Thursday, May 20, 2010
Aren't we born atheists?
Humans are the only species that are able to self examine. We ask ourselves “What is my purpose, and why am I here”? Assuming that people are born without the knowledge of God is not provable either. Infants are born without the knowledge of airplanes, but that has no bearing on the validity of airplanes whatsoever. We cannot ignore either the evidence in Scripture. Who are we as a species? The writer of Psalm 8 sees our potential and strives to give us honor and dignity and purpose by making us “a little lower than the angels.” Then how does an atheist reckon with the most powerful description of the gift of love? Concepts such as love, trust, hope, friendship, caring, respect, self-sacrifice and even humor, go to the very heart of our humanity. They are spiritual entities, not intellectual or physical. They introduce us to a sense of the presence of God every day. Life’s experiences are therefore not a matter of will. People get married, for example, not on the basis of arguments but on a determined desire to build a happy, meaningful and fruitful relationship. I do know that not all people get married for the same reason but traditional marriage is based off of these desires. Man and women engulfed in sin do marry for wrong reasons. So it is with our understanding of God. GOD made US. Technically speaking a skeptic says, “I doubt that God exists” and an agnostic says, I don’t know (or can’t know) whether God exists.” But an atheist claims to know or (or at least believe) that God does not exist, which would be a bold assertion whether it be an infant or a young adult. There are many types of agnostics (as I’m sure you know). Some of the types I believe are based off of apathetic ignorance and or arrogance. Some agnostics believe you can’t know anything hardly recognizing they just made a self-contradicting statement. Others believe there is either insufficient evidence or none at all; sadly simple ignorance is the reason for that belief. Socrates said “I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing”. Wisdom is the knowledge of what is true or right coupled with just judgment as to action. So if the statement the typical agnostic makes is you can’t know truth then how do they know that’s true? Isn’t that a truth statement in itself? Could it be that we are born children of God but allow the convincing and deceiving world views shift the way we think. Many former Christians I have met made their transition to skepticism based off of weak reasons. There weak faith led to disbelief, disbelief to bias outlook, and bias outlook to their current stance on God.
The canon of Scripture
To add to or subtract from God’s words would be to prevent God’s people from obeying him fully, for commands that were subtracted would not be known to the people, and words that were added might require extra things of the people which God had not commanded.
Deuteronomy 4:2
“You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.
If we are to trust and obey God absolutely we must have a collection of words that we are certain are God’s own words to us. If there are any sections of Scripture about which we have doubts whether they are God’s words or not, we will not consider them to have absolute divine authority and we will not trust them as much as we would trust God himself. The earliest collection of written words of God was the Ten Commandments.
Exodus 31:18
“And when He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.
The content of the Old Testament canon continued to grow until the time of the end of the writing process. If we date Haggai to 520 B.C, Zechariah to 520-518 B.C, and Malachi around 435 B.C, we have an idea of the approximate dates of the last Old Testament prophets. Roughly coinciding with this period are the last books of the Old Testament history-Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther. Ezra went to Jerusalem in 458 B.C, and Nehemiah was in Jerusalem from 445-433 B.C. Esther was written sometime after the death of Xerxes-1 (=Ahasuerus) in 465 B.C, and a date during the reign of Artaxerxes 1 (464-423 B.C.). Thus approximately 435 B.C. there were no further additions to the Old Testament canon.
Josephus (born A.D. 37/38) explained “From Artaxerxes to our own times a complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets” (Against Apion 1.42) This statement by the greatest Jewish historian of the first century A.D. shows that he knew of the writings now considered part of the “Apocrypha” (The Apocrypha is a collection of uninspired, spurious books written by various individuals) but that he and many of his contemporaries considered these other writings “no worthy of equal credit” with what we now know as the Old Testament Scriptures. There had been, in Josephus’s viewpoint, no more “Words of God” added to Scripture after about 435 B.C
In the New Testament, we have no record of any dispute between Jesus and the Jews over the extent of the canon. Apparently there was full agreement between Jesus and his disciples, on the one hand, and the Jewish leaders or Jewish people, on the other hand, that additions to the Old Testament canon ceased after the time of Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The fact is confirmed by quotations of Jesus and the New Testament authors from the Old Testament. According to one account Jesus and the New Testament authors quote the various parts of the Old Testament Scriptures as divinely authoritative over 295 times, but not once do they cite any statement from the books of Apocrypha or any other writings as having divine authority. The absence of any such reference to other literature as divinely authoritative, and extremely frequent reference of hundreds of places in the Old Testament as divinely authoritative, gives strong confirmation to the fact that the New Testament authors agreed that the established Old Testament canon, more and no less, was to be take as God’s very words
Deuteronomy 4:2
“You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.
