Due Diligence

This blog post is my response to a series of questions my friend raised regarding my criticism of Creationism. I felt this would be a better fit for my answers than the platform of our original conversation. 

1. Why do you think the debate regarding creationism (and its offshoots and various understandings - which according to your earlier blog about offshoots being at a point closest to true revelation, there seem to be more offshoots from creationist thought than evolutionist thought (perhaps unity of a theory/belief represents truth more?) - and evolution, continues today?

Firstly, I think Christian creationism is better contrasted to Non-Christian creationism (to explain how variance equates closer truth in this case), rather than evolution. Eg., Who is the creator god, Yahweh or Brahma, and how did creation come about?

I found a great summary of the varied offshoots of Creationism, which does an excellent job of explaining this further. Understanding this, we can see that Christianity has been more reluctant to drop biblical allegories in favor of evolution, and has in effect, retrofitted evolutionary explanations into biblical fundamentals to create the various offshoots we see present.

I think the debate continues to happen when we eisegete scripture, taking liberties based on its presupposed inerrancy. The debate is unfruitful, not because discussion about our origins shouldn't happen, but because we enter the discussion from an unfounded reverence for the prooftexts. I believe the Bible is a collection of books, supernaturally infallible for the purpose of pointing us to Jesus. If someone wants to make it a textbook of science, which it was never intended to be, we have warnings against such practice and should not be so ignorant.


2. Does which side one person falls on matter?

Yes, but I think this is better understood in a different way.

• Creation and evolution are not a dichotomy, but ends of a continuum (see figure above), and most creationist and evolutionist positions may be fit along this continuum. The successive steps labelled in the figure are described below.
• 
  
• CREATION
  • Flat Earthers
  • Geocentrists
  • Young Earth Creationists
    • (Omphalos)
  • Old Earth Creationists
    • (Gap Creationism)
    • (Day-Age Creationism)
    • (Progressive Creationism)
    • (Intelligent Design Creationism)
  • Evolutionary Creationists
  • Theistic Evolutionists
  • Methodological Materialistic Evolutionists
  • Philosophical Materialistic Evolutionists
• EVOLUTION

3. If yes, why?

Watch out for false prophets! They dress up like sheep, but inside they are wolves who have come to attack you.
- Matthew 7:15

Looking at the continuum, I think it is evident where Young Earth Creationists fail to contribute to any discussion on the matter of Origin. Eg.,You will never get a Philosophical Materialistic Evolutionist to consider the earth as flat, or the centre of our galaxy, so why would they consider it to be 6,000 years old? Besides the recession of logic, this does not expound any scientific mystery.

The following are held by members of the Board of Answers in Genesis to be either consistent with Scripture or implied by Scripture:

• Scripture teaches a recent origin for man and the whole creation, spanning approximately 4,000 years from creation to Christ.
• The days in Genesis do not correspond to geologic ages, but are six [6] consecutive twenty-four [24] hour days of creation.
• The Noachian Flood was a significant geological event and much (but not all) fossiliferous sediment originated at that time.
• The gap theory has no basis in Scripture.
• The view, commonly used to evade the implications or the authority of biblical teaching, that knowledge and/or truth may be divided into secular and religious, is rejected.
• By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

Young Earth Creation apologists believe the Origin of Life is narrated in Genesis, and any evidence must fit into the narrative to be considered valid. This is a classic example of a doctrine as the central ideal fallacy, and is also the reason why discerning bad theology matters. Christianity has to reflect reality—not the other way around.

4. Why do you think non-christians bring this matter up? Do they really care or is it just to justify not believing?

Invoking the supernatural is the dead-end to further inquiry.
- Anonymous

I think non-christians do care for the most part, otherwise they wouldn't ask. Creationism is not an easy (or necessary) hurdle, and there are more important things at stake if Jesus is who he says he is. But to the seeker who asks for evidence of 6 day creation, I would rather answer "No, I don't believe the Bible was written to be a book of science." If they have any more questions, they'll ask.

5. How do you think a creationist world view versus an evolutionist world view (or Big Bang theorist's view) affects [a Christian's] own narrrative framework for interpretting life? (more sucinctly: What does a belief in creationism or evolution look like through the eyes of [a Christian] interpreting life...do they really differ in perspective enough for this view to matter?)

I think Theistic Evolutionists have a better worldview than Young Earth Creationists for two reasons:

1. Their faith is informed by the reality around them, which permeates everything from the way they read scripture to how they respond to scepticism, ultimately leading to a fuller appreciation for God's creation.
2. They do not get overwhelmed by defending Old Testament paradoxes; they generally get asked better questions by non-christians.

St. Anselm described theology as "Faith seeking understanding" and theistic evolutionists believe that this search for understanding extends to scientific understanding. 'Young Earthers' also make this claim, but they are either lying (to themselves), or they don't understand the process.

I am sending you like lambs into a pack of wolves. So be as wise as snakes and as innocent as doves.
- Matthew 10:16

6. If the debate was to be settled, what do you hope it looks like? Where do you think this should lead? What are you hoping changes/stays the same in Christianity with respect to the interpretation and application of Genesis? (What does your vision of the future of Christianity look like?)

I think the only way to settle the debate is to concede that if you look around, creation itself tells us the universe is more than 6,000 years old.

It should lead to repentance, thus producing a change in the handling of scripture. Presupposition is not welcome, and is never helpful for theology or apologetics.

In short, I think the future of Christianity needs to drop the presupposition of Biblical inerrancy.

7. We can point out flaws better than most I think, but can we imagine something better? 

When I came to you, brothers and sisters, I didn’t come preaching God’s secrets to you like I was an expert in speech or wisdom.  I had made up my mind not to think about anything while I was with you except Jesus Christ, and to preach him as crucified.
- 1 Corinthians 2:1-2

Ultimately, we should not claim anything at all. Science and scripture inform our worldview, but Jesus is the essence of our worldview. However, claiming nothing cannot be our true contrition if we maintain a Young Earth perspective, if you concede that the stars are visible, for example.

That said, I imagine a kind of Christianity where Jesus is the only controversy worth talking about, debating over, or dying for. I want nothing less to be a hinderance for a questioning mind.

8. This is the heart of my questions...what can/should the church of tomorrow look like? 

I think my purpose (and the purpose of this blog) is to inspire the church to keep asking that very question.

Some of the questions I have for the "church of tomorrow" are:

• Can we find God in a Methodological or Philosophical Materialistic worldview?
• Should we study and explain the natural world, without assuming the existence or nonexistence of the supernatural?
• Could science lead us to a greater understanding and appreciation for our creator?
• When does God interact with creation, and can we define these interactions as supernatural?
• What are the problems for anti-theists?
• What can we learn from Progressive-Christianity (questioning traditions) and Christian Existentialism (choice constitutes your existence)?
• Are we using proof-texts to support any other theology? Are there other ways we misuse scripture?
• How is social media best used as a platform for discussion?
• What are the fruits (good or bad) of memes, rage comics, or trolling?
• Do we need to keep repeating the mistakes of our past in order to engage culture appropriately?

