Have we outgrown religion, or god (the idea of a god/God, or any deity of some sort)? Has science successfully rendered such views baseless? And by that token, has Creationism or Creation Science (the anti-evolutionist view if you will, or those who believe in the Biblical account of Creation) provided any worthwhile rebuttal? Or has Creation Science, described in a recent article I read as a ‘pseudo science’, become the so called ‘laughing stock of the Science world'? The short answer is of course: no… Simply put, the above questions and implications is another form of propaganda – promoted by the secular mindset, which is essentially an atheistic one. The scientific community is rife with it, as many respected scientists (who are also Christians, or religious in some way) quietly go about their work whilst retaining their creationist views without broadcasting it, because to do so would bring about prejudice against them for their beliefs. Ben Stein, a high school science educator, in his DVD “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” highlights the discrimination in the (American) education institutions if you do not believe in the naturalistic evolutionary world view. Is there any merit to the claim that truly intelligent (scientific) people cannot believe in God? The idea that any person with an education, an advanced degree, doesn’t believe in the Bible (or have any religious beliefs) because (specifically) the Bible is unscientific? Bill Nye (famous as ‘Bill Nye the Science Guy’) in a Youtube video for theBigThink.com said “And I say to the grown-ups: If you want to deny evolution and live in your, in your, uh, world that’s completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the Universe, that’s fine. But don’t make your kids do it… Because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and tax payers for the future” [taken from the article "Bill Nye: the (Pseudo-)Science Guy" by Dr. Jeff Miller] – more than implying or stopping short of saying that to believe in God and/or the Biblical account of creation (or any religion) will hamper your progress in science. In other words, creation scientists or those who share those beliefs cannot offer anything worthwhile/credible because their beliefs taint their findings. Also that anyone with these beliefs are living in a dream world. Of course his statement and what it implies is false. Agnostic Niel Degrasse Tyson stated that nearly half of the practicing scientists in America are religious and believe in/pray to, a god, yet it does not adversely affect their work. If we were to apply this view to history (bearing in mind that the Big Bang Theory has only been around for 35 years) we’d have to fudge out many contributions by so-called ‘creation-scientists’ who, based on Nye's intimation, seem to lack credibility. Men like
I could add a lot more names that are less famous. (I must add that this does not mean I agree with all of their personal views; for one, Newton did not believe Jesus was God, while it’s reported that Einstein – born a Jew – believed in a pantheistic god) but it can be said that they all accepted the Biblical account of creation as Truth. Now you might claim that modern science has unearthed the universe's true origins (minus God), but in fact, everything they have (against the Bible) is actually speculation. Pseudo Science An "old-earth ministries" article I read, labeled Creationism as a Pseudo Science since it cannot be empirically proven, and based on their definition, in this writers opinion, Creation Science can then rightly be described as Pseudo Science as it does not abide by the clinical definition of Science (it cannot be tested and proven in a lab via observational experiments… this being observational or practical and physical science). One can only observe the universe/nature to see if there are indications that are consistent with the Biblical explanation. That is to say, does anything we observe in nature or the universe scientifically contradict the Bible’s account or not? Conversely, Cosmology, with its presiding model of evolution and the Big Bang Theory, also cannot be proven… in fact its for this reason that it remains a theory and nothing more. Scientists have failed to provide any empirical proof, nor can they. What we can do is speculate and simulate, but even if (by way of an example) they do locate the much vaunted “god-particle”, it does not disprove God, nor does it prove the evolutionary theory, nor does it disprove creationists. (FYI, they’re not sure whether or not they’ve found the Higgs-Boson particle but they think that they have. One Scientist described it as recognizing a familiar face in a crowd as it passed by. It could be what they think it is, but it also may not be. So they think they’ve found it but it’s hard to tell because the process occurs so quickly in the Hadron Collider, so the ‘Find’ is yet to be verified). The reason they cannot prove the theory, is because they're speculating about something that happened in history (with no human witnesses), so all the experiments in Cern are speculative simulations of what scientists think happened in or near the beginning, but no one can say for sure. (FYI, In my email response to that article, I highlighted that according to their definition of 'Pseudo Science', they may as well add Cosmology into the mix as well since it fits the their bill... they have yet to respond.) "Concerning the term “pseudo-science,” we’d use that term differently than you’re suggesting. We’d use it to mean, basically, “false science.” Science based, for example, on faulty assumptions. With regard to science that involves unobserved events, we’d probably use the term “historical science” (as opposed to observational science), rather than pseudo-science, to describe those events. Much of geology, biology (notice that evolutionary biology is historical science, since no one has seen one type of creature give rise to a completely different type of creature, crossing a phylogenic boundary; we’d also call it a pseudo-science though, since it hinges on the flawed assumption that naturalism is correct), and cosmology are based on unobserved events, but would still be deemed science. Forensic science is another good example of science using indirect, rather than direct evidence—the scientists didn’t directly witness the event, but instead, are assessing what happened based on indirect evidence." But as I’ve said, what does this prove? If in fact the particle is verified (and I for one think that even if they haven’t found it yet, the particle probably does exist) what does it say about the origins of the universe. Practically, the particle can be ‘used’ by both evolutionists and creationists, but of course it doesn’t explain much. What do I mean? - Well, how did the particle come about in the first place? If it is the catalyzing particle to create all the others, then how was it created, or what catalyzed its formation? What or who created the Higgs-Boson particle? Additionally, this particle does not validate anything in the Big Bang Theory or the evolutionary model. It’s a link in a chain. Unfortunately for evolutionists, that chain is very incomplete. In fact the evolutionary chain has no beginning. As one scientist put it; Evolution and The Big Bang Theory have not made it to the starting line yet to compete with Creationism, because they cannot account for the origin of life/ the veritable “In the