If we are to trust and obey God absolutely we must have a collection of words that we are certain are God’s own words to us. If there are any sections of Scripture about which we have doubts whether they are God’s words or not, we will not consider them to have absolute divine authority and we will not trust them as much as we would trust God himself. The earliest collection of written words of God was the Ten Commandments.
Exodus 31:18
“And when He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.
The content of the Old Testament canon continued to grow until the time of the end of the writing process. If we date Haggai to 520 B.C, Zechariah to 520-518 B.C, and Malachi around 435 B.C, we have an idea of the approximate dates of the last Old Testament prophets. Roughly coinciding with this period are the last books of the Old Testament history-Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther. Ezra went to Jerusalem in 458 B.C, and Nehemiah was in Jerusalem from 445-433 B.C. Esther was written sometime after the death of Xerxes-1 (=Ahasuerus) in 465 B.C, and a date during the reign of Artaxerxes 1 (464-423 B.C.). Thus approximately 435 B.C. there were no further additions to the Old Testament canon.
Josephus (born A.D. 37/38) explained “From Artaxerxes to our own times a complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets” (Against Apion 1.42) This statement by the greatest Jewish historian of the first century A.D. shows that he knew of the writings now considered part of the “Apocrypha” (The Apocrypha is a collection of uninspired, spurious books written by various individuals) but that he and many of his contemporaries considered these other writings “no worthy of equal credit” with what we now know as the Old Testament Scriptures. There had been, in Josephus’s viewpoint, no more “Words of God” added to Scripture after about 435 B.C
In the New Testament, we have no record of any dispute between Jesus and the Jews over the extent of the canon. Apparently there was full agreement between Jesus and his disciples, on the one hand, and the Jewish leaders or Jewish people, on the other hand, that additions to the Old Testament canon ceased after the time of Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The fact is confirmed by quotations of Jesus and the New Testament authors from the Old Testament. According to one account Jesus and the New Testament authors quote the various parts of the Old Testament Scriptures as divinely authoritative over 295 times, but not once do they cite any statement from the books of Apocrypha or any other writings as having divine authority. The absence of any such reference to other literature as divinely authoritative, and extremely frequent reference of hundreds of places in the Old Testament as divinely authoritative, gives strong confirmation to the fact that the New Testament authors agreed that the established Old Testament canon, more and no less, was to be take as God’s very words
Challenging Chance
If you look at the individual parts of the eye (wires) as simple organs than yes it would seem plausible that natural selection and random mutation could have brought about the complex eye we have today. However each part of the eye is highly complex, even the proteins which make up the eye are far complex than you make them out to be. The human brain consists of 12 billion cells, forming 120 trillion interconnections. The light sensitive retina which is also part of the brain contains over 10 million photoreceptor cells.
There are 20 different kinds of amino acids that are used to construct the proteins of all living organisms, including man. The average person consists of a string of 500 amino acids. The total number of combinations of 20 different amino acids in such a string is, for all practical purposes unlimited. Each protein in our body however must contain a specific sequence of amino acids if it is to function properly. I urge you to take an honest look at the probability and see if gradual evolution is still a reasonable argument.
The 500 amino acids that make up an average sized protein can be arranged in over 1 x 10^600 different ways (one followed by 600 zeroes). If we had a computer that could rearrange the 500 amino acids of a particular protein at the rate of a billion combinations in a second, we would still stand essentially no chance of hitting the correct combination
There are things that are irreducibly complex (bacterial flagellum) how does gradual evolution explain this. For biological things to operate they need genetic information. My question to you is where did the information of DNA come from how did it arise in the first place. Lots of people have wanted to explain the origin of information by reference to the laws of physics and chemistry or by reference of chemical properties of the constituent parts of the DNA. That would be like saying that you could explain the information in the morning paper by reference to the physics and chemistry of ink bonding to paper. There is a chemical explanation as to why the ink sticks to the paper but that does not explain the way the ink got arranged to convey a message that could be understood by speakers of English language information requires a material medium but it transcends the material medium
Even if every mutation has a positive result (which it doesn’t) an unguided process has far greater odds than that of an intelligent designer. Forgive me for using Occam's razor on this one but to put it simply a designer seems much more probable than chance. There is only one known cause for the origin of information and that is intelligence. It looks like a creator left his signature for us on creation. -Psalms 19
There are 20 different kinds of amino acids that are used to construct the proteins of all living organisms, including man. The average person consists of a string of 500 amino acids. The total number of combinations of 20 different amino acids in such a string is, for all practical purposes unlimited. Each protein in our body however must contain a specific sequence of amino acids if it is to function properly. I urge you to take an honest look at the probability and see if gradual evolution is still a reasonable argument.
