, religion is not a crutch for those who seek God. Religion is a society - a gathering - in which many people can help each other seek Him as if they were a family. You haven't proved that God doesn't exist and I haven't proved He does. There is really no way we can have an intelligent discussion on the matter. We cannot see or sense God in any way other than by his choice because we simply aren't equipped. Perhaps God allowed Moses to see him, perhaps even the apostle John. Who really knows? It is my opinion that you should keep the door open to Him and the rest is up to Him. Be humble and follow the paths He leads you on and you won't have anything to worry about. I can claim that by experience.
The person who wrote the letter claims to have been a Christian and went "to university" (he didn't specify which kind) where he had the means to reason everything out and come to the conclusions that there is no god, we don't need God, we don't need to be ignorant, and the Bible and all religion is a tool to control the masses and is useless.
There were a few points on which he was correct but not for the reasons he proclaimed. For example, his stance that everything that is wrong with religion and with mankind is God's fault. After all, we know He makes us do all these bad things, right?
He starts by lifting up humanity saying that we have so much potential to learn and understand the world through science and philosophy but are ignorant and are taught at a young age to be that way. He argues that we shouldn't teach them anything at all about religion until they are old enough to apply logic and reasoning to all the things we didn't teach them.
Apparently he doesn't understand how society works. Every moment of a child's life with its parents should be used to teach them how to mature properly and to grasp basic skills and basic knowledge about how to live in an acceptable manner. His argument that waiting until they mature into properly ascertaining the difference between facts and fiction does not leave any room for teaching children to have respect for their Creator and for other human beings. Public schools, if he hasn't noticed, do not teach this sort of thing. And that university he went to is not likely a stronghold on those subjects. Throughout history cultures have taught their children the difference between right and wrong and the proper way to live. So, no, not teaching your children what you believe is not rational thinking and certainly not beneficial to society.
The potential he speaks of can also be invested in the purposes of religion - having a relationship with one's Creator and having a proper relationship with one's fellow human. I have noticed sites on the Internet that whose only existence is to try to persuade people that religion is bad and their way is good. Those sites of which I am speaking use all sorts of facts, events, etc, to try to disprove religion that I use to try to understand God. It's all in the intention. All things can be used for good purposes or bad ones. The irony is that their side constantly screams for us to leave them alone while they attack us.
This man argues that man's mind can be better occupied on science and that religion is a waste of our limited brain space. I don't understand that because I like science and I believe there was a Creator. I can consider both arguments to see how they fit together while he can only provide space for one or the other. He makes the claim that there is no proof for many religious beliefs. I disagree. One thing he complains about is relying on ancient manuscripts. Guess what? the more manuscripts and the older, the more we can learn. Apparently history was not one of his favorite subjects other than to find bad things people did and blame it on God.
He says that religion relies on fear mongering for survival. Excuse me, sir, but I believe you are stereotyping. You are claiming that everyone who believes in God does so out of fear. The only fear I have comes from your side. It is true that fear mongering (which actually means to sell fear) has been, is being, and will always be used to promote certain belief systems. That is not God's fault. That is not the fault of the concept of religion. That is not my fault. People are people and some of them are evil. They will seek a means to get an advantage over society's rules by any means possible, including infiltrating and controlling religion. How far they get depends on how good of liars they are. That's not religion's fault. That's like saying that you have money in your pocket and when I attack you to take it, that it's your fault. Pointing out how many have been brainwashed and how many have been murdered, tortured, banished, or imprisoned doesn't change what I just stated one iota. The Arab world is going through the same thing Christianity went through during the Crusades. Does that make Islam and the common Muslim evil? Of course not. It's like the gun argument. Guns don't kill. People kill.
You say the religious person demands you prove there is no God. You say the onus is on them to prove there is. There's just one problem with that argument. It has boundaries outside which it doesn't apply.
Try to use that open mind you brag about having and think about this. In the Judeo-Christian tradition God created everything that exists. It doesn't say whether He created it from something or from nothing. The language seems to me to imply that He shaped everything out of something. What was that something? Before God created the universe, Mr. Deep Thinker, what was there? What is God made of? You can't rely on the universe and what we know about it. We only know what we have been provided the means of using to understand the world. What might be beyond this universe is a mystery. You are assuming everything can be answered with your chart of the periodic table. What if there are things beyond that which we cannot perceive? And if this is the case, how can a Christian prove it and how can you disprove it? I am imagining that it is very difficult for you to think about at all because it isn't in your little box of pretend omniscience. Russell's teapot is out the window on this one. And how can you say that the Creator of the universe would be subject to what He created?