9. What is the potential good that can occur/be achieved (in church and in the world)?

I found that Young Earth Creationism (even when I never talked about it publicly) limited my ability to test scripture against the reality it claimed to have relevance for. Giving up this presupposition allowed me to ask myself the questions that really troubled me, and allowed me to discover the answers that exist in reality, and not just believe them because the Bible told me so. It helped my faith.

10. I ask these because I'm curious. There is a lot of pointing of fingers, labeling, disagreements, etc. but repeatedly I find myself frustrated because while we point, we do little to imagine (or if we do, to explain) a different way / a better way... The Bible says that without vision the people perish... Where is the vision?.... What's your vision?

No-one is asking which god created the universe anymore, and the world has bigger questions than how God did it. So turning a stumbling block into a stepping stone is, in my opinion, the best use of our time.

What did Paul learn from the pagans in Mars Hill? The pagans worshipped an unknown god, by making sacrifices to idols of gold and silver. Paul taught them that God made us in His image, so these things have no resemblance. Today, our challenge is humanism (go figure). Science worships the unknown, but they have dropped the god.

My vision is to see Christianity cater to this mystery.

I think the Gospel needs to be presented the way Jesus presented it, as a hidden pearl: easily trampled, often overlooked—but, once found, worth selling everything you own.
- Matthew 7:6, 13:45-46

The Existential Compass

In the world of science, a paradigm is used to understand concepts. Paradigms are found anywhere a concept is unclear or requires greater understanding. Democracy, for example, is a paradigm that allows us to best understand governance, but there are many ways to govern. Perfection of government has long been an interest for humanity. How do we measure potential perfection? One tool in use today is the "political compass".

The political compass is a multi-axis model, used to label or organize political thought on two dimensions. This helps us grasp the "centrist's" idealistic goal as we navigate the extremes, and see what is needed to bring correction.

Economic and Personal Liberties vs Securities are being measured in this example. It is how we determine where political thought falls in relation to the centrist, or the ideal. Of course, there are different opinions about what the ideal looks like, and there have been both great and terrible leaders representing all walks of life. But I think the closer we are to the centre, the better our leaders tend to be. In trying to achieve that, the recursive action we take is to vote counter to the political norm, swinging the pendulum the opposite way. The political compass can help us measure and possibly predict the outcome for the counterbalance. I am sure you can find other scenarios where this compass could be useful.

To SIN means "to miss the mark". What is this mark? What is the centrist's ideal that we define sin according to? What are the axis on this compass? What are the extremes?

In the pursuit of bringing people to truth, the ongoing discussion revolves around what we believe to be true. But we are bound to come across people with a difference of opinion, perhaps even a polarizing conflict. Mapping this typology on a compass should help us determine what side we err on, but I think we attempt this by placing doctrine as the ideal, because this is the paradigm by which we understand truth.

The biggest reason why this compass isn't helpful is because it doesn't help us understand where Republicans are in the reality paradigm, as much as it helps you understand where realities are in relation to the Republican. This is the definition of 'relative truth', and this is what defines denominations. I believe that recognizing this flaw is central to understanding the diversity that is Christianity.

When a deviation from a common rule is found to be true, we call this an Anomaly. Enough of these can throw our paradigm into a state of crisis, which in turn produces a Paradigm shift. In a Christian context, this is known as a denominational divide. But the reasons that divide us are bigger than doctrine alone. For instance, the Great Schism was a political and cultural issue; it had nothing to do with faith or practice. Alternatively, the Reformation was a doctrinal divide, but it could only gain legs because of the recent common language translation of the Bible. This puts culture into perspective for us; ie., the society that influences how we appropriate truth is varied.

Paradigm shifts should not be associated with a theory of relativism. The idea is not that truth is changing, but that further study is changing our understanding of truth.- Donald Miller, When Truth is the Enemy of Truth

Further study of truth changes our understanding of truth. That is, truth is not relative to a greater experience, so much as experiences are relative to a greater truth.

Science offers us an explanation of how complexity (the difficult) arose out of simplicity (the easy). The hypothesis of God offers no worthwhile explanation for anything, for it simply postulates what we are trying to explain.- Richard Dawkins

Our existential compass has the way of attaining the meaning of life or "The Way of True Life" as the centrist's ideal when we are trying to find purpose beyond ourselves, or such an elusive character as God. We find purpose on a spiritual level and on a cultural level, and express meaning by living liberally or confiding in security. To hold this in perfect balance would mean to have a significant understanding of how our universe works, and how we can partner with, and perpetuate it further. So I think that by studying where cultural and spiritual securities and liberties intersect, we can map which experiences are less healthy and which are more beneficial to discovering meaning. In theory, more anomalies within the central sphere should reflect thought that holistically brings us closer to understanding the universal meaning of life.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me."
John 14:6

There is a vast difference in opinion/experience within the Christian faith, and I believe it is the result of being closer to the greatest complexity that the world is trying to understand.


If the compass could be used for securities and liberties being measured spiritually and culturally, with "The Way of True Life" being the ideal, this is what I think it would look like:

"The Existential Compass"

The way I would interpret this is that the 'Way of True Life ideal' incorporates all of spiritual and cultural liberty and security to the fullest. I've placed some things on the compass, do you agree with my interpretation? Would you change the axis?

The questions I ask myself to determine how I place thought on these axes:

• What is the spiritual posture toward cultural engagement?
• What is the cultural posture toward spiritual engagement?
• Are you seeking to engage in culture or spirituality?
• Do you seek to be influential in secular or religious circles?
• Do you achieve this in a primarily passive or aggressive tone?
• What are your extremes or preferences?

Learning Christianese

* I must confess, I began this post as a rant of sorts, but I've restructured it to be more helpful to conversation.

Defining Christianese
Christianese is an in-group jargon used most notably by members of “low” Church denominations—usually Charismatics and Evangelicals. David Martin defines this discourse as “a lens for concentrating a particular angle of vision” (9). Like any in-group language, Christianese developed out of prolonged contact between people who subscribed to similar beliefs. It is characterized by the common usage of certain words, theological terms, and catchphrases. These words and phrases are usually found in standard English but with different meanings; without an understanding of the Bible or evangelical culture, the listener has no context to understand what is being said. For example, a Christianese phrase like, “set me on fire” is a request for God to renew religious passion. However, without an understanding of common Christian metaphor which equates God’s power with fire, this statement could seem like a suicidal request.

You may have heard or seen some Christian slogans in your lifetime.............. They are often created as jpeg images, T-shirts, billboards, or bumper stickers. A common trend has been to alter popular logos and trademarks by changing the wording to reflect a cryptic message referencing God, grace, and the like. Capitalizing on the successes of large corporations—often at the risk of federal trademark infringement, can seem rather dangerous for a small organization such as a church, IMO.