The 500 amino acids that make up an average sized protein can be arranged in over 1 x 10^600 different ways (one followed by 600 zeroes). If we had a computer that could rearrange the 500 amino acids of a particular protein at the rate of a billion combinations in a second, we would still stand essentially no chance of hitting the correct combination
There are things that are irreducibly complex (bacterial flagellum) how does gradual evolution explain this. For biological things to operate they need genetic information. My question to you is where did the information of DNA come from how did it arise in the first place. Lots of people have wanted to explain the origin of information by reference to the laws of physics and chemistry or by reference of chemical properties of the constituent parts of the DNA. That would be like saying that you could explain the information in the morning paper by reference to the physics and chemistry of ink bonding to paper. There is a chemical explanation as to why the ink sticks to the paper but that does not explain the way the ink got arranged to convey a message that could be understood by speakers of English language information requires a material medium but it transcends the material medium
Even if every mutation has a positive result (which it doesn’t) an unguided process has far greater odds than that of an intelligent designer. Forgive me for using Occam's razor on this one but to put it simply a designer seems much more probable than chance. There is only one known cause for the origin of information and that is intelligence. It looks like a creator left his signature for us on creation. -Psalms 19
Saturday, January 9, 2010
The Moral Argument
The moral argument begins with the fact that all people recognize some moral code (that some things are right, and some things are wrong). Every time we argue over right and wrong, we appeal to a higher law that we assume everyone is aware of, holds to, and is not free to arbitrarily change. Right and wrong imply a higher standard or law, and law requires a lawgiver. Because the Moral Law transcends humanity, this universal law requires a universal lawgiver. This, it is argued, is God.
In support of the moral argument, we see that even the most remote tribes who have been cut off from the rest of civilization observe a moral code similar to everyone else's. Although differences certainly exist in civil matters, virtues like bravery and loyalty and vices like greed and cowardice are universal. If man were responsible for that code, it would differ as much as every other thing that man has invented. Further, it is not simply a record of what mankind does—rarely do people ever live up to their own moral code. Where, then, do we get these ideas of what should be done? Romans 2:14-15 says that the moral law (or conscience) comes from an ultimate lawgiver above man. If this is true, then we would expect to find exactly what we have observed. This lawgiver is God.
To put it negatively, atheism provides no basis for morality, no hope, and no meaning for life. While this does not disprove atheism by itself, if the logical outworking of a belief system fails to account for what we instinctively know to be true, it ought to be discarded. Without God there would be no objective basis for morality, no life, and no reason to live it. Yet all these things do exist, and so does God. Thus, the moral argument for the existence of God.
Check it out at Gotquestions.org
In support of the moral argument, we see that even the most remote tribes who have been cut off from the rest of civilization observe a moral code similar to everyone else's. Although differences certainly exist in civil matters, virtues like bravery and loyalty and vices like greed and cowardice are universal. If man were responsible for that code, it would differ as much as every other thing that man has invented. Further, it is not simply a record of what mankind does—rarely do people ever live up to their own moral code. Where, then, do we get these ideas of what should be done? Romans 2:14-15 says that the moral law (or conscience) comes from an ultimate lawgiver above man. If this is true, then we would expect to find exactly what we have observed. This lawgiver is God.
To put it negatively, atheism provides no basis for morality, no hope, and no meaning for life. While this does not disprove atheism by itself, if the logical outworking of a belief system fails to account for what we instinctively know to be true, it ought to be discarded. Without God there would be no objective basis for morality, no life, and no reason to live it. Yet all these things do exist, and so does God. Thus, the moral argument for the existence of God.
Check it out at Gotquestions.org
The Teleological Argument
The word teleology comes from telos which means "purpose" or "goal." The idea is that it takes a "purposer" to have purpose, and so where we see things obviously intended for a purpose, something had to have caused it for a reason. In other words, design implies a designer. We instinctively do this all the time. The difference between the Grand Canyon and Mount Rushmore is obvious—one is designed, one is not. The Grand Canyon was clearly formed by non-rational, natural processes, whereas Mount Rushmore was clearly created by an intelligent being—a designer. When we are walking down the beach and see a watch we do not assume that time and random chance produced it from blowing sand. Why? Because it has the clear marks of design—it has a purpose, it conveys information, it is specifically complex, etc. In no scientific field is design considered to be spontaneous; it always implies a designer, and the greater the design, the greater the designer. Thus, taking the assumptions of science, the universe would require a designer beyond itself (i.e. supernatural).
