In recent conversations with some Middle Eastern Muslim friends my views of the world, particularly the Israeli Palestinian issue, have been challenged. American culture and media have established certain foundations on which I base my world view. My Christian upbringing and belief has sunken even deeper ideological anchors which guide my notions of the world. Cultural, media and religious forces have affected my friends in the same ways. Therefore our perceptions of the world and of the Palestinian Israeli question are nearly opposite.
Consequently there is much misunderstanding and there are many misguided conclusions about each other and our countries/cultures. This is due in part to our own negligence in checking sources and seeking the truth. But here we are only left in a static state- neither feeding nor tearing down farce conclusions. The other culprit, and a much more devious one at that, is the media. They betray the trust and responsibility entrusted to them by the masses. Through their ignorance due to similar factors and their deliberate twisting of the facts, people are lead astray. Misconceptions are fed and prejudices deepened, widening the already great ideological gulf between peoples.
True there is right and wrong… but rarely, if ever, does one side have exclusive privileges to truth- especially in relation to culture and country. Religious truth is a different matter. What I advocate therefore is a much more critical eye concerning our views of the world. We must separate truth from our preconceptions and prejudices that we might rightly judge the situation and reach just and equitable conclusions.
“He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” Micah 6:8
Should Israel retain control of land taken in the ’67 war? Why?
Is Israel justly administering their territory and the people within? If so how? Why?
14.5.08
18.4.08
Addendum to "Biofuel Pollutes Food Prices"
On BBC's Newnight program Mr. Ziegle, a UN Food Advisor, was interviewed. When asked if the UK's concern and commitment to bringing down world food prices and increasing biofuel use was viable his was response was a concise, "It is not possible."
30.3.08
Biofuel Pollutes Food Prices
Al Gore has recently been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his endeavors in making the affects of global warming known around the globe. It has resulted in millions, perhaps billions, of dollars in research investment for biofuels and large societal shifts around the world aimed at curbing the projected harm. Truly he has accomplished a great task.
However, science has shown us that the earth is a planet of cycles. From the molecular level to the population of flora and fauna to weather patterns the earth is involved in copious cycles designed to sustain life and its quality. When my father was in high school there were fears of another ice age. 30 years later the worry is extreme heat due to the accumulation of gases produced from fossil fuels- as well as many other factors. One cannot deny the fact that the earth is a few degrees warmer than 30 years ago... yet one also cannot deny science and world trends. Therefore one must conclude that this recent warming is but a cycle of nature designed to sustain life.
Nevertheless that has not been the case. Rather mass fear has been fueled by the farce conclusions of a politician, not a scientist, resulting in hysteria. What is more, those who should know the truth and defend it, scientists, have neglected their field. As a result they too have reached faulty conclusions and add their respected voices to the lie making it all the more dangerous.
What is the harm one may ask. People are creating a cleaner earth and a more healthy atmosphere for future generations to enjoy. True. But that is only one piece to the puzzle. What about the world's farmers who have faithfully been feeding the world since time began- especially in the age of globalization. For as long as they have been working they have received little recognition or compensation. Today though with the source of most biofuels being crops: corn, rice, sugar cane etc. the demand and price of those commodities has risen, giving farmers an opportunity to finally "strike it rich." Therefore those who were already raising those biofuel crops are shifting their focus onto such and those who were not already involved are now running to take a stake in the new oil fields. This is worldwide.
With new demand from the biofuel sector and fewer crops dedicated towards consumption there has consequently been a sharp rise in the price of food- one of mankind's most basic needs. In addition there is less excess; ergo there is less to give or sell to poor nations and countries undergoing war, famine etc. The drive to create clean fuel has resulted in a shortage of human fuel. This may be fine for the fortunate few in developed countries but it is at the cost of the less fortunate.
One perceived problem has resulted in a much greater and more important actual problem. Am I blaming Al Gore? In part yes- he was after all a major contributor to this problem as is evidenced by his Nobel(?) Peace(?) Prize. There are however many scientists involved who perhaps have an even greater responsibility to the world. Being involved in science and the statistics thereof they has all the tools needed to discover and defend the truth. Sadly little has been done.
Is there a solution then? Is there hope? Absolutely. He's called God and He will never allow the world to waste away at the hands of its stewards. One of the preventions put in place are those cycles previously mentioned. God is also personally involved in directing the health of earth. Then we as stewards also have a responsibility to take care of the world... and its inhabitants... poor and rich, weak and strong etc. Renewable sources of energy should be explored and employed, biofuels should continue (with restrictions on crop allocation aimed at ensuring plenty of food for every person), fossil fuels too should continue. The best solution is a combination and reasonable use of all possible means.
5.3.08
Whose Hands?
In this pre election period I have frequently been asked who I will be voting for. "No one," is my reply. "But," I am told, "you must make a choice." They simply do not understand or agree with my choice.
"Indecision" to Americans is cowardly, stupid. I have not yet nailed down the particular cultural standard which leads us to believe that we must choose between given options- nevertheless, I am certain there is a culprit. For we see decisions being made every day as a result of "indecision." When a bully preys upon kids in the playground and a another child disagrees yet remains silent, he has affirmed the bully's actions. If someone cheats and another being aware of and against it does nothing, they have passively made a choice to join in cheating. Finally Christ says in John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." This belief can be active or passive. One man may say that he does not believe in Jesus and the other man may simply put off his decision to believe yet when they die both will be guilty of not choosing to believe in Christ. Ergo to not choose is to choose.
So not making a choice is actually a decision. "Yet if that is your choice then you essentially let others choose the president for you." In a sense, yes. "You must choose between the lesser of the evils," is another argument I have heard. However, should we choose any evil. No. That is a worldly philosophy. We must separate ourselves from evil. Rather God's choice, the best choice must be ours too. In the case of the presidential elections that best choice is no evil and therefore not voting. For it is better to let God decide- for He establishes and tears down rulers (Daniel 2:21)- than to be a partner in any evil. Choice is best laid in the hands of our just, merciful and loving God than in the hands of man. Consider David's words when, after numbering Israel God pronounced judgement on the land and gave David three options of discipline. David says in II Samuel 24:14 "'I am in great distress. Let us now fall into the hand of the LORD for His mercies are great, but do not let me fall into the hand of man."