To be fair, Christians aren't the only ones doing this. It's an easy way for small businesses or activist groups to gain attention as well. But Christian culture rips off anything; even if the reference isn't clear or relevant. Paired with using Christianese, it's become an inside joke, really. These become the T-shirts that stay in our closets, only to come out for a church gathering.

Christian slogans are designed objectively to implement the 'Great Reversal' of Jesus—that is, the reconciliation of secular culture. We are infatuated with the way Jesus communicates: the surprising morals of his stories, his unconventional healing ministry, his quick wit when chastising hypocrites. But the difference between hijacking trademarks and the message Jesus' intended is simple: we cannot expect anyone to find truth in a counterfeit.

Counterfeits are imitations of superior value. It's not difficult to see how this method of evangelism is confusing for people. Infringements aside, anything that causes people to question the integrity of the product you're pushing is a sin, regardless of a clever acronym. This transcends the lousy T-shirt; it has ineffectually created an entire culture of apathy.

South Park, S07 E09

The way Christians have infiltrated the music industry has been nothing short of embarrassing. Christianese lyrics carry double meaning or no meaning for most listeners, while maintaining an uncomfortably positive vibe throughout. On iTunes it dominates the Inspirational genre, while blurring the line of what it means to be inspirational. This is clear because of the negative way many talent-privy listeners (Christian and non-Christian) have reacted. When Christian music labels arent infamously employing musicians to play Top 40's cover songs, they're making worship music. This serves a purpose, I concede, but I'm criticizing the tendency to produce songs that celebrate an ideological standard versus honest reality.

The Christian film industry would be the same way, save for its non-existence. Films are expensive to make, so the most prevalent content that any Christian film companies produce is Sunday School curriculum and infomercials. Any feature films that do get produced are revolving around an exasperly overt 'rebirth' plot, thus preaching to the choir, as it were—and include homework. This is just more Sunday School curriculum.

Putting ourselves through self-inflicted persecution that has nothing to do with Jesus' message of grace is a dangerous mistake, which I believe should be taken very seriously.

The goal in multimedia creation should be nothing more than to simply start a dialogue with people who notice. This is done by connecting with them on a level of familiarity, yet subtly (or unsubtly) presenting an ideology to a potential spiritual seeker. Sociologically, it's possibly the most effective way of evangelism, but sadly, it's been poorly executed. Who is your target audience? Will only church-goers understand the obscure Jesus-connection and cultural references? The question is, how do we accomplish this goal without looking like turds?

Knowing you are good at something requires precisely the same skills you need to be good at it, so people who are horrible at something tend to have no idea they are horrible at all.
- John Cleese

The Dunning-Kruger Effect is a cross-cultural study that tends to focus on American subjects. It concludes that many of them, at least sometimes and under some conditions, have a tendency to inflate their worth.

Why is this important? Most Christian propaganda, paraphernalia and multimedia is produced in America, for starters. Secondly, the companies creating this content are structured so that their strategic focus is largely dictated by non-creatives (John Cleese also talks about this). Thirdly, scripture is misappropriated to reason away communication error.
E.g., this string of arguments:

For I am the Lord, I do not change.
- Malachi 3:6

And 

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
- Hebrews 13:8

Therefore, 

"When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men to myself." - Jesus
- John 12:32

So we don't need to worry, because, 

We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
- Romans 8:28

Christians can use scripture to excuse their efforts in partnering with God to produce good work. Incidentally, the number of Christians in church communities who possess creative abilities but are disengaged is astronomical. The 'Church collective' is a resource for this very purpose.

Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men
- Colossians 3:23

With regards to creating meaningful content, I think it is important to recognize the value of communication science. The human mind connects messages on a subliminal level that, if used properly, can communicate positive undertones combined with core values, etc. Of course, this can be manipulated. However, by not paying attention to these subliminal connection being made, you are more than likely sending a confusing, or worse, conflicting message. After all, living in the Information Age, we are doing Christ a disservice by not communicating to the highest level of our ability. Looking at early Christianity, it was evident that communication methodology was carefully considered when sharing the simplest of truths. I think we can especially draw from the parabolic method of Jesus.

E.g.
Foot Washing (leading by serving)
Workers in the Vineyard (unfair wages)
The Widow's Offering (giving what you don't have)
The Good Samaritan (loving people who hate you)

The list goes on.

Jesus was a revolutionary communicator, who used palatable concepts and universal language. Everything He said challenged the way we live our lives, and did nothing short of flip our world upside down to help us understand how backwards his message was. Above many things, I think what we can take from this as storytellers, artists and designers is one guiding principle: Your theme cannot be more important than how you communicate it. Whether that's a story, a song, or a bumper sticker, if you do not allow yourself time to be creative, and your screening process does not involve test subject criticism, you may not be the right person for the job, and you will never realize that.

Good News?

Mark 1:14-15...Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the good news of the kingdom of God, and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe the good news."

Time is fulfilled. 
Jesus is referring to the time set by God for his children to become adult sons and heirs. through Jesus, all things in heaven and on earth would be brought together under one leadership. when Jesus made mention of the fulfillment of time, everyone under law was waiting for this time to come, because they would have understanding of these things (Galations 4:4; Ephesians 1:10). a contemporary way of putting it might be to say that in a world of confusion, where things do not make sense, we look forward to the time when everything will be brought into meaningful relationship under the headship of Christ.

Repent and believe. 

"Repent" comes from the root word metanoia -- meta meaning "again" and noia meaning "to think." Noia comes from a root word that has to do with cognition or thinking. So literally, "repent" simply means "to think again." But usually, given the context in which it's used in the New Testament, I'd say that "repent" has this sort of connotation: It's like, if I were on my way to see a particular movie, and I called a friend who I knew had seen it and asked, "What did you think of ____? Was it good?" And they said, "Absolutely not! It was one of the dumbest movies I've seen in a while. In fact, all the funniest parts were in the previews." Then, I'd probably respond by "repenting" of what I had originally intended to do. I'd respond by not seeing that particular movie.Now, given our understanding of the language, a good rendering of "repent" would be to "reconsider the direction you're headed." Or, in light of its typical usage in the New Testament, it means "to reconsider your entire way of living." Come to think of it, in my own life, repentance takes place fairly often. Even on a weekly basis! - Understanding God's Will (Kyle Lake)

Kingdom of God. 
salvation is, essentially, access to everything in the Kingdom of God. when Jesus said that it is "at hand", he was saying that you could have salvation now. you could experience God now.