The teleological argument applies this criteria to the whole universe. If designs imply a designer, and the universe shows marks of design, then the universe was created. Clearly, every life form in earth's history has been highly complex. A single strand of DNA equates to one volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica. The human brain is approximately 10 billion gigabytes in capacity. Besides living things here on earth, the whole universe seems designed for life. Literally hundreds of conditions are required for life on earth—everything from the mass density of the universe down to earthquake activity must be fine-tuned in order for life to survive. The random chance of all these things occurring is literally beyond imagination. The odds are many orders of magnitude higher than the number of atomic particles in the whole universe! With this much design, it is difficult to believe that we just got lucky. In fact, top atheist philosopher Antony Flew's recent conversion to theism was based largely on this argument.
In addition to being used to demonstrate God's existence, the teleological argument also exposes shortcomings in the theory of evolution. The Intelligent Design movement in science applies information theory to life systems and shows that chance cannot even begin to explain its complexity. In fact, even single-celled bacteria are so complex that without all of their parts working together at the same time they would have no survival potential. That means those parts could not have developed by chance. Darwin recognized that this might be a problem someday just by looking at the human eye. Little did he know that even single-celled creatures have too much complexity to explain without a creator!
Check it out at Gotquestions.org
The teleological argument applies this criteria to the whole universe. If designs imply a designer, and the universe shows marks of design, then the universe was created. Clearly, every life form in earth's history has been highly complex. A single strand of DNA equates to one volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica. The human brain is approximately 10 billion gigabytes in capacity. Besides living things here on earth, the whole universe seems designed for life. Literally hundreds of conditions are required for life on earth—everything from the mass density of the universe down to earthquake activity must be fine-tuned in order for life to survive. The random chance of all these things occurring is literally beyond imagination. The odds are many orders of magnitude higher than the number of atomic particles in the whole universe! With this much design, it is difficult to believe that we just got lucky. In fact, top atheist philosopher Antony Flew's recent conversion to theism was based largely on this argument.
In addition to being used to demonstrate God's existence, the teleological argument also exposes shortcomings in the theory of evolution. The Intelligent Design movement in science applies information theory to life systems and shows that chance cannot even begin to explain its complexity. In fact, even single-celled bacteria are so complex that without all of their parts working together at the same time they would have no survival potential. That means those parts could not have developed by chance. Darwin recognized that this might be a problem someday just by looking at the human eye. Little did he know that even single-celled creatures have too much complexity to explain without a creator!
Check it out at Gotquestions.org
The Cosmological Argument
The cosmological argument derives its title from observing the world around us (the cosmos). It begins with what is most obvious in reality: things exist. It is then argued that the cause of those things’ existence had to be a "God-type" thing. These types of arguments go all the way back to Plato and have been used by notable philosophers and theologians ever since. Besides being philosophically evident, science finally caught up with theologians in the 20th century when it was confirmed that the universe had to have had a beginning. So, today, the arguments are even powerful for non-philosophers. There are two basic forms of these arguments, and the easiest way to think of them might be what are called the "vertical" and the "horizontal" forms. These titles indicate the direction from which the causes come. In the vertical form, it is argued that every created thing is being caused right now (imagine a timeline with an arrow pointing up from the universe to God). The horizontal version shows that creation had to have a cause in the beginning (imagine that same timeline only with an arrow pointing backward to a beginning point in time).
The horizontal is a little easier to understand because it does not require much in the way of philosophy to grasp. The basic argument is that all things that have beginnings had to have causes. The universe had a beginning; therefore, the universe had a cause. That cause, being outside the whole universe, is God. Someone might say that some things are caused by other things, but this does not solve the problem. This is because those other things had to have causes, too, and this cannot go on forever. Why not? Let's take a simple example: trees. All trees began to exist at some point (for they have not always existed). Each tree had its beginning in a seed (the "cause" of the tree). But every seed had its beginning ("cause") in another tree. See where this is going? You can't have an infinite series of tree-seed-tree-seed because no series is infinite—it cannot go on forever. All series are finite (limited) by definition. There is no such thing as an infinite number because even the number series is limited (although you can always add one more, you are always at a finite number). If there is an end, it is not infinite. All series have two endings actually—at the end and at the beginning (if you don't see why this is true, try to imagine a one ended stick!). But if there were no first cause, the chain of causes never would have started. Therefore, there is, at the beginning at least, a first cause—one that had no beginning. This first cause is God.
The vertical form is a bit more difficult to understand, but it is more powerful because not only does it show that God had to cause the "chain of causes" in the beginning, He must still be causing things to exist right now. Once again, we begin by noting that things exist. Second, while we often tend to think of existence as a property that things sort of "own"—that once something is created, existence is just part of what it is—this is not the case. Consider a simple example of the triangle. We can define the nature of a triangle as "the plane figure formed by connecting three points not in a straight line by straight line segments." Notice what is not part of this definition: existence.