I believe that I have made the best choice- leaving the matter in the hands of God Who knows all things and works them out to our (those who love God (Romans 8:28)) good and His glory (Romans 8:28-30).
"Indecision" to Americans is cowardly, stupid. I have not yet nailed down the particular cultural standard which leads us to believe that we must choose between given options- nevertheless, I am certain there is a culprit. For we see decisions being made every day as a result of "indecision." When a bully preys upon kids in the playground and a another child disagrees yet remains silent, he has affirmed the bully's actions. If someone cheats and another being aware of and against it does nothing, they have passively made a choice to join in cheating. Finally Christ says in John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." This belief can be active or passive. One man may say that he does not believe in Jesus and the other man may simply put off his decision to believe yet when they die both will be guilty of not choosing to believe in Christ. Ergo to not choose is to choose.
So not making a choice is actually a decision. "Yet if that is your choice then you essentially let others choose the president for you." In a sense, yes. "You must choose between the lesser of the evils," is another argument I have heard. However, should we choose any evil. No. That is a worldly philosophy. We must separate ourselves from evil. Rather God's choice, the best choice must be ours too. In the case of the presidential elections that best choice is no evil and therefore not voting. For it is better to let God decide- for He establishes and tears down rulers (Daniel 2:21)- than to be a partner in any evil. Choice is best laid in the hands of our just, merciful and loving God than in the hands of man. Consider David's words when, after numbering Israel God pronounced judgement on the land and gave David three options of discipline. David says in II Samuel 24:14 "'I am in great distress. Let us now fall into the hand of the LORD for His mercies are great, but do not let me fall into the hand of man."
I believe that I have made the best choice- leaving the matter in the hands of God Who knows all things and works them out to our (those who love God (Romans 8:28)) good and His glory (Romans 8:28-30).
BwLhAiCtKe=Foolishness
"Where have all the superheroes gone?"
Denver Post- 2.3.08- http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_8401191
By David Harsanyi
"In a world crawling with merciless terrorists, corrupt politicians and sociopath hedge-fund managers, we need a fictional hero to save us.
Or are we so unsure of ourselves, so morally conflicted, that we can't even win in fantasy?
Back in 1941, Captain America, a purely political creation, was charged with a single task: to kick Nazi butt. The Captain, in fact, confronted the Germans before the United States did, in one issue punching Adolf Hitler's lights out.
One of Captain America's creators claimed that during the late '30s and early '40s, "the opponents to the war were all quite well organized. We wanted to have our say, too." And soon enough, Wonder Woman and scores of other fictional champions of the American Way employed guile and fists — unilaterally — to confront the depraved Axis powers. And Captain America went about his business without permission from Congress.
Comic book heroism wasn't exclusively about warfare, of course. Superman, the über-superhero, was defined by another distinct notion of patriotism. Comic-book scholar Roger Sabin contends that the Great Depression and "the liberal idealism of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal" formed Superman's left-leaning ethos. As the "savior of the helpless and oppressed," Clark Kent's alter-ego rarely concerned himself with international threats. Instead, he pursued shady cigar-chewing corporate magnates, devious politicians and even went toe-to-toe with the Ku Klux Klan in one famous radio broadcast. In his spare time, naturally, he was a journalist.
Later, American kids had GI Joe. There were at one point four GI Joe figures, each representing a different branch of the armed forces. GI Joe, though, wasn't completely fictional. The Marine figure for a time actually celebrated wartime heroism. The doll was based on Mitchell Paige, a recipient of the Medal of Honor during World War II, who single-handedly stopped an entire Japanese regiment by himself.
For my generation, superheroes morphed from comic books to larger-than-life cinematic action heroes. These pugilists fought crime without being hampered by annoyances like Miranda rights or double jeopardy. John Rambo, after fighting the war at home in his first movie, assisted Afghans in taking down the entire Soviet invasion force by his third. Former karate champ Chuck Norris traveled to Vietnam to avenge the lost war and rescue prisoners left behind by a nation too weak to care.
All of it was cathartic.
Revenge and justice, in fact, could be unearthed everywhere in pop culture. When the detective duo of "Lethal Weapon 2" shot a South African diplomat — who was not only a racist, but also a drug dealer — in the head, all those who oppose apartheid could feel just a little better about the world.
This brand of moral absolutism is frowned upon these days. Our nation seems unable to serve up fictional characters without weighing them down with moral ambiguity and layers of complex emotional baggage. Our cinematic heroes are most often tortured, imperfect souls, even when they do good. We've become so cynical, in fact, that we can't even imagine ourselves as unconditionally in the right. Sure, we still have Rambo, but at 60 and with a questionable grasp of his mental facilities, no one is overly confident.
Nowadays, movies are more likely to offer portents of destruction and a disturbing future. We are faced with environmental disasters in "The Day After Tomorrow." Or "Cloverfield," wherein a monster tears the head off the Statue of Liberty, then terrorizes a gaggle of hipsters in Manhattan. Ultra-sadistic horror and disaster flicks — a staple of another decade of unease, the '70s — are the flavor of the day.
The only mainstream politically escapist entertainment we can find today is the television show "24," which follows the adventures of counterterrorist agent Jack Bauer, played by Kiefer Sutherland. Each season, Bauer untangles terrorist schemes jeopardizing the lives of thousands. Incredibly, in a 24-hour span — over and over again — Bauer rescues the unsuspecting public from colossal catastrophe.
Bauer, to be kind, isn't tethered to the tenets of the Geneva Conventions or overly concerned about the FISA court. Bauer has an imaginary job to do, after all. And to extract valuable information from suspects, he tortures them. Occasionally, he tortures them emotionally, but mostly he tortures them physically. He almost always gets what he needs.
The problem is that the show's sixth season saw ratings fall. Producers claimed they had difficulty recruiting actors, many of whom, according to The Wall Street Journal, "disapproved of the show's depiction of torture." Head writer Howard Gordon told the paper that, "The fear and wish-fulfillment the show represented after 9/11 ended up boomeranging against us. We were suddenly facing a blowback from current events."