Let me take this further: If we only have a legal-transaction understanding of salvation in which we are forgiven of our sins so we can go to heaven, then salvation essentially becomes a ticket to somewhere else. In this understanding, eternity is something that kicks in when we die. But Jesus did not teach this. Jesus said that when we believe, we have crossed over from death to life (John 5:24). God always has been and always will be. And when I enter into a relationship with God through Christ, I am connected with God now and I will be connected with God forever. For Jesus, salvation is now. - Velvet Elvis (Rob Bell)

Good news. 
does any of this sound like good news?

"The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe the good news."
Edit: "The time of confusion has ended, you may now recognize yourselves as sons of God. Full life is available to you now; reconsider your ways of living and believe what I teach you."

Street Evangelism

Benny Hinn Healing Crusade

in all seriousness, if i take someone with a terminal illness and bring them to the front of a church, and challenge anyone who thinks they have enough faith to heal them, to come and do so, is this wrong in God's eyes?

Jesus heals man with Palsy

i've been doing a little street evangelism and young people are generally very angry with church. they say the church isn't what it should be. well, i've heard this for a long time now, and i don't care to cast any more stones. revival is happening in Canada, and i want in on it. i just need to know my bounds. i need to know what is promised, what isn't, what i can tell people, and how to have faith. you might just tell me to read my Bible, but i have been. i'm amazed by the book of Acts. can every christian heal people? prophecy? cast out demons? i know different people get different giftings based on their measure of faith, but what does that mean? how can you base it on your faith? does that mean that if i believe i can heal, i can therefore heal? i don't think i have the gift of healing, specifically. i've done some online tests, talked to lots of people, and i believe i am gifted in the area of teaching, and prophecy. i've heard rumor that everyone really has every gift, we just specialize in certain ones. if this is true, i should be able to do anything, and just focus on one or two or three. i've been baptized in the Holy Spirit, but i haven't spoken in tongues. i've had a few tiny prophetic experiences, nothing too bold or outrageous.

i find that people that we talked to on the streets are generally hurting people and are in need of healing, or some other miracle. i'd just like to know if i can have faith that my prayers for them will be answered.

My Embrace

i can't stand this. i feel like my life is on repeat. i keep asking the same questions over and over, trying to come to different conclusions... for the sole purpose of changing my mind again, and again. like repainting a canvas with all that old paint underneath. somehow it still shows through. not really sure what i'm trying to describe here, just my display of raw emotion. i am contending with apathy now. i want God to take everything away from me. beauty, pride, joy... take things that are dear to me. so i can relearn what it means to be thankful.

i try to represent Christ. but all that comes across is my self-consciousness. guarding my heart. analyzing myself. second-guessing my actions. analyzing myself again. it gives me a headache. advice says, "just be yourself." it proves rather frustrating when it's your self that you're trying to kill. kill this self-righteousness and pity. take away my better judgment so that i may learn to forgive and forget. kill my senses. let me become numb to the pain of reformation.

reason will only validate a need. my reason is Christ. i need morality. i need unconditional love. i need something to live for. i need acceptance. i need forgiveness. i need progression.

random thought: there are plenty of fish in the sea. but my lure is caught in the weeds of an irrigation pond.

i signed up to be on the worship team at church today. i don't know what this means for me. it's something i used to help my mom with. maybe i want to induce more discipline in my life. more restrictions. more commitments.

this oddity of joy proves rather amusing. need i say, my last sentence is redundant. i get stuck at a traffic light, and burst out laughing. excuse my pizzahut-lingo, but when there's 40 bills up and the make table is a sea of chaos, i am ecstatic. technical mistakes in music stimulate passion.

"when the Spirit meets the flesh, it is a beautiful collision" - David Crowder.

one thing i've been thinking a lot about lately is this metaphysical sensation: conjoining of the senses. for example, tasting red. seeing heat. hearing pain. when we worship, we have this interaction with God's Spirit. and it is coupled with overwhelming passion.

i have this burning desire to be able to read a book while i sing to music. being one-track minded, this is virtually impossible for me. i can't split my attention to share two sources of information exchange. it's like breathing in through your mouth, and out your nose simultaneously. they cancel eachother out, and you stop breathing. your lungs do not function, so the oxygen transfer is pointless.

now that you're experimenting with your nose and mouth, allow me to continue...

why do we worship? to glorify God. to interact with the Spirit. right. i don't want to poison your mind with my next comparison, so this is a forewarning: don't read too much into this.

God gave us marriage, to exemplify how we are to interact with Him. a relationship that is consummated by venerating eachother, showing the highest execution of love known to man. this may seem rather misplaced and awkward, when in conjunction with my last post displaying God as a father-figure. but our understanding of God is that He desires to be the ultimate satisfaction to every need. He is our be-all and end-all. He is our everything.

this upsets a lot of christians, because they don't want Jesus to be their boyfriend. they suggest that this image of God is too intimate, and that God is to be revered above all else. i'm not disqualifying that Christ wants to be revered, but the marriage scenario doesn't undermine this. at least, in a Biblical sense.

"In one blinding moment of salvific truth, Christianity became no longer merely a moral code, an ethic, or a philosophy of life, but a love affair." - Brennan Manning: Above All

i am thoroughly convinced that God desires an intimate relationship with us. and when we limit ourselves to lip-service, a good deed now and then, and a warm pew, we're missing out. surely, all that we can ever achieve is merely inadequate. but God is still exuberantly pleased. much like the delight a father has in a child's finger-painting, God not only knows our limitations, He embraces them.

Evolution... revisited

i know, i know, it's flippin' 6 am. maybe that can attest to my new conviction. perhaps you are a veteran reader of my blog and have witnessed this post and have seen my grade 12 arguments presented in essay format as to the question of evolution and my fundamentalist claims.

well, i haven't made up my mind yet, but this thread has provided some radical insight for my Creationist viewpoint. i'm not sure. i'm honestly not sure. this doesn't change my christian faith, as my faith is not based on my understanding of a 6 day creation. it appears as though the Evolutionist view has evolved into Intelligent Design, and i almost regret having moved on from the debates and inquiry. the contending worldviews seem to have eradicated my previous stance, for which i am eternally grateful. science seems to have moved on from the Creationist-Evolutionist debate. one thing that has not changed is the faulty data still being distributed in textbooks.

in case you are wondering, i believe the Bible to be infallible and inerrant. i believe science can provide evidence for this, but like everything else, science cannot prove anything.