In fact, the argument about the existence of a Creator will never end because there is no way to find out what's outside the box. The means of knowledge, including our senses, that we have been given is simply not enough to understand all things. The ole boys club of science gets offended if you so much as consider the possibility of a Creator. Scientists who think so are often scoffed at and blacklisted. Any mention of the possibility brings taunts and threats from the doubters. Quite frankly, it reminds me of the Catholic church and Copernicus. And, quite frankly, I think the church is more open-minded than the scientists.
I am glad that you have found happiness trusting in your own mind and isolated set of morals. (Society needs more than that; it needs for everyone to have the same set - otherwise, one man's right is another man's wrong.) I'm glad you have looked inside and are doing things that are moral. That, of course, doesn't mean it's the only way. And I'm glad you feel ethically obligated to yourself and to humanity. However, I also think you've turned your back on the most important One because you haven't studied as much as you should have to form your outspoken opinion. Unfortunately, you don't appear to me to know as much about religion as you claim you do. I have a friend that spouts out all your claims as well as you do and she doesn't know diddly about religion or the Bible.
It is my own personal philosophy that God chooses our paths. He may lead us to some places where it is difficult to understand that they are on the path to Him but it's not in our ability to understand why. I am pretty sure that that is what is happening to you. You seem to be very angry and only time and experience will resolve that as you unknowingly follow God's lead.
And, then, there are your claims of the church using condemnation, fictitious principles, stereotypes, and dogmas ... all of which I've seen in your own letter. Talk about hypocrisy. I do agree that if you suddenly discovered there is a Creator He wouldn't condemn you to Hell (if it even exists) but give you mercy. However, that mercy comes from love and He expects something in return - your love and your gratitude. It amazes me how ungrateful our society is for what it has. It's all about what we don't have. First of all, God gave you a life. Any moment of joy, any happy memory is his free gift to you. How can you not be grateful? And here in America the poor are rich. They just don't know it. And if they need things it is our job to take care of them, not to go around gloating of how we don't need God and how we have superior morals. In fact, nothing you have is really yours and what you have is owed to the next person who is needy. People need people. That's how we were designed.
Yes, Christians must serve God. They owe Him for their very lives. Yes, we need to trust Him. That takes a lot of practice. I no longer have that problem. I've experienced things your science cannot explain. Yes, we die for Him one way or another. I don't see that changing. After all, you owe God one life. And I don't think calling God the magic man in the sky is an insult that would ever come from my lips.
Atheists say funny things. One complains that God made man from dirt. The next says He wouldn't stoop so low as to care anything about us. Opposite ends of a spectrum. There is no arrogance in a sincere believer thinking God made everything for mankind. It is called humility.
The part about Jesus is something it does take faith to accept. We know he existed. We know he was a Jew by the words and actions in the text and he was probably of the Pharisaic party. We do not know much more than that. However, what would be the best way to relate to the creatures to whom you gave life other than to experience it yourself? His role was supposed to be the ultimate sacrifice. In other words, he's opening the door wider for us to come to God. He didn't make sin as you claimed but he gave us the choice to follow him or do what you're doing. He didn't arrange to have himself killed. That was also people's choice. Where is logic missing as you claimed? If the story of Jesus is true, there is no story that can top it.
Some people have experienced things which were unscientific. They feel a connection to their Creator. Your scientific explanations can't take that away from them. Why would anyone even write a letter like yours except to hurt people who don't fit into your religion of how the world should be? Where is your compassion for them? Where is your humanity? Why are you calling all religious people ignorant? Ignorant means that you don't know something. It could be that you would be ignorant of something. This is just more hypocrisy. And why are you painting all religion with a broad brush based only on arguments against Christianity?
As far as the "semi-literate desert dwellers" go, don't you think God could give wisdom to whomever He pleases? Lately we've been finding out that the ancients weren't quite as dumb as we supposed. They had technologies that enabled them to find out things many modern Americans don't even know. Yes, most Christians couldn't list the Ten Commandments but they probably know more about kindness and compassion and gratitude than you do.