Now, I oppose torture. And by torture, I mean listening to moralizing actors who can't differentiate between an escapist action show and reality. Playing a role on "24" is no more an endorsement of torture than playing a run-of-the-mill, misogynistic murderer is an endorsement of serial killers. At least in this sort of fiction, the public can forget we have an incompetent CIA and for 24 hours pretend that someone somewhere is actually on top of global terrorism.
In any event, "24" producers were told to "re-imagine" the show, so we can look forward to a kinder, gentler Jack Bauer.
And GI Joe? He reportedly no longer takes orders from the U.S. government. In a movie due out next year, Joe is commanded by a "European-based military unit known as Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity (GIJOE)." Perhaps he'll track down global warming deniers and copyright infringers.
Last we heard from the real Captain America, he was protesting a new federally mandated law requiring all "super-powered" individuals to register with the government. Such laws, he believed, were an assault on civil rights of the "superhero community." He was killed by an assassin's bullet soon after. I kid you not.
Some say that popular culture is typically a reflection of our national psyche.
If that's true, we're a nation completely unsure of itself."
Moral absolutism and the advent of the superhero began their fall in the 60's. They were felled by the same hands- rebellion against authority, all things established and, at the root, rebellion against God and righteousness (not that all encompassed within the aforementioned arenas are of God). As a result black and white no longer exist as separate entities but as an agglomerated mass of grey. The absence of black and white in our society's morals is the kryponite to every superhero. In fact, it is the bane of everything upright- an unstable foundation cannot support any sort of superstructure. Therefore truth too does not endure in this age.
Today's acclaimed knowledge and new found wisdom is nothing but foolishness. God's Word is fulfilled when Paul says, "For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:21-22). Consequently what most would call rational and the "right thing" is destroying society and individual rather than advancing them.
The only villain the superheros couldn't withstand was that of foolishness.
Denver Post- 2.3.08- http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_8401191
By David Harsanyi
"In a world crawling with merciless terrorists, corrupt politicians and sociopath hedge-fund managers, we need a fictional hero to save us.
Or are we so unsure of ourselves, so morally conflicted, that we can't even win in fantasy?
Back in 1941, Captain America, a purely political creation, was charged with a single task: to kick Nazi butt. The Captain, in fact, confronted the Germans before the United States did, in one issue punching Adolf Hitler's lights out.
One of Captain America's creators claimed that during the late '30s and early '40s, "the opponents to the war were all quite well organized. We wanted to have our say, too." And soon enough, Wonder Woman and scores of other fictional champions of the American Way employed guile and fists — unilaterally — to confront the depraved Axis powers. And Captain America went about his business without permission from Congress.
Comic book heroism wasn't exclusively about warfare, of course. Superman, the über-superhero, was defined by another distinct notion of patriotism. Comic-book scholar Roger Sabin contends that the Great Depression and "the liberal idealism of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal" formed Superman's left-leaning ethos. As the "savior of the helpless and oppressed," Clark Kent's alter-ego rarely concerned himself with international threats. Instead, he pursued shady cigar-chewing corporate magnates, devious politicians and even went toe-to-toe with the Ku Klux Klan in one famous radio broadcast. In his spare time, naturally, he was a journalist.
Later, American kids had GI Joe. There were at one point four GI Joe figures, each representing a different branch of the armed forces. GI Joe, though, wasn't completely fictional. The Marine figure for a time actually celebrated wartime heroism. The doll was based on Mitchell Paige, a recipient of the Medal of Honor during World War II, who single-handedly stopped an entire Japanese regiment by himself.
For my generation, superheroes morphed from comic books to larger-than-life cinematic action heroes. These pugilists fought crime without being hampered by annoyances like Miranda rights or double jeopardy. John Rambo, after fighting the war at home in his first movie, assisted Afghans in taking down the entire Soviet invasion force by his third. Former karate champ Chuck Norris traveled to Vietnam to avenge the lost war and rescue prisoners left behind by a nation too weak to care.
All of it was cathartic.
Revenge and justice, in fact, could be unearthed everywhere in pop culture. When the detective duo of "Lethal Weapon 2" shot a South African diplomat — who was not only a racist, but also a drug dealer — in the head, all those who oppose apartheid could feel just a little better about the world.
This brand of moral absolutism is frowned upon these days. Our nation seems unable to serve up fictional characters without weighing them down with moral ambiguity and layers of complex emotional baggage. Our cinematic heroes are most often tortured, imperfect souls, even when they do good. We've become so cynical, in fact, that we can't even imagine ourselves as unconditionally in the right. Sure, we still have Rambo, but at 60 and with a questionable grasp of his mental facilities, no one is overly confident.
Nowadays, movies are more likely to offer portents of destruction and a disturbing future. We are faced with environmental disasters in "The Day After Tomorrow." Or "Cloverfield," wherein a monster tears the head off the Statue of Liberty, then terrorizes a gaggle of hipsters in Manhattan. Ultra-sadistic horror and disaster flicks — a staple of another decade of unease, the '70s — are the flavor of the day.
The only mainstream politically escapist entertainment we can find today is the television show "24," which follows the adventures of counterterrorist agent Jack Bauer, played by Kiefer Sutherland. Each season, Bauer untangles terrorist schemes jeopardizing the lives of thousands. Incredibly, in a 24-hour span — over and over again — Bauer rescues the unsuspecting public from colossal catastrophe.
Bauer, to be kind, isn't tethered to the tenets of the Geneva Conventions or overly concerned about the FISA court. Bauer has an imaginary job to do, after all. And to extract valuable information from suspects, he tortures them. Occasionally, he tortures them emotionally, but mostly he tortures them physically. He almost always gets what he needs.
The problem is that the show's sixth season saw ratings fall. Producers claimed they had difficulty recruiting actors, many of whom, according to The Wall Street Journal, "disapproved of the show's depiction of torture." Head writer Howard Gordon told the paper that, "The fear and wish-fulfillment the show represented after 9/11 ended up boomeranging against us. We were suddenly facing a blowback from current events."