In the Next Room

lately i've been discouraged. not a very nice way of starting a new year, but sometimes i want to stare out the back window of a car, and watch the road disappear behind me... listen to a cd and single out the invisible voice of a backup vocalist and recognize the beauty of harmony... try every scenario of a puzzle, avoiding the solution merely to discover every possible way to come to the wrong answer... i want to roll down a hill, but it's winter... i'm eager to say i've lived life, but i have not lived it yet... i want to have children, but but the math requires a piece of chalk and a chalkboard... if only life were that simple. why are God's ways not our ways? why does He require of us what does not come naturally?

why do i care to not smell like a perspiring human? what makes profanity offensive? why must i mourn the death of a loved one?

sometimes my best medicine is my dog. she loves her walks, and getting fed at 6:00. for my dog, life is simple. she would not recognize my deep, inner turmoil, or the complexity of my life, but she recognizes my face when i walk in the door. she knows the smell on my pant leg if i've been around another dog. she instinctively knows when dinner time is. how do i love such an ignorant, selfish animal? morally, my dog is corrupt. she is not considerate, empathetic, hospitable, or virtuous in any way.

i continually come into contact with people who want answers to questions. they want advice. they want to be told what to do. they want someone to understand them.

My dog, Annie

if i told my dog that the bag where her food is kept lies in the next room, gave her a leash and a scoop to take with her on her walks, showed her where her dog shampoo is, and then left for a 2 month vacation, i would come home to a dead dog. my dog has not developed opposable thumbs to open the door to her food, or developed a sense of human tolerance to walk herself without coming into contact with other dogs and violating someone's property rights, or able to determine when she smells too much like a dog and needs a bath. i would then be faced with animal cruelty charges.

often i feel like the answers i give to people's questions are unsatisfying. the advice i give is irrelevant. i fail to empathise with them. i feel like a dog who knows where the food is, but i can't open the door.

i fear a new movement in christianity is on the rise: relevance without godliness. christians trying to relate to everyone's problems, but failing to give God's divinity justice. agreeing that christians have bad taste in music. that we look foolish when we worship. that striving for holiness looks like arrogance. if we see someone confused about direction for their life, we tell them to pray more. if we meet someone with an addiction, we tell them to quit. if we find someone struggling financially, we tell them to tithe.

christians have a habit of saying uncool things. ever have a conversation with someone, and bring up God, and watch them as they get this glazed look over their eyes? i get discouraged. immediately what comes to mind is that they've heard it before. they've tried it and it doesn't work. it's like i can see where they're coming from, build up to a climax where i'm going to offer some deep, philosophical solution, and i bring up God. a beautiful letdown.

i think we need to re-establish what godliness means. godliness means humility. what does it look like? is it something that is desirable? 2 Peter 1:3-8 talks about making one's calling and election sure. adding to your faith. a systematic breakdown on how to become an effective, productive christian. it is some of the best advice i have received. we talk about christianity like it's a breeze through life on a white, puffy cloud, without a care in the world. we tell people about the hole in their heart that is immediately filled with the acceptance of Christ. yet we see 80% of born-again believers fall away from God. we see children raised in christian homes going off to college and leaving church behind. do we keep these statistics in the dark? are we embarrassed by what the records show? somehow Christ's "unfailing love" has failed a lot of people. either that, or they never found it in the first place. i tend to believe the latter.

sadly, people have heard where the kibble lies. they've even heard about the master who opens the door. how do they get His attention?

Heavenly Ham

tonight i attended my grandparents' annual Christmas party. i was asked to say the blessing for dinner too. we had ham, scallop potatoes, cabbage salad, jello, peas, and lasagna.

anyways, so i had to pray. and ask God to bless our meal. let me tell you, i wanted to scream. why, you may ask? because i was remembering something scriptural about eating unclean animals, and that it was an abomination to God. so i checked this. Deuteronomy 14:3-20. i was about to ask God to bless an unclean animal, which He has already cursed. this was scary for me. because i did not know the rules for such things, or if it was strictly Old Testament, or if it only applied to Jews, or what.

i was beside myself, deafening my ears to my own prayer. i just thanked God for a bunch of stuff, family, Christmas, freedom, what-have-you. then it came. "thank you for this meal." i shook my head in my thoughts. i was disgusted. mind you, i was well aware that i cooked up some mean bacon last night, and enjoyed it thoroughly. i love bacon. i love ham. i'm canadian. leave me alone... with my bacon.

so maybe i was being a little over-dramatic. i mean, it's christmas. we eat what we're given. plus, there are much more important things than what you eat, right? so i came home and checked this. here you go, a little Acts 10:9-23 for you to look at.

there you have it, folks. all meat, clean or unclean, hooved or not hooved, delectable or revolting, bacon or ham. all good. it's all good. our God is evidently sane. as well as omniscient. worthy of praise, because He knows how good bacon really is. so thank Him.

oh, and for those contradiction conspirators, this is simply one of the many changes to the law instated by Jesus. Orthodox Jews do not eat meat, because they still abide by the old law and the Torah. why? because they are taught that the new testament is hate-literature. they do not believe Jesus to be anything more than a con. they're still waiting for their messiah. the Son of Man. sadly, they have missed it. because they cannot accept that He would have a problem with their legalistic tradition. that He would heal a blind man on a Sunday. or that He would fill their holy water vessels with wine. or that He would be born in a cow trough in Bethlehem, or crucified naked on a cross with a crown of thorns.

oh, and by the way, Merry Christmas... or Happy Holidays... or Season's Greetings... honestly, who cares if the government decides to call it "holiday season"? i mean, Dec. 25 was originally a pagan holiday of feasts, celebrating winter solstice. most scholars think Jesus was born around the end of September. but, with commercialized st. nicholas, and popular western culture, i don't see a dire need to make a change. as for me and my house, Jesus is the reason for the season. if He's not anyone else's reason, so be it. it's not a religious statute. evidently, it's not like God will smite you or anything. unless you're Jewish.

For the Record

so much has been on my mind lately. it's been nuts. i could write a book.

on another note, i've been reading lots of stuff about faith lately. trying to piece it all together. despite interpretations and theories. some very convincing theories, at that. but i keep taking scriptural references used to back different arguments, and consistently come back to the same place. somehow, it makes perfect sense, just the way it was originally written. i know this sounds like, "duh!" but you wouldn't believe how many outlandish assumptions are made to derive complex conclusions. we make faith so complicated, don't we. i must say, after forming a reasonably solid grasp of an interpretation of scripture, it is hard to accept evidence of a contradictory concept... and its scriptural backup. is this a contradiction in scripture? well, more like a contradiction of interpretation. in relation to defining faith, we have some very popular opposing views: Calvinism and Armenianism. i must admit, both have their plus's and minus's. both are essentially accurate as well. i can think of a few names of people who would disagree with me. but i will present my views now, and debate later. after all, i'm still testing my theories. but i've run this by a couple people, and they have no qualms with my logic. so here it is:

We Are Human
outside of Christ, we are oblivious to God, as well as incapable of achieving salvation on our own. we are also unable to do good in complete purity, i.e. everything we do is tainted. we cannot seek God on our own. it is up to the Holy Spirit to reveal itself to us. it does not come from tainted understandings of Jesus, or even knowledge of the Bible, or our perception of christianity based on the acts of christians. you will know a christian by their love, but it ends there. you can't get an accurate depiction of Christ based on its followers. Christianity is different than any other religion by this aspect. i won't go into great detail to answer why, but it is quite interesting. Christianity was never a religion. it was never a culture. Jesus did not philosophize, He taught what one must do to enter the kingdom of God.