This definition would hold true even if no triangles existed at all. Therefore, a triangle's nature—what it is—does not guarantee that one exists (like unicorns—we know what they are, but that does not make them exist). Because it is not part of a triangle's nature to exist, triangles must be made to exist by something else that already exists (such as I drawing one on a piece of paper). But it also does not exist simply because of what I am. So, I have to be given existence as well. This cannot go on forever (no infinite series, remember?). Therefore, something that does not need to be given existence must exist to give everything else existence. Now apply this example to everything in the universe. Does any of it exist on its own? No. So, not only did the universe have to have a first cause to get started; it needs something to give it existence right now. The only thing that would not have to be given existence is a thing that exists as its very nature. It is existence. This thing would always exist, have no cause, have no beginning, have no limit, be outside of time, be infinite . . . sound familiar? It should! It is God!
Check it out at Gotquestions.org
The horizontal is a little easier to understand because it does not require much in the way of philosophy to grasp. The basic argument is that all things that have beginnings had to have causes. The universe had a beginning; therefore, the universe had a cause. That cause, being outside the whole universe, is God. Someone might say that some things are caused by other things, but this does not solve the problem. This is because those other things had to have causes, too, and this cannot go on forever. Why not? Let's take a simple example: trees. All trees began to exist at some point (for they have not always existed). Each tree had its beginning in a seed (the "cause" of the tree). But every seed had its beginning ("cause") in another tree. See where this is going? You can't have an infinite series of tree-seed-tree-seed because no series is infinite—it cannot go on forever. All series are finite (limited) by definition. There is no such thing as an infinite number because even the number series is limited (although you can always add one more, you are always at a finite number). If there is an end, it is not infinite. All series have two endings actually—at the end and at the beginning (if you don't see why this is true, try to imagine a one ended stick!). But if there were no first cause, the chain of causes never would have started. Therefore, there is, at the beginning at least, a first cause—one that had no beginning. This first cause is God.
The vertical form is a bit more difficult to understand, but it is more powerful because not only does it show that God had to cause the "chain of causes" in the beginning, He must still be causing things to exist right now. Once again, we begin by noting that things exist. Second, while we often tend to think of existence as a property that things sort of "own"—that once something is created, existence is just part of what it is—this is not the case. Consider a simple example of the triangle. We can define the nature of a triangle as "the plane figure formed by connecting three points not in a straight line by straight line segments." Notice what is not part of this definition: existence.
This definition would hold true even if no triangles existed at all. Therefore, a triangle's nature—what it is—does not guarantee that one exists (like unicorns—we know what they are, but that does not make them exist). Because it is not part of a triangle's nature to exist, triangles must be made to exist by something else that already exists (such as I drawing one on a piece of paper). But it also does not exist simply because of what I am. So, I have to be given existence as well. This cannot go on forever (no infinite series, remember?). Therefore, something that does not need to be given existence must exist to give everything else existence. Now apply this example to everything in the universe. Does any of it exist on its own? No. So, not only did the universe have to have a first cause to get started; it needs something to give it existence right now. The only thing that would not have to be given existence is a thing that exists as its very nature. It is existence. This thing would always exist, have no cause, have no beginning, have no limit, be outside of time, be infinite . . . sound familiar? It should! It is God!
Check it out at Gotquestions.org
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Why Christianity?
If there was the ultimate question at final jeopardy this would be it. First of all there is a question you must ask your self and that is, is truth important? Christianity claims to be the Truth, In fact, Jesus claims to be the “Exclusive Truth” meaning the only way to God is through Him. Secondly, Jesus said those who believe on him will not perish but have eternal life, be saved. These are strong, clear-cut statements, but are they True? Is there evidence behind the claims of Jesus being truth?
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
John 14:6
“that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.”
John 3:15-17
“He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is he“.
Deuteronomy 32:4
“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
John 8:32
We have all fallen short to the glory of God. Jesus died for our sins so that we are forgiven. By Gods amazing grace we are saved when we submit our lives to him. I ask you to imagine this. You are in a courtroom standing before the judge. The only difference here is you did not sin against the community but to him. He looks at you and reads off everything you have done… He then leans over and says I am going set you free and I will pay the price for you. The first thing that comes to your mind is “I don’t deserve this.” But God loves us so much that he does not wish to see anyone perish. We have an infinitely loving God who has called us to do the same. To love the unloved, to be there for those when no one would.
“Hatred stirs up strife, But love covers all sins.”