Now, I oppose torture. And by torture, I mean listening to moralizing actors who can't differentiate between an escapist action show and reality. Playing a role on "24" is no more an endorsement of torture than playing a run-of-the-mill, misogynistic murderer is an endorsement of serial killers. At least in this sort of fiction, the public can forget we have an incompetent CIA and for 24 hours pretend that someone somewhere is actually on top of global terrorism.
In any event, "24" producers were told to "re-imagine" the show, so we can look forward to a kinder, gentler Jack Bauer.
And GI Joe? He reportedly no longer takes orders from the U.S. government. In a movie due out next year, Joe is commanded by a "European-based military unit known as Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity (GIJOE)." Perhaps he'll track down global warming deniers and copyright infringers.
Last we heard from the real Captain America, he was protesting a new federally mandated law requiring all "super-powered" individuals to register with the government. Such laws, he believed, were an assault on civil rights of the "superhero community." He was killed by an assassin's bullet soon after. I kid you not.
Some say that popular culture is typically a reflection of our national psyche.
If that's true, we're a nation completely unsure of itself."
Moral absolutism and the advent of the superhero began their fall in the 60's. They were felled by the same hands- rebellion against authority, all things established and, at the root, rebellion against God and righteousness (not that all encompassed within the aforementioned arenas are of God). As a result black and white no longer exist as separate entities but as an agglomerated mass of grey. The absence of black and white in our society's morals is the kryponite to every superhero. In fact, it is the bane of everything upright- an unstable foundation cannot support any sort of superstructure. Therefore truth too does not endure in this age.
Today's acclaimed knowledge and new found wisdom is nothing but foolishness. God's Word is fulfilled when Paul says, "For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:21-22). Consequently what most would call rational and the "right thing" is destroying society and individual rather than advancing them.
The only villain the superheros couldn't withstand was that of foolishness.
3.3.08
Wolves in Sheep's Clothing
"Feminism: noun
The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.
'Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb is a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, so are the children of one’s youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them; they shall not be ashamed, but shall speak with their enemies in the gate.' Psalm 127:3-5 Of Solomon
Lets break down this beautiful Psalm...
'The fruit of the womb is a reward.' Children are the fruit of a mother’s womb and genuinely the gift of God. The word reward here may be understood as 'the sign of Divine favor.' Of Divine favor takes far other than the pessimistic view, so common in our day, as to the special gift of children.
Simple men many times see children as an utter misfortune and encumbrance that ultimately brings about utter poverty and destitution. However, how beautifully and blessedly different are the teachings here. God gives children, not as a penalty, nor as a burden, BUT as a favor. Likewise, in the Old Testament to be barren and without children was considered a curse. It was once said, 'To have many children about us is better than to have much wealth about us.' Let us never forget this simple truth: Children were purposed by God in Scripture to be a blessing bestowed upon a husband and wife!
I recently read these statements from those who's goal it is to demolish the family and pervert the God ordained role for women.
'The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it.' (Margaret Sanger)
'In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them.' (Dr. may Jo Bane, feminist)
'Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women...We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men.' (The Declaration of Feminism)
'We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.' (Sisterhood is Powerful)
'Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession...The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that.'(Vivian Gornick)
Feminism is a very wicked and sick system that has sucked in many advocates. It is something we need to be very aware of in our society and fight against. We cannot allow these ideas to seep into our minds and then start to slowly alter our thinking.
Titus 2:4,5 says, ..train the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home , to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God. (this is in quite contrast to the quotes from the feminists above)
'A man has no pleasure in life than can equal his joy in his children, who bear his image, and in miniature reproduce himself. For a man lives over again in the success of their well-grown healthy bodies; of their developed and cultured minds; of their honorable and useful positions. A man never feels to have lived in vain when he leaves a respectable and well-ordered family behind him' -Rawlinson"
by Courtney Schnetz
The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.
'Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb is a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, so are the children of one’s youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them; they shall not be ashamed, but shall speak with their enemies in the gate.' Psalm 127:3-5 Of Solomon
Lets break down this beautiful Psalm...
'The fruit of the womb is a reward.' Children are the fruit of a mother’s womb and genuinely the gift of God. The word reward here may be understood as 'the sign of Divine favor.' Of Divine favor takes far other than the pessimistic view, so common in our day, as to the special gift of children.
Simple men many times see children as an utter misfortune and encumbrance that ultimately brings about utter poverty and destitution. However, how beautifully and blessedly different are the teachings here. God gives children, not as a penalty, nor as a burden, BUT as a favor. Likewise, in the Old Testament to be barren and without children was considered a curse. It was once said, 'To have many children about us is better than to have much wealth about us.' Let us never forget this simple truth: Children were purposed by God in Scripture to be a blessing bestowed upon a husband and wife!
I recently read these statements from those who's goal it is to demolish the family and pervert the God ordained role for women.
'The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it.' (Margaret Sanger)
'In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them.' (Dr. may Jo Bane, feminist)
'Marriage has existed for the benefit of men; and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women...We must work to destroy it. The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men.' (The Declaration of Feminism)
'We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.' (Sisterhood is Powerful)
'Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession...The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that.'(Vivian Gornick)
Feminism is a very wicked and sick system that has sucked in many advocates. It is something we need to be very aware of in our society and fight against. We cannot allow these ideas to seep into our minds and then start to slowly alter our thinking.
Titus 2:4,5 says, ..train the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home , to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God. (this is in quite contrast to the quotes from the feminists above)
'A man has no pleasure in life than can equal his joy in his children, who bear his image, and in miniature reproduce himself. For a man lives over again in the success of their well-grown healthy bodies; of their developed and cultured minds; of their honorable and useful positions. A man never feels to have lived in vain when he leaves a respectable and well-ordered family behind him' -Rawlinson"
by Courtney Schnetz
29.2.08
The Insufficiency of Good
This thought really provoked consideration on my words to express Who God is and I enjoyed it much. I hope you do as well!