Salvation
so how should we 'witness?' well, personally i don't like this term. generally it's used to describe a conversation initiated and carried on with an intention to bring someone to conversion to Christianity. is conversion a bad thing? no. can we convert people? again, no. we can live our christian lives, according to a higher standard, but we can't push this to look desirable or simple to non-believers. firstly, if your christian walk is simple, you're doing something wrong.

accepting Jesus is simple. i.e. saying "Jesus, forgive me for my sins, and be Lord of my life" is a 12-word statement that will change a person's view of life, with no present word containing more than 7 letters. is there any deception in how this verse is presented? in and of itself, no. but we can give a horrifying Hell speech before-hand to seal the deal. funny how we manage to paint a picture of Hell so vividly, while our depiction of Heaven is that it "cannot be put into words." that said, both realms must be beyond our human understanding. Hell could only be worse, and Heaven could only be better, according to the Bible.

so what are we left with? i heard a preacher say the other night that Jesus never promised anything... He prophesied. meaning, He knew what he was talking about. He didn't have to do anything to fulfill a vow. He was, himself, fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. in fact, he advised not to swear by anything. He said, "let your yes mean yes, and your no mean no." so what's our role in the whole salvation thing? i think it's preaching the gospel message. we are given a Bible so that we can read it and tell people what it says. the Holy Spirit does the rest.

Relationship With God

call this "Calviminianism", but a lot of people argue about how this relationship works. and to be honest, i don't see consistency in one christian's experience compared to another. a lot of them wander around looking for, well, God-knows-what (i haven't read that book, btw)... a sign, an open door, a miracle, clear direction, affirmation, whatever. this saddens me. as i am sure it saddens God. Calvinists tell you that God is the initiator. Arminianists tell you to name-it and claim-it.

what's my take on it? well, take what Jesus said, for example: Ask and you shall receive, knock and the door shall be opened to you, seek and you shall find. Those who love Me will obey My commands. Come to Me and I will give you rest. Die to yourself, pick up your cross, and follow Me. Store your treasures up in Heaven. so i think it works both ways. i think all that we do should line up with scripture, meaning our attitudes, tithing, fellowship with other christians, accountability, preaching the Gospel, healing the sick, raising the dead, interceding, spending time with God. hmmm... that's quite a call to action.

how does one go about hearing from God? well, i think Jesus said it all right there. i think it's a give-give relationship we are supposed to have. we can't expect God do to everything, and we can't do things for our own purposes.

so who is the initiator? who commences this process? well, i think God does (John 3:16). the most stagnant christians are (very generally) the ones that have been christian for their whole lives. because they're not taught how to have a successful relationship.

did God see this as an issue worth dealing with? i believe that is one of the reasons He created Eve. to show us how to have an intimate relationship. this was how He initiated a relationship with Adam. similarly, men were made as the initiators (or pursuers) of relationship with women. this is their God-given role to understand our role in the relationship with God. what is Eve's role as a woman? to demonstrate our role within relationship to God. women respond to men, but that response strengthens the relationship. if it is taken out of the relationship, what happens? the relationship crumbles, and the initiator 'ceases to amaze' and loses the fire of intimacy.

similarly, God will not 'strike me with lightning' if i command Him to. because it is not a request that will have a positive outcome in my relationship with Him. non-christians don't have a relationship with Him to begin with, so God will not perform. He's not a "genie in a lamp" subject to slavery of a master. much like if I give a girl a flower and ask her on a date, and she says, "give me a box of chocolates and I'll accept your offer," i am turned off. meanwhile, she is pursuing a relationship with a jerk who spoils her with anything her heart desires, and when she isn't looking, winks at me in malevolence. i am rightfully jealous. because i know he will harm her. he doesn't respect her. he does this to spite me. as a result, nothing good will come to her. she will get all her heart desires, but her end is very dark.

"are you calling me a girl?" some of you (guys) may ask. well, the Bible describes the Church (that is, every christian in unity) as the Bride of Christ. so yes. as a "Church Body" we are female in nature. better said, we were created because God was lonely before He made the earth. this, of course, is introduced in our human understanding of God in relation to time. i have explained this to a few people, how God is outside of time, since He created time. He is, therefore, omnipresent in that time does not effect Him. Jesus backs me up saying "God is the same yesterday, today, and forever." but i said that in my last post. so i can't end this one there.

whew. that's probably the longest post i've ever written, and i hope it stays that way. as i said, there is a lot that's been on my mind lately, and i chose to stew in it and let it fully develop before i distributed it via the WWW. i hope you enjoyed reading it, as i'm sure if you're reading this right now you made it through. congratulations for making it through. i'll also have you know that my research in this has only strengthened my faith, thus making it worthwhile. i hope it does the same for you, if not providing insight, providing questions raised that you will find satisfying answers to.

Divine Authority

picture this: you buy a car and take out a bank loan to pay it off. you now owe the bank money. yet the car is used for selfish purposes. it drives you to parties and movie theatres, but not to work or anywhere that will generate income to pay back your loan. eventually you fall deeper into debt. you're not making money, and the interest is killing you.

will the bank give you another loan? no! similarily, we cannot ask for gifts and blessings from the Holy Spirit, unless we bear fruit with it. God will take it away otherwise.

salesmen make money: if we have gifts like holy boldness and peace beyond our understanding, we can preach the Gospel.

teachers make money: if we have discernment and wisdom, we can teach fellow christians how to seek God.

doctors make money: if we have divine healing annointing, we can lay hands on the sick.

Matthew 10:1 says that Jesus gave the disciples the authority to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness, before he sent them out with instructions.

in the Parable of the Talents, Jesus told a similar story of how the Master's gifts are not to go to waste. it also further demonstrates the repercussions of disobedience in v. 30.

that said, obedience stems from initial love for the Father. Jesus said those who love Me will obey My commandments. what is love without obedience? how can i say i love my parents if i do not obey them? how is my love demonstrated otherwise? i am called to honor my parents. obedience is one aspect of honor. that is also applicable to our Heavenly Father. a man gives flowers to his wife to display affection, or apologies. but when this becomes routine, love is removed and flowers mean nothing. if he continues to disrespect her and lose her trust, apologies mean nothing. husbands are not called to obey their wives. but they are called to love and serve them via the constitution of marriage. wives are called to respect and follow their husbands. this was instituted by God. who are we as society to redefine gender roles or marriage vows?

however, God's Word stands alone. it defends itself. i do not need to change the government's opinion, and pastors nation-wide have already made aware to them the consequences for their actions. they did not pray and receive the ability to change God's law, as this would never happen. the constitution of marriage has not changed as far as God is concerned.