No, religion was not made by man for the control of man (your words). Religion is the way to connect with the Creator. It is not some sort of magic or ritual. You just talk to Him and treat Him to the respect He deserves. Evil people are why religion is often used to control people. Do you think the leaders of the Middle East are really Muslims? Really? How about the Crusades? People are people. There are evil ones who will use any means necessary, even religion, to get what they want. They don't care about people. They don't care about God. They care about themselves. That is the doing of humanity, not God. By the way, God and religion are two different things but in your letter you sometimes can't tell them apart.
And, no, religion is not a crutch for those who seek God. Religion is a society - a gathering - in which many people can help each other seek Him as if they were a family. You haven't proved that God doesn't exist and I haven't proved He does. There is really no way we can have an intelligent discussion on the matter. We cannot see or sense God in any way other than by his choice because we simply aren't equipped. Perhaps God allowed Moses to see him, perhaps even the apostle John. Who really knows? It is my opinion that you should keep the door open to Him and the rest is up to Him. Be humble and follow the paths He leads you on and you won't have anything to worry about. I can claim that by experience.
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
New Discussion Group
Defenders of Religion is where you will now find my posts and those of others who join.
Enlighenment vs God
Americans are turning away from religion in droves. Is it because we are an enlightened society? Not at all. We are a dumber society. We are a brainwashed society. But not enlightened. The truth is that there is just no room for God. We are fishing, skiing, playing video games, chatting, watching sports, watching TV, watching movies, entertaining (not teaching) our kids, and on and on and on. We can't go to church or synagogue because football or some other sport is on. We can't read our Bible because it's low on the priority list. We don't teach our kids about God because we're too busy trying to be their friend and they haven't requested any information about the true reason we exist. We are not grateful for our lives. We do not thank God for giving us life free of charge. We spend our lives pretending He isn't important or doesn't exist. The media help us to be ignorant of God because He gets in the way of their plans. All we see in the news are bad things that happen in religious areas - priests molesting kids, those Kansas morons protesting funerals, and anything else they can find to make religion look like a bad influence, while belittling those who do believe. Yes, when you tell your viewpoint and ignore the other side's views or try to make them the bad guy, you are brainwashing. You are a liar. You are ruining people's lives and murdering others. You are the number one enemy of society, media. Of course, there are good media but the mainstream sees them as the enemy, too. Fox, for example, has been pounded for years by the mainstream and sadly has given in to a great extent. CNN used to tell the truth. Strange, though, that Fox is number one, isn't it? Do you suppose people are tired of being lied to? Who will replace Fox when they have become mainstream? I don't know but I do know that they too will be pounded by the mainstream. Perhaps they will be a little more determined than Fox was and not abandon those of us who believe in them and in God. And perhaps we need to take a look at our priorities.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
I am not opposed as some are to the thirteen-billion-year-old universe. I am also not opposed to the young universe theory. But I am opposed to people attempting to use the Bible to attempt to prove or disprove either. The Bible was not written as a scientific document but begins with two very ancient stories explaining how a God created the universe and set it in motion.
We cannot prove or disprove God with these two stories that don't even totally agree. We can't prove who carried down the most correct story of the beginning because most cultures didn't have writing. Stories like these were passed down orally. You know the details were embellished over the millennia.
Scientists have always thought they were on the verge of discovering the key to the universe. They just never quite do. The seven days in the Genesis accounts also have no basis that has been proved beyond all question. Were they days or periods of time? Who knows? The problem with everyone's theory of the beginning is that we have limitations. We do not have the original, unadulterated Genesis story any more than we have the original, untarnished Bible.
The New Testament has actually been altered through the ages. We have many times found older pieces of text that are slightly different than what we are accustomed to. However, we can take that new information and place it into our existing knowledge and become more enlightened as to the overall meaning of the Bible.
I suppose the time the Bible, mostly the New Testament, must have been tampered with the most was when Constantine decided to make Christianity the official religion of Rome. I read a letter in which new copies were sent to him as he requested. Who knows what changes were made? Being the Emperor I'm sure he saw a few that needed to be. It is a miracle that the Old Testament even exists.