Proverbs 10:12
“Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends.”
John 15:13
"In your unfailing love you will lead the people you have redeemed. In your strength you will guide them to your holy dwelling.
Exodus 15:13
God, who calls us friend, and children of His, loves us so much. Though we walk away from him and curse His name whether out of anger or ignorance He still loves us this unconditional love that will never die. This is God, this is Jesus who was crucified on the cross so that we may have eternal life and salvation in the kingdom of Heaven.
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
John 14:6
“that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.”
John 3:15-17
“He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is he“.
Deuteronomy 32:4
“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
John 8:32
We have all fallen short to the glory of God. Jesus died for our sins so that we are forgiven. By Gods amazing grace we are saved when we submit our lives to him. I ask you to imagine this. You are in a courtroom standing before the judge. The only difference here is you did not sin against the community but to him. He looks at you and reads off everything you have done… He then leans over and says I am going set you free and I will pay the price for you. The first thing that comes to your mind is “I don’t deserve this.” But God loves us so much that he does not wish to see anyone perish. We have an infinitely loving God who has called us to do the same. To love the unloved, to be there for those when no one would.
“Hatred stirs up strife, But love covers all sins.”
Proverbs 10:12
“Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends.”
John 15:13
"In your unfailing love you will lead the people you have redeemed. In your strength you will guide them to your holy dwelling.
Exodus 15:13
God, who calls us friend, and children of His, loves us so much. Though we walk away from him and curse His name whether out of anger or ignorance He still loves us this unconditional love that will never die. This is God, this is Jesus who was crucified on the cross so that we may have eternal life and salvation in the kingdom of Heaven.
Right and wrong (Part 2)
Right and wrong Part 2
There are two main feelings someone faces when making a decision. What I ought to do and what I ought not to do. A lot of the time if the task undesirable or even dangerous the “ought to” is the weaker of the two decisions. For example someone you do not know is hanging from a cliff screaming for help. By helping them you put your own life in danger yet you don’t even know the person. The first reaction and sadly the weakest is “I ought to do something” immediately after that comes the rationalizing on if saving this person is worth the risk of your own life. There is one standard that stands alone in this and this is the little voice inside of all of us telling us to do the weaker of the two decisions. Even though we would be putting our own lives in danger the desire to rescue or to do good hits all of us it comes naturally almost as if written in our DNA. Now you may argue that this is nothing but a “Herd instinct” doing things for the good of society is the only reason why we do good, but this is false. C.S Lewis once said in his book Mere Christianity “Now I do not deny that we may have a herd instinct: but that is not what I mean by Moral Law. We all know what it feels like to be prompted by instinct-by mother love, or sexual instinct, or the instinct for food. It means that you feel a strong want or desire to act in a certain way. And, of course, we sometimes do feel just that sort of desire to help another person: and no doubt that desire is due to the herd instinct. But feeling a desire to help is quite different from feeling that you ought to help whether you want to or not.” So where does this come from? Not from us, C.S Lewis goes on by saying “The law of Human Nature, or right or wrong, must be something above and beyond the actual facts of human behavior. In this case, besides the actual facts, you have something else-a real law which we did not invent and which we know we ought to obey” This law which is above man comes from God, who has put in all of us this desire to do good. God is all true and all loving. He blessed us with free will and loves to see us use it to glorify him. We all know the good we ought to do and the conviction it carries. Your next question may be well there are so many religions out there why Christianity? Lets dive right into that on the next topic.
There are two main feelings someone faces when making a decision. What I ought to do and what I ought not to do. A lot of the time if the task undesirable or even dangerous the “ought to” is the weaker of the two decisions. For example someone you do not know is hanging from a cliff screaming for help. By helping them you put your own life in danger yet you don’t even know the person. The first reaction and sadly the weakest is “I ought to do something” immediately after that comes the rationalizing on if saving this person is worth the risk of your own life. There is one standard that stands alone in this and this is the little voice inside of all of us telling us to do the weaker of the two decisions. Even though we would be putting our own lives in danger the desire to rescue or to do good hits all of us it comes naturally almost as if written in our DNA. Now you may argue that this is nothing but a “Herd instinct” doing things for the good of society is the only reason why we do good, but this is false. C.S Lewis once said in his book Mere Christianity “Now I do not deny that we may have a herd instinct: but that is not what I mean by Moral Law. We all know what it feels like to be prompted by instinct-by mother love, or sexual instinct, or the instinct for food. It means that you feel a strong want or desire to act in a certain way. And, of course, we sometimes do feel just that sort of desire to help another person: and no doubt that desire is due to the herd instinct. But feeling a desire to help is quite different from feeling that you ought to help whether you want to or not.” So where does this come from? Not from us, C.S Lewis goes on by saying “The law of Human Nature, or right or wrong, must be something above and beyond the actual facts of human behavior. In this case, besides the actual facts, you have something else-a real law which we did not invent and which we know we ought to obey” This law which is above man comes from God, who has put in all of us this desire to do good. God is all true and all loving. He blessed us with free will and loves to see us use it to glorify him. We all know the good we ought to do and the conviction it carries. Your next question may be well there are so many religions out there why Christianity? Lets dive right into that on the next topic.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
No such thing as right and wrong
There’s no such thing as right and wrong its and there is no such thing as truth, it is only opinion….. I’m sure most people if not all have heard this statement. This “idea” has no foundation and is dismissed in virtually all arguments because of how self-defeating it is. For any Christian struggling in this area of evangelizing here is what you can do. This will be brief but I will be happy to go into more detail upon request.