Drinking, Smoking, Sex, Drugs, and Rock & Roll

there. i did it. grouped them all together.

i have a new pet-peeve. instigating. basically, i want to find out what is so "taboo" yet "sinfully" permissible about these topics. i can see them as choice topics for debate, but i find a lot of this happening: "i could really use a smoke right now" or "i'm itchin' for a heineken"

it's as if these are unrightfully frowned upon and the relevant thing to do is set ourselves apart from any pious pharisees that we come in contact with, and spite them from a distance, waving a lighter and a finger.

are these things wrong? for anyone? i never thought a recovering alcoholic should be given alcohol. or a smoke-intolerant person should be smoked around. i know some new christians who are trying to quit smoking. yet i see christians craving cigars from time to time. and inviting others to join. okay, maybe i'm pointing fingers. but i fail to see a need to be liberated to do these things rather than encouraged not to.

okay, i haven't even talked about sex, drugs, or rock and roll. basically i threw these things into my title to set a tone. rock and roll is considered evil by some people, i, myself do not want to get into this argument. sex i think is understood to be a closed door until marriage, and drugs are just plain bad. i could get into why, but i'll leave it for now.

is smoking wrong? well, we've all seen the gingevitis ads (shivers), but i don't think this is what is arguable. i know a guy who gets angry with himself because he smokes. he says he hates it because it's "just a front." people hide behind it. it's an escape from emotional stress.

"did Jesus tell us to light one up when we are weary and burdened?" i bet lots of smokers get that one... is smoking a burden?

"Jesus turned water into wine, but He didn't drink any" personally, i don't believe this, secondly, was Jesus encouraging drinking or getting drunk?

my beef is not whether or not we should damage our bodies, that's between us and God. conviction comes from the Holy Spirit. not fellow believers. that's judgment. where my beef is is telling others that it's okay. or doing it simply to get a rise out of some legalist. as if relevance is set apart from holiness.

Candid Camera

remenis with me:

my brother's highschool graduation ceremony.

mother and i are in attendance.

my job: to videotape isaac receiving his diploma.

so i turn on my camera.

but i can't see anything through the lens.

cap is off, just to double-check.

but i suspect a busted CCD chip.

i take it to the shop a week later.

it's a busted CCD chip.

$300 and 4 months later, it's fixed.

today i am excited. today is the day i get my camera back. it has been in the shop for too long! finally my baby is coming back to me. my Canon ZR-65. my companion. my love. my treasure. my weapon...

it occurred to me just how deadly a videocamera can be, when in the hands of a warrior for Christ!

check it out: i can be a witness, disguised as a documentary filmmaker. a camera not only gives purpose for interviewing random people to get opinions about our small town issues, but also poses a means to an end: Jesus Christ. it opens a window for candid conversations about topics chosen by the interviewer (me). while earning a reputable profile as a videographer, i'm doing undercover work for the kingdom of God.

there's something sexy about the potential of this project. this would make a cool youth event. i can just picture a bunch of teens running through the streets of downtown Simcoe with videocameras... with a *new mission: soulharvest

* i say new mission as a correction. originally i said "primary focus," but that is incorrect. it should be secondary to a primary focus of God. how could i slip that up! ha. as soon as i posted this blog entry, my mom told me that she couldn't pick my camera up today and that it would have to wait until tomorrow night. and i had made plans of using it tomorrow. then i had a shower and thought about this for a little while. then God kicked me in the head. why would i challenge people to do anything before time with Him? before prayer? so i made up my mind. i would change this post. because i needed to be corrected. because i am still flawed. then i got a phone call. it was my mom, telling me that she could try to pick it up tonight after all. honestly, this is interesting. it's like the thoughts that go through my head manipulate reality. the conversations with God, at least.

Damaging Effects of Direct Sunlight

our culture has allowed us to embrace the comfort of the world which we are presented with. we are sheltered by what mass media deems important and worthy of our attention. it, in turn, dictates our world-view and ignorance of the bigger picture. it is our tinted pair of sunglasses, transforming reflections of the sun into a more tolerable, soothing picture. not revealing the intense; painful; and, in prolonged exposure, damaging effects of direct sunlight.

we have become vulnerable. accustomed to the shade that our 'sunglasses' provide for us. even in our spiritual lives. we tackle the decoys that the devil has set for us: saving gospel music; the constitution of marriage; prayer in school; pro-life activism; religious holidays... the list goes on and on.

the Church holds on so dearly to these things. these social issues. they proclaim our pride to this great nation. all that we will stand for.

but our war is not that against flesh and blood. but in the intense; painful; and, in prolonged exposure, damaging effects of spiritual warfare (damaging to your complacency in your faith)

perhaps it is our freedom of speech that has been our biggest hinderance of all in this battle. meaning, the ability to fight for these 'rights'. i mean, by making all of our country's laws align with our biblical philosophy, will we see a country turn to God? i hope not. i would hate to attend a church that is programmed by government dictatorship.

i do not think this country will experience full-fledged revival until our freedoms have been stripped away from us. until the church is an underground movement. let them bulldoze our church buildings. let them persecute us for our world-view. let christianity become a rebellion again. then and only then will you see a true hunger. a true passion.

i'm not suggesting that we light matches to our church buildings. thank God for the freedom to build a place for gathering of christians. but i think we are afraid of the inevitable: north america as a third-world country. it is actually harder to live your faith in this westernized culture than anywhere else in the world. because our battle is not against oppression, it is against legalism. our battle is not against the social issues of our north american culture, but against the root of the problem: their world-view... largely, evolutionism. give a people no meaning for life, and you get a life with no meaning. no absolute truths. no values. no conscience. try and explain to them that the purpose for church is to make the world a better place to live... it's doomed to fail. because Jesus did not come to take over the world, but to save us from it!

let that be our mission also: to save people from the never-ending punshment for the wickedness of this world.