Both scientists and creationists have one bad flaw. They think they know what happened and they think they can prove it. But when scientists and theologians find new evidence that puts their theory into question they should realize that their theories aren't quite as stable as they wish. Think about how the number of theories of how things got the way they are have blossomed during the past few decades. If science is so advanced and stabilized, why isn't there only one theory? Meanwhile theologians and scientists find each others' possibilities repulsive. The science community has become almost exclusive to those who reject any specific deity although a general "god" idea is okay as long as it is just a belief and not considered as a potential reason for our existence.
The reality of it all in my long thought out opinion is that God is beyond our understanding. We have been given life and a place to live it (for which we should be ecstatic and overwhelmingly grateful) and limited means of understanding it. Whatever God is is beyond our comprehension. How He chooses to allow us to understand Him and our beginning is up to Him. He gave us the five senses and anything we know beyond that is up to Him. Sure, we have instruments that use other means but we still have to interpret them with those same five senses. Scientists will have to realize that they can only understand the universe as much as He allows them to. God's reality is limitless in my view and man's reality is gradually revealed as He sees fit.
We, as humans, must learn to accept new truths. Both Christianity and science are very reluctant to accept anything that doesn't fit into their preconceived formula of the universe. Martin Luther and Einstein were both rejected at first because their views did not fit into what was widely accepted. My views will not be widely accepted, either, of course.
God reveals things to us gradually and it takes a long time for us to understand them because of our comfort in our beliefs. If they aren't already in our Bible, they're wrong. If we can't detect them with our five senses, they're wrong. That's how we judge reality. Think about it, if God had started the universe at a certain point and told it to go from there, how could we know it or how could we reject it? If you're scoffing now, you're making my point.
We cannot prove or disprove God with these two stories that don't even totally agree. We can't prove who carried down the most correct story of the beginning because most cultures didn't have writing. Stories like these were passed down orally. You know the details were embellished over the millennia.
Scientists have always thought they were on the verge of discovering the key to the universe. They just never quite do. The seven days in the Genesis accounts also have no basis that has been proved beyond all question. Were they days or periods of time? Who knows? The problem with everyone's theory of the beginning is that we have limitations. We do not have the original, unadulterated Genesis story any more than we have the original, untarnished Bible.
The New Testament has actually been altered through the ages. We have many times found older pieces of text that are slightly different than what we are accustomed to. However, we can take that new information and place it into our existing knowledge and become more enlightened as to the overall meaning of the Bible.
I suppose the time the Bible, mostly the New Testament, must have been tampered with the most was when Constantine decided to make Christianity the official religion of Rome. I read a letter in which new copies were sent to him as he requested. Who knows what changes were made? Being the Emperor I'm sure he saw a few that needed to be. It is a miracle that the Old Testament even exists.
Both scientists and creationists have one bad flaw. They think they know what happened and they think they can prove it. But when scientists and theologians find new evidence that puts their theory into question they should realize that their theories aren't quite as stable as they wish. Think about how the number of theories of how things got the way they are have blossomed during the past few decades. If science is so advanced and stabilized, why isn't there only one theory? Meanwhile theologians and scientists find each others' possibilities repulsive. The science community has become almost exclusive to those who reject any specific deity although a general "god" idea is okay as long as it is just a belief and not considered as a potential reason for our existence.
The reality of it all in my long thought out opinion is that God is beyond our understanding. We have been given life and a place to live it (for which we should be ecstatic and overwhelmingly grateful) and limited means of understanding it. Whatever God is is beyond our comprehension. How He chooses to allow us to understand Him and our beginning is up to Him. He gave us the five senses and anything we know beyond that is up to Him. Sure, we have instruments that use other means but we still have to interpret them with those same five senses. Scientists will have to realize that they can only understand the universe as much as He allows them to. God's reality is limitless in my view and man's reality is gradually revealed as He sees fit.
We, as humans, must learn to accept new truths. Both Christianity and science are very reluctant to accept anything that doesn't fit into their preconceived formula of the universe. Martin Luther and Einstein were both rejected at first because their views did not fit into what was widely accepted. My views will not be widely accepted, either, of course.
God reveals things to us gradually and it takes a long time for us to understand them because of our comfort in our beliefs. If they aren't already in our Bible, they're wrong. If we can't detect them with our five senses, they're wrong. That's how we judge reality. Think about it, if God had started the universe at a certain point and told it to go from there, how could we know it or how could we reject it? If you're scoffing now, you're making my point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)