"You know how we say "God is good." Well I just realized how that is so insufficient to say. I mean "yes of course he is good," but we also think our grades are "good" the food is "good" that one boy in Southland is "good" looking. With the way we use words today, the word "good" doesnt mean too much.... and especially doesnt do justice to God. I wish I could think of a word to use...God is great? amazing? awesome? wonderful? YES, he is all these things, yet these words dont do him justice. The reason I say this... is today in church I was struck with the fact that God is .... (insert a sufficing word if you can think of one)I had been really thinking and wondering over some things about trials and hardships." by Courtney Schnetz
"You know how we say "God is good." Well I just realized how that is so insufficient to say. I mean "yes of course he is good," but we also think our grades are "good" the food is "good" that one boy in Southland is "good" looking. With the way we use words today, the word "good" doesnt mean too much.... and especially doesnt do justice to God. I wish I could think of a word to use...God is great? amazing? awesome? wonderful? YES, he is all these things, yet these words dont do him justice. The reason I say this... is today in church I was struck with the fact that God is .... (insert a sufficing word if you can think of one)I had been really thinking and wondering over some things about trials and hardships." by Courtney Schnetz
28.2.08
Have or Have Not?
A comment by my sister recently sparked this post. People, when asked what God has been teaching them lately, often mention patience. Yet patience is a fruit of the Spirit. If one yields to the Spirit they have it, if not then the fruit is not apparent. Therefore my sister insightfully mused as to whether one can be taught a fruit of the Spirit. It seems to her at this point in time that waiting and patience may be different although similar.
I have not studied this yet and will thus refrain from making a comment.
What are your thoughts?
I have not studied this yet and will thus refrain from making a comment.
What are your thoughts?
26.2.08
America's Enterprise of Faith
"When the Church began in Jerusalem it was a relationship. It moved to Greece and became a philosophy. It moved to Rome and became an institution. It moved to Europe where it became a culture and it moved to America and became an enterprise" said Morris.
Every nation, people and culture which has had the privilege of a strong Christian influence has allowed time or culture to negatively influence the faith. In Greece and America culture is the bane. Time and the complacency it breeds are the culprits in Rome and Europe. The results of their gradual fall we see mentioned above. They now, like the cities of antiquity, have only a semblance of their former glory.
When I walk the book isles, browse the music section and take a general inventory of Christianity in America today I am sickened! Christian material is too often marketed with money at the heart rather than Christ and the edification of believers...especially when a particular product does well! It is a business attitude that dictates product placement and advertisement not the will of God...or at least The God. Sadly much of the Christian community has chosen the master wealth and God is at their back. For Christ said, "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth" (Matthew 6:24).
Moreover, churches have succumbed to this worldliness and joined hands with business and entertainment for the sake of numerical growth. "The rise of the evangelical churches, especially the megachurches, is a consumer-driven movement similar to changes seen in politics, art and education, said James Twitchell, author of 'Shopping for God: How Christianity Went From in Your Heart to in Your Face.' 'Successful churches,' Twitchell said, 'have one thing in common: They are entertaining'" (Denver Post 26.2.08- "Americans restless in search for God" by Electa Draper; http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_8362744). As a result truth is little preached and few disciples made (true there are many Christians, or perhaps very few once the surface is breached). Depth has taken a backseat, if it is even in the vehicle, to width. That is, the only sacrifice made on the alter has been quality in order to make room for quantity.
Love too has been a victim. Those swinging to the other side of the pendulum in reaction to the aforementioned movement have offered a different but equally offensive sacrifice. Christ NEVER ceded doctrine but He also NEVER ceased to love. One without the other is empty and meaningless. Love without doctrine is cheap and shallow and doctrine without love is only noise.
Therefore like Christ let us return to a proper balance, always loving and always upholding doctrine.
Moreover, we must also take heed of the current situation in America lest the age old adage "history repeats itself" become true of the US. Sadly it appears that this nation has already slipped far down the slippery slope and is nigh unrecoverable. But there is hope and it lies in prayer. All revivals have their birth herein because only God can take such calloused and hardened hearts and make them soft and open again.
Yet hope lies in the future as well if we should fail to climb back up the peak. History reveals that as one nation falls another picks up the banner. Looking to the East, Asia, particularly China shows great potential and is perhaps already prepared by God and poised to seize the standard! Thank God for His knowledge to know all things, wisdom and discernment to act righteously and best and His power to work them out!
Every nation, people and culture which has had the privilege of a strong Christian influence has allowed time or culture to negatively influence the faith. In Greece and America culture is the bane. Time and the complacency it breeds are the culprits in Rome and Europe. The results of their gradual fall we see mentioned above. They now, like the cities of antiquity, have only a semblance of their former glory.
When I walk the book isles, browse the music section and take a general inventory of Christianity in America today I am sickened! Christian material is too often marketed with money at the heart rather than Christ and the edification of believers...especially when a particular product does well! It is a business attitude that dictates product placement and advertisement not the will of God...or at least The God. Sadly much of the Christian community has chosen the master wealth and God is at their back. For Christ said, "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth" (Matthew 6:24).
Moreover, churches have succumbed to this worldliness and joined hands with business and entertainment for the sake of numerical growth. "The rise of the evangelical churches, especially the megachurches, is a consumer-driven movement similar to changes seen in politics, art and education, said James Twitchell, author of 'Shopping for God: How Christianity Went From in Your Heart to in Your Face.' 'Successful churches,' Twitchell said, 'have one thing in common: They are entertaining'" (Denver Post 26.2.08- "Americans restless in search for God" by Electa Draper; http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_8362744). As a result truth is little preached and few disciples made (true there are many Christians, or perhaps very few once the surface is breached). Depth has taken a backseat, if it is even in the vehicle, to width. That is, the only sacrifice made on the alter has been quality in order to make room for quantity.
Love too has been a victim. Those swinging to the other side of the pendulum in reaction to the aforementioned movement have offered a different but equally offensive sacrifice. Christ NEVER ceded doctrine but He also NEVER ceased to love. One without the other is empty and meaningless. Love without doctrine is cheap and shallow and doctrine without love is only noise.
Therefore like Christ let us return to a proper balance, always loving and always upholding doctrine.
Moreover, we must also take heed of the current situation in America lest the age old adage "history repeats itself" become true of the US. Sadly it appears that this nation has already slipped far down the slippery slope and is nigh unrecoverable. But there is hope and it lies in prayer. All revivals have their birth herein because only God can take such calloused and hardened hearts and make them soft and open again.