beginning” moment. Currently, this model has no beginning, apart from “Spontaneous generation and Abiogenesis” which contradict Scientific law. Where does the Higgs-Boson particle “fit” in the timeline of creation/development of the universe? One could say it was merely a tool God created to make the universe. Its like an artists tool - used not to shape the clay, but rather to make the clay required for the sculpture. If one were to apply it to the evolutionary model, then it would be integral to what came before the Big Bang… In other words it doesn’t explain what occurred to incite the implosion/explosion/expansion of the original mass to create the big bang. This of course is another bone of contention, with evolutionary scientists divided as to the origin of the theorized big bang, because some say that it must have had a center, while others disagree (ie. there is no center of the universe). The most preposterous notion though is that the entire universe comes from a “cosmic egg”, or cosmic dot (no bigger than a full-stop on this page) – a “single point” from which everything – you and I, earth, The Milky Way etc… evolved. This by the way, violates scientific law, echoed by Agnostic Scientist and former (he passed away in 2006) NASA astronomer: “But the creation of matter out of nothing would violate a cherished concept in science—the principle of the conservation of matter and energy—which states that matter and energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Matter can be converted into energy, and vice versa, but the total amount of all matter and energy in the Universe must remain unchanged forever. It is difficult to accept a theory that violates such a firmly established scientific fact” --- Robert Jastrow (1977, p. 32). Dating [and the Geologic timetable] A major issue of course is dating methods. There are quite a few methods out there, the most famous being Carbon Dating (which is based on several major assumptions, and can only be used for previously living matter with a limit of measuring only up to 40 000 years – meaning any fossil found and measurable using this method is by default, younger than 40 000 years old… thus it cannot be applied to the Prehistoric timescale for Dinosaurs which measures in the millions of years. For this, they instead rely on rocks around the fossil to date the specimen). Hence the need for other methods to suit and somehow aid the evolutionary theory and geologic timescale --- some of which are the Potassium-Argon, Uranium 238 and Fision-Track methods, all of which render vastly different dates for the same geological samples. Here’s a link detailing 20 different dating methods and the assumptions that are needed for ALL of them (they list 7 basic general assumptions and then further outline specified flaws of each individual dating method.) – Science vs evolution – Why non-historical dating techniques are not reliable To give you an idea of how dating works: an archaeologist will take a fossil he’s found, and before testing it, the scientists will ask him for an assumed/estimated date based on his expert opinion (i.e. how old does he think it is, based on his research and experience?) he’ll offer an estimate, and then they’ll search for a date that suits his theory. "Why do the radioactive ages of lava beds, laid down within a few weeks of each other, differ by millions of years?"—*Glen R. Morton, Electromagnetics and the Appearance of Age. Another article I read recently, on LiveScience.com, outlined the history of the feud between Evolutionists and Creationists, written by a (supposedly) unbiased author. One of the points she highlighted was the Creationist belief that the world came into being in 6 days and the earth is younger than 10 000 years old… She then stated “when in fact it is 4.5 Billion years old” – this of course is an outright lie. It’s odd that a learned scientist, or science writer would make such specious statement. What is a fact is that based on a flawed dating system, the earth appears to be billions of years old, or "according to some scientists, the earth is believed to be...". Why are so many scientists so afraid of accepting that “Earth changes can happen in catastrophic leaps” as we’ve witnessed with floods, earthquakes, tsunami’s etc. "Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality." "Both religion and science require a belief in God. For believers, God is in the beginning, and for physicists He is at the end of all considerations… To the former He is the foundation, to the latter, the crown of the edifice of every generalized world view." Some general questions I have:
Summing up – This is an article that can spawn volumes of work, and has for many an individual investigating these sorts of topics in earnest or tackling the philosophical dynamism which starts where science ends. Labeling Creation Science as a 'laughing stock' merely demonstrates the accusers ignorance and brand of bias. It strikes me as odd though that many people in the field do not earnestly want answers, but have rather settled on their own preconceived conclusions. Many (non-Christian) scientists dismiss outright the creation model of the Universe (and God/the Bible etc), before even considering it or investigating it. This in my opinion is unscientific (though scientists have covered themselves in this regard… according the University of California, Berkeley, “the scientific process only applies to the natural world. Hence, anything considered supernatural does not fit into the definition of science”). One can claim that you’ve considered something and found it to be a joke, but in reference to Christianity you’re only expressing your ignorance. The fact is that many people evade the Biblical explanation because it means facing some serious personal issues. Because once you’ve decided to investigate the Bible and its claims seriously, it then means you have to open yourself up to the possibility of being accountable to God... in other words it means confronting the truth of God, and that means realistically facing our rebellious nature. Most people in the world don’t want to do this. What it also means is wrestling with the notion of the supernatural, and this plays on one of mankind's most primal fears... the fear of the unknown. "Astronomers try not to be influenced by philosophical considerations. However, the idea of a universe that has both a beginning and an end is distasteful to the scientific mind. In a desperate effort to avoid it, some astronomers have searched for another interpretation of the measurements that indicate the retreating motion of the galaxies, an interpretation that would not require the universe to expand. If the evidence for the expanding Universe could be explained away, the need for a moment of creation would be eliminated,and the concept of time without end would return to science. But these attempts have not succeeded, and most astronomers have come to the conclusion that they live in an expanding world" --- Robert Jastrow - Until the Sun dies (1977, p.31) "We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way..." --- Isaiah 53:6 [Image credits: youtube.com, cern.ch, iconqal.com, quoteinsta.com]
0 Comments