First of all lets check out something’s in the past that both non-believers and believers can agree on. The mass extermination of Jews which was led by Adolf Hitler was definitely wrong to do. If there were no such thing as right and wrong the definition of murder(to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously) turns into… population control. Those who do not believe in morals do not realize that we live by them everyday…Have you ever thought about that? When someone yells at you for something you didn’t do you would say “that’s unfair or that’s not right”. You would not sit and be silent. We know right and wrong best not by our actions but our reactions. Lets dive into truth, a guy I work with once told me that he does not believe in truth. Such a trap because he is oblivious to the fact that he just made a truth statement. Recognizing this he said “things may be true for you but not for me”. Once again no foundation under this statement. Truth does not change depending on who believes it. Why is it that we demand truth from doctors, lawyers, employers and friends but when it comes to religion we cast it off by saying “well that’s true for you but not me”. There is only one truth and it is immovable whether we like it or not. If you are like him and believe that truth may work for some but not all then I have a mission for you. Go to a bank, and write yourself a check for an amount that reaches beyond your balance. When you do go to the teller and ask her to cash it… When she says “I’m sorry sir/ma’am but I cannot cash this for you because you have insufficient funds”. Use your statement “well that may be true for you but for me” and see how far that gets you. Later on in the week that same guy said to me “If there is anyone who deserves vacation its me”. Another truth statement. How do you think he would react if the supervisor looked at him and said “That may be true for you but not for me, get back to work”. Not only do we subconsciously live by right, wrong and truth but also judging. The definition of judge is to decide or settle authoritatively. When we decide what we want to eat we are judging one restaurant versus the other. When we choose to hang out with a group of people over the other we judge both options of people. When a person commit’s a crime we hope that he is judged accordingly and given the punishment he deserves. If you take an honest look around we live by this standard of right and wrong, just and unjust but where does it come from…. We will go over this tomorrow.
First of all lets check out something’s in the past that both non-believers and believers can agree on. The mass extermination of Jews which was led by Adolf Hitler was definitely wrong to do. If there were no such thing as right and wrong the definition of murder(to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously) turns into… population control. Those who do not believe in morals do not realize that we live by them everyday…Have you ever thought about that? When someone yells at you for something you didn’t do you would say “that’s unfair or that’s not right”. You would not sit and be silent. We know right and wrong best not by our actions but our reactions. Lets dive into truth, a guy I work with once told me that he does not believe in truth. Such a trap because he is oblivious to the fact that he just made a truth statement. Recognizing this he said “things may be true for you but not for me”. Once again no foundation under this statement. Truth does not change depending on who believes it. Why is it that we demand truth from doctors, lawyers, employers and friends but when it comes to religion we cast it off by saying “well that’s true for you but not me”. There is only one truth and it is immovable whether we like it or not. If you are like him and believe that truth may work for some but not all then I have a mission for you. Go to a bank, and write yourself a check for an amount that reaches beyond your balance. When you do go to the teller and ask her to cash it… When she says “I’m sorry sir/ma’am but I cannot cash this for you because you have insufficient funds”. Use your statement “well that may be true for you but for me” and see how far that gets you. Later on in the week that same guy said to me “If there is anyone who deserves vacation its me”. Another truth statement. How do you think he would react if the supervisor looked at him and said “That may be true for you but not for me, get back to work”. Not only do we subconsciously live by right, wrong and truth but also judging. The definition of judge is to decide or settle authoritatively. When we decide what we want to eat we are judging one restaurant versus the other. When we choose to hang out with a group of people over the other we judge both options of people. When a person commit’s a crime we hope that he is judged accordingly and given the punishment he deserves. If you take an honest look around we live by this standard of right and wrong, just and unjust but where does it come from…. We will go over this tomorrow.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Trying or Traning?