Yet hope lies in the future as well if we should fail to climb back up the peak. History reveals that as one nation falls another picks up the banner. Looking to the East, Asia, particularly China shows great potential and is perhaps already prepared by God and poised to seize the standard! Thank God for His knowledge to know all things, wisdom and discernment to act righteously and best and His power to work them out!
6.2.08
The Wars Within
Today America enjoys great internal peace. Foreign nations no longer occupy the soil, North and South have now been reunited for over a century and civil unrest is microscopic. However, while physical internal peace is realized new enemies have risen in the conflict vacuum. Now that peace has been accomplished people feel free to engage in other forms of warfare. Today there is an ideological war being waged amongst the general American populace and a power struggle of similar character taking place between branches of government.
Before the 60's most American's more or less held the same moral and ethical values. They believed in truth and right and wrong. Yet during the tumultuous 60's youths began to rebel against those long held principles. Black and white blurred into grey, all things were relative, peace and love was the motto. This time appears to be the mother of liberalism, especially the extreme left. As it has developed and "matured" the political spectrum has been stretched greatly. In the process innumerable variations and combinations of the two ideologies have been created between the extreme left and fundamental right. Consequently the gorge separating left from right, liberal from conservative, has grown into a cavernous valley, one side is barely visible from the other. Indeed France cannot be seen from New England's coast.
Unable to find much common ground the two sides have become increasingly opposed to one another. Israel and Judah though of the same father had little other resemblance in the days of Asa and Ahab. Little trace of amity in either word or action can be found any longer. Ergo American society has become alarmingly incongruous. In fact, the country has decidingly split between two camps, the Democratic and the Republican, the Liberal and the Conservative. The sea appears calm on the surface but beneath strong currents oppose one another. Ideological militancy is beginning to emerge and if nothing is done to alleviate the tension then physical conflict is a viable possibility. The volcano erupts when pressure becomes too great. Sufficient is history's testimony.
Let me here digress and address the issue of governmental conflict. Today I heard it said by several coworkers that the Bush administration is Monarchal in nature. Mulling over their comment a possible reason for their impression came to me. Bush is a steady president not fickle and wishy washy. Therefore he does not tolerate being treated as a puppet of the Legislative branch. It could appear then that the flexing of executive power is to a detrimental degree. Yet it is needed. For there is a very real power struggle between the two branches, especially when opposing parties occupy the separate branches. As with the American society, the branches of government are at odds with one another due to their radically different views. At every level this rift is apparent.
In conclusion superficial peace exists and must be dealt with in one way or another. There is little evidence though that the conflict will be reconciled peacefully. America is not even hinted at in end times prophecy so it must be deduced that a catastrophic event befalls this nation who is a world player and power. United we stand, divide we fall. Will America's end be at our own hands or by another nation's?
Before the 60's most American's more or less held the same moral and ethical values. They believed in truth and right and wrong. Yet during the tumultuous 60's youths began to rebel against those long held principles. Black and white blurred into grey, all things were relative, peace and love was the motto. This time appears to be the mother of liberalism, especially the extreme left. As it has developed and "matured" the political spectrum has been stretched greatly. In the process innumerable variations and combinations of the two ideologies have been created between the extreme left and fundamental right. Consequently the gorge separating left from right, liberal from conservative, has grown into a cavernous valley, one side is barely visible from the other. Indeed France cannot be seen from New England's coast.
Unable to find much common ground the two sides have become increasingly opposed to one another. Israel and Judah though of the same father had little other resemblance in the days of Asa and Ahab. Little trace of amity in either word or action can be found any longer. Ergo American society has become alarmingly incongruous. In fact, the country has decidingly split between two camps, the Democratic and the Republican, the Liberal and the Conservative. The sea appears calm on the surface but beneath strong currents oppose one another. Ideological militancy is beginning to emerge and if nothing is done to alleviate the tension then physical conflict is a viable possibility. The volcano erupts when pressure becomes too great. Sufficient is history's testimony.
Let me here digress and address the issue of governmental conflict. Today I heard it said by several coworkers that the Bush administration is Monarchal in nature. Mulling over their comment a possible reason for their impression came to me. Bush is a steady president not fickle and wishy washy. Therefore he does not tolerate being treated as a puppet of the Legislative branch. It could appear then that the flexing of executive power is to a detrimental degree. Yet it is needed. For there is a very real power struggle between the two branches, especially when opposing parties occupy the separate branches. As with the American society, the branches of government are at odds with one another due to their radically different views. At every level this rift is apparent.
In conclusion superficial peace exists and must be dealt with in one way or another. There is little evidence though that the conflict will be reconciled peacefully. America is not even hinted at in end times prophecy so it must be deduced that a catastrophic event befalls this nation who is a world player and power. United we stand, divide we fall. Will America's end be at our own hands or by another nation's?
5.2.08
Addendum to "Evolution and Man"
In my reading I recently came across these quotes from Charles Darwin which are case in point of the aforementioned post. As one will see, the creator of the Evolutionary Theory himself realized the implications of his proposal. "Even the subtitle for Charles Darwin's groundbreaking 1859 book Origin of Species reflects this particular aspect of "natural selection": The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life" (ICR "Acts and Facts" article "One Birthday, Two Legacies by Beth Mull- http://www.icr.org/article/3653/).
"I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilization than you seem inclined to admit.... The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world" (ICR "Acts and Facts" article "One Birthday, Two Legacies by Beth Mull- Charles Darwin: Life and Letters, I, letter to W. Graham, July 3, 1881, 316; cited in Himmelfarb, G. 1959. Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution. London: Chatto and Windus, 343).
"He ranked certain races as being between "the Caucasian" and the baboon.
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time, the anthropomorphous apes...will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro sic or Australian and the gorilla" (ICR "Acts and Facts" article "One Birthday, Two Legacies by Beth Mull- Darwin C. 1901. The Descent of Man. London: John Murray, 241-242).
Again Evolution enslaves and degrades mankind but God and Scripture frees and elevates him to his rightful place as beings created in God's image. Thus they are to be treated and respected as such. In the latter faith all men are created equal.