- A factional short story - She sat as she usually did at the beginning of one of her more philosophical lectures, with her one thigh resting on the edge of her desk. When she brushed her short dark hair behind her ears, tucking the strands neatly into the arms of her slim spectacles, as she did now, it somehow lured onlookers, in this instance, her students, to sit forward in anticipation. It was her way of readying herself, and us, for what was to come. She interlocked her fingers in her lap and with a vaguely shaky voice, she began. “How hard is it, to believe in the invisible… how hard have we tested our perception of invisibility? An ‘invisible God’, for instance? Why, why is he invisible in the first place? And is the concept of invisibility even believable, I mean, it’s been the subject of many art pieces - films, scientists have actually been working on an actual ‘invisibility cloak’. But can there be any truth to this concept, anything more than fiction? Is it yet another fruitless pursuit of some impossible goal?” She turned her gaze to the open window now. “The more we know, the more we clutter ourselves. Travel to a rural town, experience a slower paced life and it will begin to lend some appreciation, not only for our creature comforts, but also to how simple life can be, or once was. I’ve met people whose only concern, quite literally, amounted to “when was the rain coming?” – that was and still is their main cause of stress. I’ve met farmers who’ve prayed for rain… I started in this manner because I want you to take a mental step back for a moment and think about life differently, to clear the clutter of bills, work, study, even family, from your plate, and let’s just think about life… the roots of it. When it comes down to the essentials, it becomes a matter of perception, because your life is less cluttered, you get to focus on the real things. I think of rural dusty towns because on such outskirts you become most aware of life in general.” She said her two fists together, “You’re conscious of it all the more, and just like that your perspective changes because quite literally, you’re relying more of your five senses to interact with your surroundings. City life often involves things or people jumping out at you, asking for your attention, making a noise, shrouding your vision… assaulting your senses. In remote places, that is removed, and you’re suddenly aware of the sound of your own footsteps, natural smells and aromas of nature, the cleaner air, being able to see to the untouched distance, and after a while you’re perhaps aware of the sound of your own breathing, because it is the only sound punctuating the air. You become fully aware of your own existence because now that everything, family, friends, TV, wifi, noise, is all gone and nothing is begging for your attention, everything around you just is. So your own existence… it feels, strangely “close” because now your senses are required to fetch stimuli from around you." She grabbed fists of air. "What does this have to do with God and invisibility? It’s simple; it’s how we perceive life. How we see this material world before us. Our senses, are our gateway to this world, allowing us to experience it. What we sense, governs what we determine to be invisible or not. The ancient peoples and rural cultures all had a sense of the spiritual, yet city life has diminished that sense by simply droning it out. We’ve become desensitized on a spiritual level. Think about this a moment: Dogs have more powerful olfactory sensors, said to be 1000 times more powerful than ours. So their sense of smell is richer, and broader, detecting odours that we can’t. They’re able to hear certain frequencies that we cannot. Crustaceans, in particular, the Mantis Shrimp, has one of the most elaborate visual systems ever discovered. They’re considered to have the most complex eyes of the animal kingdom. Some species possess 16 different photoreceptor types, of which 12 are for analysing colour. What does this mean? Well we only have 4 visual pigments of which 3 are used for colour perception. The rainbow stems from 3 colours. What this means is that they not only possess a better visual spectrum than we do, but it’s even better than our best technology can offer. It easily outperforms Blu-Ray optical technology. Mantis Shrimps can perceive more colours than we can. Does this mean there are more colours than we know? It makes sense if there are, since most of the light spectrum is not visible to us. What’s certain is that they perceive more than us, including ultraviolet light, and even polarization vision. What is clear to me is that even by studying the material world there’s a whole lot more than meets the eye… or ears and nose - not forgetting taste. So already we know, or are aware of the unknown… sorry to use this once laughed at idiom. But this is the known unknown… So by considering the invisibility of God, specifically addressing people who seem sure that there is no God, or spiritual/supernatural realm, we can already ascertain that even within our humble finite existence, we cannot see all there is to see, or hear all there is to hear… and this is about what we know exists out there. To us, they are known invisible entities. There are definite elements that exist outside our realm of perception. Now, spare another thought for the invisible world of . . . your mind.” Her head cocked to one side, “Wait what? – Yes,” She nodded, looking at our faces, “everything happening inside your mind, your thoughts, your imagination and your dreams. ALL this takes place outside, or apart from the natural material world, and are, by their nature, invisible to others. They are intangible. So already we’ve established 'perceivable' unknowns or invisibilities, and thence indefinable invisibilities. Again, these are invisible elements we know exist. Now think about this: If you’re in an accident, you may lose limbs, have an organ transplant, become paralyzed…" She waited, "the point is, that despite these things, you would still remain who you are, in mind, your personality… the essential things that make you, YOU. And guess what, it’s those invisible things that make us different. I’ve seen a couple of medical cases where patients lost portions of their brain, and though their lives were adversely affected, they still remain essentially who they are as people. So what makes us who we are? This is the existential question, because even through all that I’ve mentioned, there’s still more to us. A relative of mine recently suffered a stroke which has drastically impaired her speech. As a result, she could only enunciate two words: 'Willy boy' – this incidentally is what she used to call her now deceased husband. So of all the words in the two languages that she was able to speak, somehow her brain and mouth 'chose' those words as their default setting as she now learns how to speak again. Is this due to habit, muscle memory, or Love, or all of the above? Either way, its food for thought. We are already more than what we can perceive. Is believing in an “invisible God” really that hard? Ask yourself this: Is your idea of God too ‘provincial’? – The Bible is, well, its like a Vladimir Nabokov quote – ‘not like one wave... and to experience it does not mean you’ve grasped the whole sea. To truly understand it, would mean getting in the boat, going out to open waters until you can’t see land anymore. You then experience the waves that the sea can muster, and in the midst of it, find out what God’s Grace is really about… but still, you would be in the dark as to the teeming life beneath the surface, and the endless undercurrents... Many want to think of God as a simple