John Ortberg said this perfectly "Then it dawns on you: Right now you cannot run a marathon. More to the point, you cannot run a marathon even if you really try really, really hard. Trying hard can accomplish only so much. If you are serious about seizing this chance of a lifeftime, you will have to enter into a life of training. You must arrange your life around certain practices that will enable you to do what you cannot do now by willpower alone. When it comes to running a marathon, you must train, not merely try."
A buddy of mine in class awhile back, told me that he tried but everyone and everything around him tempted him into going back to his old ways. I pray for this guy everyday. The devil will throw at us temptations that are so hard for us to drop. Whether it be one night stands, getting hammered, drugs, or even pornography. These are all corrupting temptations. We must remove ourselves from these situations and stay away from them until we feel strong enough to slowly come back and face them. I didn’t give up everything over night it took time and yes I did slip up several times but I am forgiven. Time with God, time in prayer and time in reading the bible is the training we need. I removed myself because I knew if I stayed I would not have turned into the man God wants me to be. In Matthew 11:29-30 says "Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” What a wonderful picture, Jesus is giving to those who are exhausted, weary and burdened from carrying the load by themselves! What a comfort, peace, joy and rest it is to know that Jesus is right with us, walking with us, teaching us and strengthening us side by side With the love and help from God I was able to train myself into the follower of Christ that doesn’t give in to meaningless things. The greatest thing to remember is, is God is right there waiting for you to come to him wholeheartedly. He is ready to shoulder the massive stack of worries, pain, and doubts that you have. The real question is are you ready? Are you ready to take that step and change your life forever? I can honestly tell you I’ve been there, I’ve hit rock bottom. The only thing that brought me to my feet was God who was right there with me. I’m going to close this one with a story for all of you.
Footprints
One Night a man had a dream. He dreamed he was walking along the beach with the Lord. Across the sky flashed scenes from his life. For each scene, he noticed two sets of footprints in the sand; one belonged to him and the other to the Lord. When the last scene of his life flashed before him, he looked back at the footprints in the sand. He noticed that many times along the path of his life there was only one set of footprints. He also noticed that it happened at the very lowest and saddest times in his life. This really bothered him and he questioned the Lord about it. "Lord, you said that once I decided to follow you you'd walk with me all the way, but I have noticed that during the most troublesome times in my life, there is only one set of footprints. I don't understand why when I needed you most you would leave me." The Lord replied, "My precious, precious child, I love you and would never leave you. During your times of trial and suffering when you see only one set of footprints, it was then that I carried you."
A buddy of mine in class awhile back, told me that he tried but everyone and everything around him tempted him into going back to his old ways. I pray for this guy everyday. The devil will throw at us temptations that are so hard for us to drop. Whether it be one night stands, getting hammered, drugs, or even pornography. These are all corrupting temptations. We must remove ourselves from these situations and stay away from them until we feel strong enough to slowly come back and face them. I didn’t give up everything over night it took time and yes I did slip up several times but I am forgiven. Time with God, time in prayer and time in reading the bible is the training we need. I removed myself because I knew if I stayed I would not have turned into the man God wants me to be. In Matthew 11:29-30 says "Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” What a wonderful picture, Jesus is giving to those who are exhausted, weary and burdened from carrying the load by themselves! What a comfort, peace, joy and rest it is to know that Jesus is right with us, walking with us, teaching us and strengthening us side by side With the love and help from God I was able to train myself into the follower of Christ that doesn’t give in to meaningless things. The greatest thing to remember is, is God is right there waiting for you to come to him wholeheartedly. He is ready to shoulder the massive stack of worries, pain, and doubts that you have. The real question is are you ready? Are you ready to take that step and change your life forever? I can honestly tell you I’ve been there, I’ve hit rock bottom. The only thing that brought me to my feet was God who was right there with me. I’m going to close this one with a story for all of you.
Footprints
One Night a man had a dream. He dreamed he was walking along the beach with the Lord. Across the sky flashed scenes from his life. For each scene, he noticed two sets of footprints in the sand; one belonged to him and the other to the Lord. When the last scene of his life flashed before him, he looked back at the footprints in the sand. He noticed that many times along the path of his life there was only one set of footprints. He also noticed that it happened at the very lowest and saddest times in his life. This really bothered him and he questioned the Lord about it. "Lord, you said that once I decided to follow you you'd walk with me all the way, but I have noticed that during the most troublesome times in my life, there is only one set of footprints. I don't understand why when I needed you most you would leave me." The Lord replied, "My precious, precious child, I love you and would never leave you. During your times of trial and suffering when you see only one set of footprints, it was then that I carried you."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