"I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilization than you seem inclined to admit.... The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world" (ICR "Acts and Facts" article "One Birthday, Two Legacies by Beth Mull- Charles Darwin: Life and Letters, I, letter to W. Graham, July 3, 1881, 316; cited in Himmelfarb, G. 1959. Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution. London: Chatto and Windus, 343).
"He ranked certain races as being between "the Caucasian" and the baboon.
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time, the anthropomorphous apes...will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro sic or Australian and the gorilla" (ICR "Acts and Facts" article "One Birthday, Two Legacies by Beth Mull- Darwin C. 1901. The Descent of Man. London: John Murray, 241-242).
Again Evolution enslaves and degrades mankind but God and Scripture frees and elevates him to his rightful place as beings created in God's image. Thus they are to be treated and respected as such. In the latter faith all men are created equal.
3.2.08
Paper or Plastic?
Does anyone find it ironic, even funny, that just about ten years ago Americans and the world were trying to save trees and thus boycotted paper bags and switched to plastic but today, in the name of the same fight, are boycotting plastic?
This sounds earily similar to the ice age scare of my father's generation and the global warming scare of my generation.
This sounds earily similar to the ice age scare of my father's generation and the global warming scare of my generation.
31.1.08
Christianity & Government
"In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people." Webster
Today's rhetoric of separation of church and state should stop at the founding father's words and those near their time. For they were Christian men of great faith whose lives depicted and whose words echoed Scriptural truths. It is no more evident than in their words recorded in our nations founding documents. The Preamble to the Declaration of Independence itself undeniably affirms this when it states that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..." To the creators of the corner stones of America, Christianity in state was no contradiction. It is therefore obvious that the separation was not what most today fight for. Rather it was as Jefferson meant it to be- a separation of state from church not church from state.
When we consider the historical context of these men the true meaning of separation from church and state becomes crystal clear. Most of America's founders either came from England or were intimately acquainted with it. There the state had infiltrated the church and corrupted it. Consequently American leaders wanted to guard against the same bane and thereby protect the church's purity. For it held the same place in their hearts as it did in Webster's as is evidenced by their free and copious use of Christian language in America's founding documents. We can deduce then that they considered that religion, particularly Christianity, does a nation well, especially a nation which intends "to secure the rights and privileges of a free people" as Webster's aforementioned quote states.
In conclusion, we ought to, nay, must reintegrate Christianity into our society and government as it is an intrigal, vital, piece to our nation's success and future, indeed to its very rason d'etre. When we seperate the church from the state we seperate heart from the body.
Today's rhetoric of separation of church and state should stop at the founding father's words and those near their time. For they were Christian men of great faith whose lives depicted and whose words echoed Scriptural truths. It is no more evident than in their words recorded in our nations founding documents. The Preamble to the Declaration of Independence itself undeniably affirms this when it states that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..." To the creators of the corner stones of America, Christianity in state was no contradiction. It is therefore obvious that the separation was not what most today fight for. Rather it was as Jefferson meant it to be- a separation of state from church not church from state.
When we consider the historical context of these men the true meaning of separation from church and state becomes crystal clear. Most of America's founders either came from England or were intimately acquainted with it. There the state had infiltrated the church and corrupted it. Consequently American leaders wanted to guard against the same bane and thereby protect the church's purity. For it held the same place in their hearts as it did in Webster's as is evidenced by their free and copious use of Christian language in America's founding documents. We can deduce then that they considered that religion, particularly Christianity, does a nation well, especially a nation which intends "to secure the rights and privileges of a free people" as Webster's aforementioned quote states.
In conclusion, we ought to, nay, must reintegrate Christianity into our society and government as it is an intrigal, vital, piece to our nation's success and future, indeed to its very rason d'etre. When we seperate the church from the state we seperate heart from the body.
America's Glory
"When statesmen are ruled by faction and intrest, they can have no passion for the glory of their country." Addison
By in large, this is the nature of America's political scene today. A sad state. Is it any wonder then that the nation's glory is seriously waning.
By in large, this is the nature of America's political scene today. A sad state. Is it any wonder then that the nation's glory is seriously waning.
29.1.08
That Privledged Hemisphere
Have you ever noticed that most habitable land lies north of the equator? Interesting.
Additionally, it is intriguing to consider that most great civilizations have been born in the Northern Hemisphere.
Maybe these observations are something and maybe they are nothing.
Additionally, it is intriguing to consider that most great civilizations have been born in the Northern Hemisphere.
Maybe these observations are something and maybe they are nothing.
27.1.08
American Railways
Since my first visit to Europe and my rail experience I have been a strong advocate for such systems in the US. However knowing that Americans are fiercely independent and individualistic it became quiet obvious that such a public and communal form of transportation would not, nay, could not take root. This culture whose identity birthed the automobile and highway system- both supporting and nurturing the deep rooted value- would never except en mass a departure from said cultural standard. Compromise to such a cherished principle would be unthinkable regardless of the economic, ecological and personal benefits to be reaped.
Except now a dim light has appeared, a ray of hope, a chance for a train system equal to Europe's to be financed and developed- to go from dream to reality. Our modern popular push for environmental responsibility is its catalyst. Most everything that rail lines bring concur with ecological responsibility. The benefits to person, government, nature, and world are rich.
But this potential can only be attained through people of vision and persons of means taking up the mantle and carrying it on to completion. Will anyone capitalize on such a ripe opportunity?
Except now a dim light has appeared, a ray of hope, a chance for a train system equal to Europe's to be financed and developed- to go from dream to reality. Our modern popular push for environmental responsibility is its catalyst. Most everything that rail lines bring concur with ecological responsibility. The benefits to person, government, nature, and world are rich.
But this potential can only be attained through people of vision and persons of means taking up the mantle and carrying it on to completion. Will anyone capitalize on such a ripe opportunity?
24.1.08
Today's Romans
It occurred to me the other day as I watched the movie "Gladiator" that American society, perhaps the entire world- I cannot speak for them as I do not have enough experience in any country but this- has much the same character as Rome did. Those ancient people loved sex and violence in war and games and Americans show the same inclination. Do not be so quick to defend yourself. Actions speak louder than words.