timekeeper, who wound the universe’s clock, and then let it tick on,” she wafted her hand, “leaving it be, to run its course. But no, when we were created, the first of us, we were created holy, and righteous to stand in God’s presence – it was only Good. So what is Holy? – It means to belong to, or derived from, or associated with - a divine power. Something sacred. Regarded with veneration or specificity. Something reverent. But we disobeyed God, and thence removed ourselves from holiness, from God’s presence, as we descended into sin. And what is Sin? - A condition of estrangement from God, resulting from such disobedience. Romans 14:23 “… and whatever is not from faith is sin” – thus we are born into it, because we are born separated from God – we’re on opposing sides. But this creator of the universe, who sits on his throne in heaven, then stepped off that throne, to be born of a woman, and live amongst us, knowing full well what would happen. He knew he would be killed. But God planned this since our fall in Genesis 3. He planned it perfectly. He chose to dwell among us, to demonstrate his love… and true love is sacrificial – caring not for oneself, but for others. And Sacrifice? - A Relinquishment of something at less than its presumed value. === Imagine you were sentenced to death for a crime you were guilty of - which we all are, in this life - and someone came, and they said they loved you… even though we did not deserve the love, and they said they would take your place,to be executed in your stead. THIS is the type of love God has for us. God didn’t just choose to die, he chose to be beaten, tortured, laid bare and humiliated… reduced to a bleeding chunk of ripped flesh nailed to a wooden cross. - When this was prophesied in the Old Testament, this method of death, and punishment, hadn’t even been invented yet. God not only humbled himself, but Jesus subjected himself to hours of pain for our sake. It would be simple for God to show up and exercise his power, much like the miracles he performed throughout the Bible, with the same universe-creating power, making it obvious to us that he is the one true God, the almighty, brandishing his majesty in a visual feast of splendour and authority, essentially asserting that man choose to follow him, or choose death. But instead, God chose death first, overcame it, and now offers his hand gently, to follow him. God does want obedience, yes, like a father wants from his child, but he doesn’t want to enslave us, or to force us. He cannot make us Love him, because that is not true love. Read the Book properly, and you’ll find that it is in fact a love story, with a hero, fighting for us. The facts are that historians are unanimous. There was a man named Jesus, and he lived, and died, under the rule of Pontias Pilate. The bone of contention is whether or not he rose again. If he did not, then the entire Christian faith is based on a lie. In fact it would then mean that Jesus lied, since he said he would rise again, as it is written in Mark 10:34, Luke 9:22 and Matt 16:21. In fact, the majority of sceptics who studied history and the Bible, to search for evidence, came out of it a Christian. It could be claimed that the ones who were not converted, were never sceptics to begin with, but were rather cynics who presented no evidence to back up their claims that the Bible Story is false. Bertrand Russell admits his take on Jesus was, and I quote 'not concerned with historical facts'. Even outspoken critic Friedrich Nietzsche referred to Jesus as 'the only one true Christian' – whilst the Hindu religious leader Dayanand Saraswati made the wildly ridiculous claim that Jesus is 'a hot-tempered person destitute of knowledge and who behaved like a wild savage' – which he said without producing any evidence. So what we have, is historical evidence, and specifically a first generation of martyrs, who either saw what they claimed to see, or they were lying. All of them could choose to end their suffering, instead they chose to die for their belief. Understand… this is not one man’s testimony, this is the core testimony of Twelve men. Or shall I say thirteen, for after Judas Iscariot killed himself, the Apostles elected Matthias to replace him, and thence there was Apostle Paul. Both of these men died for their faith. So there was twelve apostles who died for their testimony of Jesus. Only Apostle John lived to be an old man, though he endured torture and beatings in his life time. Thus they fulfill Revelations 21:14, where John writes about the names of the Twelve on the twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem. So what does all this have to do with an Invisible God? Simple. These are the signs, the evidence of things unseen. The 'knowns'. Are we to suppose that what we see with our human eyes are all that is there? Let us think about that for a moment. We are claiming that all that our human eyes can see, is the extent of existence. And we do not even know how the human eye works. That is to say we don’t even fully understand the mechanism that allows us to perceive the world around us, and yet we have the audacity to claim “This is all there is”. Primitive men, or people of older times, in rural places, believed in a spiritual realm. It was part of them. Yet modern man has sought to eliminate this aspect of life. Secularism has sought it educate spirituality out of us, to show that it was simply a reflection of the primal uneducated thought patterns. This of course makes the false assumption that you cannot have both spirituality and intellect. And yet, intellects have failed to tear down the Bible. Whether you are an intellect or a simple man, the battle is always in the mind. This is why it is written in Luke 24:45 – “Then he opened their minds so they could understand the scriptures. Our physical bodies are visible, yet that which comprises who we really are, our mannerisms, character, personality and thought patterns… these are all invisible. We live finite lives, yet what we are made of, mentally and spiritually, is not finite. Stepping aside from Jesus Christ for a moment, we can reason that God being 'invisible' as we understand invisibility, is simply because our natural finite human eyes cannot perceive something as vast as a creator of the entire universe. Something so immense cannot fit into this world. Yet he ‘inserted’ himself into his creation a number of times in subtle ways. Moses beheld a burning bush, and as a result he had to wear a veil because his face was glowing due to the encounter he had. Every heavenly encounter in the Bible comes with the words 'DO NOT BE AFRAID'. Because we, as humans, have three principle fears," she held up three fingers which she lowered one at a time as she listed them "the unknown; that which we cannot understand; and lastly, the truth. Spirituality, the supernatural... ticks off all three. ... To believe in God, you need to have an open mind. Class dismissed.” [Image credits: fotocommunity.com, pol-ubeda on flickr.com, imgkid.com]