While the people of modern Rome would never admit entertainment in war, death or any other violence what does their media appetite reveal? Sex, violence, war, death, &c. dominate media. News syndicates, Hollywood, the video game industry and all other media sources do not publish material which does not sell. Ergo deduction indicates that Americans do indeed find pleasure in these abominable subjects. Their propensity towards a bloodthirsty, sordid and immoral attitude equals if not surpasses that of those people of antiquity! Fie on them!
Believers we too are guilty and much more accountable than unbelievers for we should know better! Let us therefore separate ourselves from the world as Romans 12:1-2 commands! "Therefore I urge you brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect." We carry holy news and therefore should be more than whitewashed tombs! Let us promote all that is good and righteous and lovely while condemning in word and action all that defiles, sin and that which is opposed to the LORD God. Then we will have a firm foundation on which to witness and share the gospel. Then we will be set apart as holy- to be used in God's service. Then we will shine as stars in the universe. Then we will not be as those Romans but as citizens of heaven.
While the people of modern Rome would never admit entertainment in war, death or any other violence what does their media appetite reveal? Sex, violence, war, death, &c. dominate media. News syndicates, Hollywood, the video game industry and all other media sources do not publish material which does not sell. Ergo deduction indicates that Americans do indeed find pleasure in these abominable subjects. Their propensity towards a bloodthirsty, sordid and immoral attitude equals if not surpasses that of those people of antiquity! Fie on them!
Believers we too are guilty and much more accountable than unbelievers for we should know better! Let us therefore separate ourselves from the world as Romans 12:1-2 commands! "Therefore I urge you brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect." We carry holy news and therefore should be more than whitewashed tombs! Let us promote all that is good and righteous and lovely while condemning in word and action all that defiles, sin and that which is opposed to the LORD God. Then we will have a firm foundation on which to witness and share the gospel. Then we will be set apart as holy- to be used in God's service. Then we will shine as stars in the universe. Then we will not be as those Romans but as citizens of heaven.
23.1.08
Evolution & Man
I recently purchased Ridpath's "Great Races of Mankind." He initiates his treatise with the question which grips our race- that is of origin and all inquiries therein. Following he carefully outlines the sciences involved in their successive line. Herein the then new doctrine of his time begins to show its face- Evolution.
In the course of my study I diverted from reading and entertained my love of flipping through the pictures. What quickly became apparent was Evolution's consequential effect on the understanding and view of mankind. It goes so far as to feed mankind's tendency towards ethnocentrism, racism and overall superiority complex.
Volume one, chapter XIL, pg. 233 contains an image which vividly depicts the Evolutionary point of view. There are six people, each from a different race and culture. The first man is implied to be lowest on the Evolutionary scale- he is an Aborigine. A white man in a suit from Western culture is assumed to be the highest form of man. See also photos on pgs. 382, 388, 396. Each is an arresting reminder of Evolution's deplorable and abhorrent degradation of mankind and ultimately and most importantly the glory of God! Men are made to appear barbaric, animalistic and in the case of Western civilization superior and civilized.
Therefore if the theory of Evolution is fact, as is widely propagated, than racism should be taught and enforced, the equality of mankind is farce, civil rights only extend to the civilized, there is no sanctity of life &c. Since Evolution theorizes that each species is in a different stage of development than it follows that one species is greater, more advanced, more human than another. Consequently, less evolved creatures must be treated accordingly and slavery is tolerable and should be vehemently supported! As men have beasts of burden and pets so they must by evolution's practical application be allowed and encouraged to take such from lower species of man. The strong will survive and thrive and the weak will be subject to them if indeed they can prolong their existence. Evolution demeans man.
However Scripture lifts him up to his proper status! America's founding fathers learned from the Bible, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights." This releases man from bondage and ushers him into the glorious light of freedom! The Scriptures teach that man is created in God's image (Gen. 1:26) and that he is to be treated as such. Equality of mankind is upheld by the pillar of God's Word.
What is more, mankind's actions: campaigning against inequality, slavery and racial superiority, their fight for the responsible use of the earth, including the preservation of flora and fauna are not compatible with Evolution's teaching. Rather it confirms what Scripture teaches and that the knowledge of these truths are imbued by God the Creator. The liberal and worldly cries and actions are not attacks on God and truth but rather affirmations thereof!
Praise God!
In the course of my study I diverted from reading and entertained my love of flipping through the pictures. What quickly became apparent was Evolution's consequential effect on the understanding and view of mankind. It goes so far as to feed mankind's tendency towards ethnocentrism, racism and overall superiority complex.
Volume one, chapter XIL, pg. 233 contains an image which vividly depicts the Evolutionary point of view. There are six people, each from a different race and culture. The first man is implied to be lowest on the Evolutionary scale- he is an Aborigine. A white man in a suit from Western culture is assumed to be the highest form of man. See also photos on pgs. 382, 388, 396. Each is an arresting reminder of Evolution's deplorable and abhorrent degradation of mankind and ultimately and most importantly the glory of God! Men are made to appear barbaric, animalistic and in the case of Western civilization superior and civilized.
Therefore if the theory of Evolution is fact, as is widely propagated, than racism should be taught and enforced, the equality of mankind is farce, civil rights only extend to the civilized, there is no sanctity of life &c. Since Evolution theorizes that each species is in a different stage of development than it follows that one species is greater, more advanced, more human than another. Consequently, less evolved creatures must be treated accordingly and slavery is tolerable and should be vehemently supported! As men have beasts of burden and pets so they must by evolution's practical application be allowed and encouraged to take such from lower species of man. The strong will survive and thrive and the weak will be subject to them if indeed they can prolong their existence. Evolution demeans man.
However Scripture lifts him up to his proper status! America's founding fathers learned from the Bible, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights." This releases man from bondage and ushers him into the glorious light of freedom! The Scriptures teach that man is created in God's image (Gen. 1:26) and that he is to be treated as such. Equality of mankind is upheld by the pillar of God's Word.
What is more, mankind's actions: campaigning against inequality, slavery and racial superiority, their fight for the responsible use of the earth, including the preservation of flora and fauna are not compatible with Evolution's teaching. Rather it confirms what Scripture teaches and that the knowledge of these truths are imbued by God the Creator. The liberal and worldly cries and actions are not attacks on God and truth but rather affirmations thereof!
Praise God!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