Article by Steven Benjamin I've heard it said that there are three types of men in the world (intentionally generalizing and painting us with very broad strokes); worldly men, religious men, and men of God. The first is those who are subject and governed by worldly things and desires, the second are those who practice religion but live worldly lives (riding the fence so to speak), the third are those seeking God in earnest (still fallible and not without sin or immune to temptation, but who truly and humbly seek God and live for Christ.) Finding the nude through the lewd, with Faith It’s a tricky thing, narrowing this topic down in one article, but I’ll try to zero in on the basics, though there’s enough material here to write a thesis and more. It’s always been difficult to differentiate, especially in the photographic arena tiptoeing through nude-Art, sensuality and sexuality. It’s one of the reasons that any topic involving sex or bare flesh, has been shunned by the church for so long, and that neglect, when looking at the current state of society, well let’s just say it’s telling… These days (in the modern age), the vast majority of men have seen or ‘experienced’ or ‘been exposed to’ pornography at some stage or level. But is there a need to differentiate between the mediums, to find when something actually becomes pornographic, – In short, yes there is. Of course this issue/debate is subjective, but there are discernible lines, however faint they may be at times, made so mostly by the people involved in it – in the making and perceiving - and it is important to find these lines. Many ultra conservatives in the church have a blanket regard for anything involving sensuality and nudity, and see it ALL as sin, actually, not just sin, but SIN – THE Sin of all SINS, because some still abide by the belief that there are varying degrees of it. But of course the Bible outline’s it quite simply, that everything that is not of faith is sin (Rom 14:23). I was given a word by a total stranger some time ago whilst going through my own encounter with pornography, that I should “stop doing whatever is not of God”. Now, as God has been working in me, I must highlight that it was interesting that the message was worded in this way. In my experience, when someone has a God sent word for you, it’s usually quite specific… and this got me thinking (something I do very well), additionally, it set me into a pursuit - of what? A pursuit of the truth. But why is this issue important? Simple - It is Fundamental. – It is a fundamental struggle of man, as God reminded me, when ‘taking me’ back to the beginning to the Garden of Eden. This though, was sparked by a question I had had since I was a teenager, to which I already knew the answer, that of; Can a man love [a] woman more than God? I simply needed to understand why I knew the answer was [of course] ‘Yes’. Check your halo’s, harps and clouds at the door... The truth is that our ideas and imaginings of heaven have always been quite conservative, measured to earthly things and dictated by commercialized media. Or many times heaven is represented as just the best the earth currently has to offer, but surrounded by clouds, which is cool maybe for like, an hour or two, maybe even a day, but what then? It seems a bit empty because many or most people don’t take heaven or the possibility thereof, that seriously. Another truth is that we simply cannot comprehend eternity. So what then for those of us who do take this issue seriously; how do we wrap our minds around it to appropriately adjust our perceptions? Firstly, what have we learned from God in our time here on earth? What notes do we have pertaining to the Almighty's personality, his creative design etc? When looking at the purest things on earth, the purest and most beautiful things this world and life has to offer, what incentive do they provide with a view to the “beyond” in mind? I believe heaven will include all these things, simply amplified in ways unimaginable… but let’s not allow that word unimaginable to get in our way – as we’re encouraged to believe in things unseen… the reason I say that heaven will include these pure things, is simply because they came directly from God. Yes we will worship God, but it won't be like any church service you may or may not have attended. We're meant to worship God in our everyday lives (living sacrifices), so heaven will encompass all the elements that God delights in here on earth. [WARNING: NUDITY AHEAD!] The struggle in this world is to reclaim intimacy with God; to develop our relationship with him. When you look at God’s design of marriage, and the two bodies that make up the union, we learn about God’s romantic and sensual nature (Two elements we need to remind ourselves that he invented – he is literally the God of sex). But looking more objectively - Woman: the crown of all creation, the first of her kind (since there is no gender in heaven due to there being no need for procreation – hence no 70 virgins either by the way) is a most intriguing image of sensuality and beauty. She is yet another picture of a certain side of God. When God made man, he took him through a vast untamed land, a wilderness, before leading him to Eden… So in this way we learn of God’s beauty within the mystery of adventure. Can you imagine what earth looked like in the early days, zero pollution, the air clean and pure, not one impurity in the waters nourishing the vast untamed landscape, teeming with life… it is an invigorating vision. So far we have many basic alluring ingredients all located at the beginning of creation lending some colour and hints into what is to come in the hereafter. We serve a God who is in love with us. He is passionate, he is mighty with a voice loader than thunder… he is a frightening prospect when taking from the images the Bible lends us. Hence C.S. Lewis using the image of a Lion (Aslan) in Narnia in his representation, with little Lucy Pevensie constantly wanting to hug and nestle in his mane, whilst still retaining the knowledge that this is a powerful and untamed beast – fear born out of respect (and what the term “God fearing” entails). And yet we speak of the same God who created sunsets and sunrises, mountainous reflections in lakes, the Aurora Borealis, the human orgasm, an infectious smile, music, dance, rainbows and erupting volcanoes, waterfalls and the entire universe with comets, nebula's and the explosive beauty of a dying star. *** Can we ever know what heaven will be like without ever having been there? Is this why he gave us the ability to have dreams, why we have an imagination… to gain further access to this other world, this other realm, gaining better grasp and clarity of his will and his vision. Let us pause for a moment to contemplate heavenly things. In the Bible, every Angel or heavenly being that appears on earth, invariably opens with the line of “do not be afraid”. Now ask yourself why… Imagine the scene, place yourself there. A great and astonishing light manifests in your presence and an audible voice emanates from it. Everything that arrests your senses at this moment, is otherworldly. You’re encountering something spiritual, something supernatural. This would shock anyone, even the staunchest of believers, simply because it apposes our very nature, and nothing on this earth (save perhaps for the Word of God - the Bible) can fully prepare us for such an encounter. [Click HERE for my Bible Book Review.] “There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire within a bush.” – Exodus 3:2 (NIV) The Supernatural world is literally frightening to our natural earthly selves and shatters our perceptions. To make us understand the imagery the Bible uses things like rumbling, thunder and blinding light in the descriptions of heavenly creatures, with huge audible claps accompanying every flap of their wings. Side-note: (the Biblical word ‘Seraphim’ means “burning ones” – and taking the literal form of burning, the temperature of flames dictate its color,the hottest of which, is white… from yellow to red to purple to blue and finally – white heat). Also, in metallurgy, fire and heat is used to purify the metal, hence the colour and symbolism also denotes the purity of the Angels. In Genesis 3:24 the Cherubim (yes the same angels for which the little archery baby angels of valentines fame derive their name) Angels are described with flaming swords guarding the gate of Eden, inspiring fear and even dread. It was they, the Cherubim who brought down judgement on Jerusalem’s fallen people in Eze 10. These creatures are complex and strange (to our minds eye) creatures bearing no resemblance to the angelic figures conjured by by the majority of contemporary media. “… from what appeared to be his waist up he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded him.” – Ezekiel 1:27 (NIV) Of course applying this to our adult minds, well… as children we were always more adept and receptive to these otherworldly concepts, because as we grow older we seem to cauterize the capacity of our imaginations, seeing certain ideas as immature or irrational. Many are prompted to simply dismiss the supernatural – we are after all talking of things which are not human. If there is one thing we can say about all these visions, is that they are NOT tame. When people talk of being “God fearing”, it is in reference to the literal power and might of God. Here is a being who spoke the world into being… And yet, he loves you. He wants to spend time with you. He wants you to make the choice to love him, because within the DNA of creation, is a story of love and romance, adventure, beauty and purity. * And so, having touched on what heaven could be, we've also glimpsed the other side. So what of it… What is hell? Hell; there are many versions of it, judging by what we’ve seen here on earth, but in eternity, I feel that it is simply abandonment. Being alone in eternity. Cut off from anything and everyone. God loves us, and has offered his love to us freely, but many of us have shunned it. So when it comes to eternity, those who chose to, will be shunned by God. Spending eternity in solitude, deserted. Hell is the Abyss… it is nothing, it is the torment of abandonment, solitary confinement, but the opposite of that – infinite solitude, like being lost in space but without the reference of stars or planets. It is infinite darkness… “What is hell? Hell is oneself. But not to leave you on that note; Considering Lucifer, if we look at all of creation, we see the context. One must look at the greater picture, the whole story. Central to that story, is the fracture in heaven. Just think, the majority of Jesus’ miracles were to do with healing, and to be saved is to be “born again” in spirit… and God said in Rev 22 that effectively Eden, will be restored. Overcoming death (which was never a part of creation), healing and restoration are keynotes (to say the least). When God started the human story (our side) it was a new beginning of hope for what had transpired before, of restoring what was lost in heaven. But to do that, he needs souls who choose him, souls who will love him truly, deeply. Hence reclaiming the intimacy with God, lost in the Garden of Eden (yes this story haunts us), but made available again, afforded to us anew by the sacrifice Jesus made by allowing himself to be nailed to a cross and suffering our fate: death... Dying for someone, taking their place and giving everything for that person, no matter what their attitude or resolve, in all our sin and shame - this is the ultimate expression of his love for us. * “It is as hard to explain how this sunlit land was different from the old Narnia as it would be to tell you how the fruits of that country taste. Perhaps you will get some idea of it if you think like this. You may have been in a room in which there was a window that looked out on a lovely bay of the sea or a green valley that wound away among mountains. And in the wall of that room opposite to the window there may have been a looking-glass. And as you turned away from the window you suddenly caught sight of that sea or that valley, all over again, in the looking glass. And the sea in the mirror, or the valley in the mirror, were in one sense just the same as the real ones: yet at the same time they were somehow different - deeper, more wonderful, more like places in a story: in a story you have never heard but very much want to know. The difference between the old Narnia and the new Narnia was like that. The new one was a deeper country: every rock and flower and blade of grass looked as if it meant more.” Here you have the creator of the entire universe, whose splendour is for all to see… so ask yourself: what’s Heaven really like? Merry Christmas! {Image credits: Pinterest.com, scout.cheatsheet.me, yooperpage.blogspot.com, iliketowastemytime.com, helpyourselfimages.com, www.beautyscenery.com, intothesunrise.blogspot.com, www.tripadvisor.com, celebritiesinview.com, www.theguardian.com, www.freewallsource.com, commons.wikimedia.org, wallroro.com, imgarcade.com, pixgood.com, creative-universes.wikia.com, thefaithpal.blogspot.com, vulgaire.com} Related Reading: A unique creation. From what we know, there is no such thing as gender in heaven, even though all angels mentioned in the Bible are male – in heaven there is no need for different sexes because there’s no procreation. So when God made Eve he capped off his creation by delivering to the world a different side of himself, and bestowing man with the ‘mimicking’ creating ability, to bear children. Angels were made by God, and so was the first man (Adam), but every son and daughter of Adam (a son of God) thereafter would then be referred to as ‘son of man’ and ‘daughter of man’, born into this world. Procreation as we know it is unique to this world, and thence so is woman. It says a great deal doesn’t it? Man was created in God’s image, but in women he endowed some of his more intricate and complex characteristics (still in his image). He instilled more of his raw beauty. I like the description that draws from the design of a rib (when God took Adam’s rib – this is also the first wound spoken of in the Bible – and there is no mention of pain or scars; the healing was instantaneous because it was divinely imposed). It says that women are equally strong (protecting the man’s heart) and fragile/delicate – the bone will break first to protect what's on the inside - the heart. What also makes more sense is why Satan (serpent) approached Eve first - before Eve, God and Adam had spent time together. He created her last - She is God’s crowning creation. This does put a few other things into perspective as well – because just as Satan first targeted Eve, he also targeted all her daughters as well. Why is there so much gender inequality? Why are women such a prime commodity in the sex industry, or human trafficking? Since the fall of man, God’s crowning creation has found herself under increased focus from the devil. She is his number one target. In essence when analysing history in this context, its easy to see that Satan has launched a personal war on women. It's why they are wrongly referred to (by many men) as the ‘weaker’ sex and why in many cultures of the world, there seems to be this want to literally cover or ‘hide’ women from public life. Man at his worst sees women (or all people) simply as lumps of flesh to be bartered and exploited; as sub-human… to be owned, to have dominion over. Now think of a strong woman, and what she is capable of. Think of how every good man has a strong woman at his side; and If women are ‘taken down’, then men will be too. “The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist” – this may be a popular movie quote (The Usual Suspects), but it remains a general quote that rings very true (Rev 12:9 – the deceiver). What many people are often guilty of (after acknowledging God) is underestimating the power of Satan and his role in this world/our lives. From this we can also surmise that the devil is indeed intelligent and cunning by his use of stealth, and this world is his playground of sin. So the prime target he chooses, is your mind… of course acknowledging his presence is a battle even in itself, but once you do, you then have to decide what to make of that knowledge, and whether or not you’re willing to engage with him (in conflict). This is a battle you cannot fight, and win, without Jesus. This is the world we live in. God created many beautiful things, gracing this world with his beauty, wrapping a different side of himself in the female form – illustrating his strength embedded in some of his softer more vulnerable and complex forms within this poem of creation called Woman. So it makes sense that Satan would take this unique creation and make it the focus of his war on mankind – to take down the crown jewel of creation - the bearer of life. Women “replaced” Lucifer, in a sense, as God’s most beautiful creation: “‘You were the seal of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. 13 You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone adorned you: carnelian, chrysolite and emerald, topaz, onyx and jasper, lapis lazuli, turquoise and beryl. Your settings and mountings were made of gold; on the day you were created they were prepared. 14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the holy mount of God; you walked among the fiery stones. 15 You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you. 16 Through your widespread trade you were filled with violence, and you sinned. So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God, and I expelled you, guardian cherub, from among the fiery stones. 17 Your heart became proud on account of your beauty,” God describing Satan – it completely opposes the devil with horns and a pitch fork portrayed in the media. “…and you corrupted your wisdom because of your splendor.” [Ezekiel 28:12-16] From here we see the tussle of beauty. I’ve mentioned before on this blog that beauty is fascinating and multi dimensional – can we imagine a world without it? How it nurtures and uplifts, possesses the ability to manipulate, in good ways and bad. It beguiles and captivates and reveals another breathtaking side of God. And yet, this is only the natural world. To delve into the spiritual is indeed frightening and not something our human minds were made to comprehend – our human eyes would not be able to handle such a simple thing as the blinding light that comes from heavenly beings in all their splendour. That is why when reading the Bible – taking Ezekiel and his visions for instance, I interpret it in the sense that though he often attaches earthly symbolism to heavenly beings – wings of an eagle, the face of a man, the face of a lion… he’s simply quantifying his visions in a way that he/we could understand (as I read once, can you imagine how frightened Ezekiel was at this point). So likening his visions to animals he was simply grasping the various characteristics of what he saw. For instance the Bible has a number of different descriptions of Lucifer, but each of them merely alludes to his characteristics and the various shapes he takes on in the natural world – a serpentine-like nature, but then later Jesus describes him as a prowling and roaring Lion looking to devour (1 Peter 5). I, like any man, am fascinated by women, and started writing this in an attempt at capturing or understanding something more whilst it also extended a theme that I've have over the past weeks on this blog regarding women. Perhaps it was also inspired by something Pastor Joseph Prince mentioned in his sermon I posted on the ‘Real story of Noah’, regarding the Bible making no mention of female angels. But, as I found out, as I explored the creation of woman, it delved deeper and further back into the supernatural realm and thence returned to modern earthly times bringing things into context and perspective. I hope it enlightened you as it did me. Sometimes we already have the knowledge before us, but its simply the way we arrange it that may allow us to see something new and fresh… "There is in every true woman's heart, a spark of heavenly fire, which lies dormant in the broad daylight of prosperity, but which kindles up and beams and blazes in the dark hour of adversity." "Pleasure is to a woman what the sun is to the flower: if moderately enjoyed, it beautifies, it refreshes, and it improves; if immoderately, it withers, deteriorates, and destroys. But the duties of domestic life, exercised as they must be in retirement, and calling forth all the sensibilities of the female, are perhaps as necessary to the full development of her charms, as the shade and the shower are to the rose, confirming its beauty, and increasing its fragrance." "Daughters of the attitude that produced them, certain women will not appeal to us without the double bed in which we find peace by their side, while others, to be caressed with a more secret intention, require leaves blown by the wind, water rippling in the dark, things as light and fleeting as they are." [Image Credits: flickr.com, tumblr.com, pinterest, lecontainer.blogspot.com, 500px.com, fashiongonerogue.com, liekerromeijn.nl, republicofyou.com.au, everythingfab.com] "All is possible to woman, for woman alone may make herself impossible." Related posts: 'Captivating: Unveiling the mystery of a women's soul' - Book Review Bible - Book Review God's message to women Beauty & the Bullets, guns & war Ugly Beautiful The Bible vs the Blockbuster. Do we really know the story of Noah? Or what do we think we know; have we been reading the Bible correctly? For those still curious, here’s a look at what the Bible actually says about the man from the Bible called Noah, famous for the Ark and the Great flood. Hollywood is infamous for their inaccurate adaptations of any and all stories/books/plays etc, so there was no surprise when Darren Aronofsky’s film started rumblings of controversy – though to be honest, there hasn’t been that much really, not as much as there could’ve been. Perhaps my Review on Inthekan lends some light as to why, but when you compare this to the reception of Mel Gibson’s bloodied Passion of the Christ which was wildly successful because it went further than all others before it in its graphic depiction of the crucifixion, its reception has been almost tame. It begs the question of, do we really know the real story of the Bible, because there are a number of details to this story that even Christians are divided on. What's certain though, is that if you believe this story to be true, one must acknowledge the supernatural elements; in fact, this Bible story is driven by the supernatural. But alas you can’t please everyone, whilst you can piss off very many. This though is an objective look (as objective as I – a Christian – can be). Needless to say it would of course help if you’ve seen the film – and I would recommend it, even if all it does is spark a conversation. Here then is a rendition of events delivered by noted Pastor Joseph Prince - he presents the Real story of Noah as its portrayed in the Bible - but he tells it in a way I, or probably you, have never heard it before. He paints a picture that you've probably never heard in Sunday school... and yes, it would make for a cool but disturbing movie. Interesting further reading: - FACTS on Noah's Ark and the Flood - (this alludes to some interesting notes on the design of the Ark) - Thinking Outside the Box - Explorers claim to have found Noah's Ark - 101 Reasons why Noah's story doesn't float (for a non believer Dr. Justin Long's take on things) Relevant links from this site: - Bible Book Review Unveiling the Mystery of a Woman's soul The accompanying piece to ‘Wild at Heart’, this time John Eldredge teams up with his wife Stasi in the writing department in pursuit of the heart of a woman, in all her feminine beauty. "Even to see her walk across the room is a liberal education." Synopsis “Every woman was once a little girl. And every little girl holds in her heart her most precious dreams. She longs to be swept up into a romance, to play an irreplaceable role in a great adventure, to be the Beauty of the story. Those desires are far from child’s play. They are the secret to the feminine heart. The message of Captivating in this: Your heart matters more than anything else in all creation. - What Wild at heart did for men, Captivating will do for women. Target Primarily women, some might say Christian women, but I believe women from any culture or religion can gather something from these pages. It is also a very handy read for men too, seeking to understand their woman, or just women in general a little more. In fact, most women that have read the book, implore men to read it too, just like women should read Wild at Heart. "She knew treachery' Bottom Line Admittedly, not being the direct intended target reader of this book, meant it took me a while to find a rhythm, a while to get going and find that groove you seek when reading any book (each one has their own). However, once I got into it, making the necessary readjustment, because as a man I’m reading this primarily as a learning exercise, I could then glean what I could and in some instances recognize where certain things could be applied to my own life. These are the type of books men want to read but seldom find the energy to do so, or perhaps they start but fail to finish it, so it is a small triumph that I managed it, though I’m not cracking any champagne bottles. This book tackles the issues of beauty and strength, and varying forms of such, as well as the modern woman and how her role, and the regard for her, has changed. But its more than that. It’s a wonder when looking at all the great stories of the world, that there are so few about heroic women (compared to men), though we know that were it not for women, those men would not have been around to achieve all those accomplishments, but is that it? Is that all women are for, to bring strong and courageous men into the world? NO! Of course not, the message is rather that in every story of greatness, women played an equally crucial role. If men be the reflection of God’s strength, then women are undoubtedly the reflection of God’s unparalleled beauty, in all its complex glory. "Beauty is Dangerous" [Image credits: nbcLatino.com, flickr, russianwomentruth.com, wallsave.com, "womens-league", "asian-women-hairstyles"] In fact, so beautiful was she, that the first man, Adam, actually chose her over God; but he would discover that nothing can compare, nothing can satisfy the hunger of his soul for what God is and has… that deep spiritual yearning we all carry – no material thing can satisfy a spiritual need. The two are separate yet can be connected; in that a man and a woman in marriage become one in spirit, but God always comes first, because he's the creator of ALL, he created both man and woman, and if we are to seek our purpose in life, we must look to the creator for guidance, not other creations... A large portion of this book is aimed at marriage and the relationship between the man and woman, but focussing on how the roots take shape to form a strong bond – that is to say how women deal with their lives before entering marriage (the same goes with guys) and even how to get the best out of their husbands (for those already married). This may all seem unromantic in approach, but I assure you, reading this, and other books like it, will only highlight how romantic God really is, and how much of heaven has been imprinted on this earth. There are lessons in this book that can be learnt and re-learnt as many have claimed, and I concur, that this is a book that can be read several times. We were meant to delight in the splendour of a woman’s beauty, their allure, their intricate mysticism and complicated nature… but the world (devoid of the Spirit) would and does abuse this. Women, who are meant to be man’s equal, are subject to exploitation and depravity, where beauty is a thing to be bartered and traded. Yet, as I’ve re-learnt here; beauty is alive, it is nurturing, and it is has the ability to grow, to enlighten, enliven and invigorate. How many men have gone to war for beauty, to show off their valour, even with humble intent? How many times has your spirits been lifted at the sight of something beautiful? Beauty can soften a hardened heart and break down barriers, but it can also awaken the primal beast in men, hungry with insatiable desire. Beauty has the ability to evoke strength in those who gaze upon it, and to instil resolve and life, even if that life is simply the basic quickening of the pulse. And, you know what, we need beauty. It’s in our DNA? What would the world look like without it? What would the world be like without the enchanting presence of a woman? "Beauty overwhelms us, enchants us, fascinates us, and calls us" We, as men, are drawn to beauty, because that’s what it does, it attracts, but as men, real men, our duty is to ensure that we avail our strength (and protection) and also ensure that it is always enabled to flourish, because if not, then beauty can also wither and grow dormant. This happens far too often, but there's still hope of that beauty being rekindled to return to its passionate freedom. In Wild at heart it was said that there are two kinds of women; one who is like the Caribbean, and the other like the North Atlantic Sea… but only one of them requires a real man. Captivating attempts to awaken what’s at the heart of every woman (but in the process also educates men as to their role to play). It may take things from a Christian vantage point, even criticizing the church for stunting and suppressing the role of women, but the principles can be applied universally. I highly recommend this bestseller, whether you're man, but especially if you're a woman! 4/5 "Show me your face,let me hear your voice; For your voice is sweet and your face is lovely." You belong among the wildflowers You belong in a boat out at sea You belong with your love on your arm You belong somewhere you feel free - Tom Petty For my book review of "Wild at Heart", click HERE |
[Banner illustration by Joel Kanar]
WRITING
|