Judge a Book by its Followers (revised)

the book: The Holy Bible
its followers: Christians
the judges: ....Christians?

i've been thinking about this for a little while now. (pause for more thought) can people base an accurate preconception of a 'religion' based on its followers? should they be able to? pop-culture teaches not to judge a book by its cover. but christians do it all the time. could one, being a non-believer, tell someone what christianity is without ever reading the entire christian bible, but by judging the lives of its followers? could christians? this would require christians to learn the bible, and apply it to their daily life. i mean, this sounds somewhat absurd. to memorize 66 books of prophecy, ethics, miracles, and genealogy and practice it in your daily life.

perhaps some omissions from the bible are permittable, if we are called to "preach the gospel"... like, we could leave out all the boring stuff, cut straight to the 'meat' and hilight key references in the bible. or better yet, cut out the entire old testament. besides, Jesus never came to save the world until the new testament, right? well, there's 4 whole books about Jesus, so he must be important. maybe we could just pick one book and stick with that. let's stick with john because i think i heard he spent the most time with Jesus. but there's 21 chapters in john. still a long read. so let's boil it down to the main message of Jesus... He did say to obey God's commandments. but there's 10 of those, and i only remember a few... so what are the important ones? Jesus said that the greatest commandment was love.

we have boiled it down to one thing. love. is that it? can we settle for that? can we live that? sure! every christian will tell you that! roman catholics and protestants alike! as well as mormons! jews! muslims! hindus! buddhists! sikhs! taoists! wiccans! we can all live together in peace and harmony! isn't that the ultimate goal? is that love? i think it's more of a tolerance. this is NOT the love that Jesus was talking about. this is not being the "salt of the earth". i think we have the wrong idea about love. love is not about making sure everyone gets along nicely with eachother. love hurts. love bleeds. love intrudes. love heals...

the hippie movement was inspired by contemporary christian music artists. they wrote love songs to Jesus. they told the world that Jesus loved them. that He didn't care where they had been. that God would love them no matter what.

people liked this idea about Jesus. they could smoke a joint, fornicate in the woods, run around naked... and it would never matter, Jesus loved them! well, they LOVED this idea. don't get me wrong, i can't argue with them. the initial message is true! Jesus DOES love me. and THANK GOD for grace...

grace? okay. let's back this up. what is grace for? why do we need grace? grace was God's ultimate gift to man. THROUGH Jesus. he gave us forgiveness and a second chance. this is our second chance. a chance to make a difference. to create change. God demonstrated His love for us by intruding into our lives. sending His son to die for us. to heal us. and that hurts. and Jesus bled for us. he died for us. that is love.

so my point is, we are to be like God. is this unfair? if, to enter heaven, divine perfection is expected of us? can we judge a book by its cover? can we judge the Bible by the lives of its followers? do christians follow the Bible? do christians live bible-inspired lives? we need to stop judging eachother. we need to start loving eachother. speak love, not judgement. we need to stop tolerating eachother. we need to start holding eachother accountable for their actions. speak truth, not compromise.

Evolution In Public School

Foreword: I wrote this essay when I was in grade 12 and presented it in front of my class along with visuals and video content, followed by questioning from the class. My views have since changed and no longer reflect the views I so strongly expressed herein.

Science should be taught in school. Ask anyone why, and you will likely get similar responses. Because children will ask questions, teachers must be prepared to answer them. Imagine the frustration and confusion a child would have if he/she was given a different answer from every teacher in every classroom for the same question. This is one of the reasons why public schools have what is known as a curriculum. Ideally, the public school system is meant to teach accurately, without biased opinions or religious viewpoints. This is why evolution is taught in science classes when it comes to explaining our origins. After all, evolution is backed by scientific evidence, right? If it didn’t, it wouldn’t be taught in the schools of North America. At least, that’s what we’re told.

First, let’s look at the origin of the Evolution Theory. Long before Charles Darwin’s time, people began questioning the age of the earth. Up until the late 1700’s, the majority of people believed the Bible and that it suggests that the earth is about 6000 years old. Then James Hutton came along, and said that the earth was in fact, billions of years old. Hutton claimed to be a christian, so logically, if he said the Bible was wrong, he would be the one to know. In 1831, Charles Darwin took a trip to the Galapagos Islands. Charles loved worms, so he shot birds. Some of which, were finches. So Darwin collected them and studied the variation in the shape of the beaks. He developed a theory called natural selection. A Scottish lawyer named Charles Lyell observed microevolution, and believed in macroevolution. His hate for the Bible was evident in his studies.

Fortunately, Evolution is not the only belief with regards to the origin of the earth. There is another theory, Creationism. Creationists believe in the Bible. The Bible states that the earth was created in 6 days, not billions and billions of years. Furthermore, Christianity has a definite geographical origin. No other religion has that. Creationists spend a lot of time debating Evolutionists. So far, they have managed to tear apart every shred of evidence supporting evolution. In fact, it not only disproves evolution, but proves creation. Take for example, the fictionous ‘Ape Men’. All any paleontologists ever found of Nebraska Man was a single bone. A tooth, for that matter. It was later found after careful study, that it belonged to a peccary (a close relative of a pig). Or take the Piltdown Man. It was declared a 500,000 year old ape-man by many British scientists. Four decades later, it was found to be consisting of a very recent orangutan jaw stained to look old, with its teeth filed down to make them more human-looking, planted together with a human skull bone, also stained to create an appearance of age. Pithecanthropus, Darwin’s missing link of the evolutionary scale, was actually a human thighbone found close by the skullcap of a chimpanzee. The bones were found in volcanic sediments, which were responsible for the fissilization, not old age. As for Peking Man, few students learned that the skulls had been found in scattered little fragments, with missing fragments substituted with plaster. Neanderthals were long portrayed as ape-men, stooped over. This misconception was largely the result of a faulty reconstruction by French paleontologist Marcellin Boule, who mistook the skeleton of a man with kyphosis (hunchback) for an ape-man in the process of becoming upright. Human ancestors are shown going back almost 6 million years. But no chimpanzee or gorilla ancestors are depicted before a million years ago.Why does every bone fragment turn out to be a human ancestor? Where are all the fossils of chimpanzee and gorilla ancestors? "The problem with a lot of antrhopologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone." - Dr. Tim White, anthropologist.

Radiocarbon dating, especially the Carbon 14 method, is the primary source of proof for evolution. C14 dating is very accurate when used for wood from up to about 4,000 years ago. After that, the method becomes very unreliable for the following reasons: (1) This method is only accurately used when it is calibrated with objects of known age. Example: wood found in a grave of known age by historically reliable documents is the standard for that time for the C14 content. (2) To assume a particular level of Carbon 14 in an organism requires a precise determination of environmental (atmospheric) levels of the same. That is, to presume a particular level in a living thing requires a precise knowledge of the ambient amount of Carbon 14 in the air and environment. Scientists pervorming radiocarbon dating assume that the amount in the environment has not changed. This is compelling for several reasons, not the least of which is the convenience with which "science" apparently operates; we hear of massive changes in the earth, ice ages, catastrophic events that killed the dinosaurs, etc., but the environment never changed according to the same scientists.

Evolutionists talk a lot about the Geological Column. But the only place where the Geologic Column exists is in the textbooks. Dinosaurs are not aged by Carbon dating, but they are aged according to how deep they are found in the rock layers. The funny thing is, the rock layers are aged by determining what kind of fossils are found in them. Talk about circular reasoning.

It is evident that the Evolutionists have a biased judgement against Creationists. After all, was the theory not developed to disprove and offer an alternative to the Bible? Any evidence disproving the Evolutionist Theory is simply ignored, and is still printed in school textbooks all over North America.

President Washington’s face is carved in a rock. Could that be done by chance? No, it had to be designed. Knowing that, could Washington himself have happened from chance? They both came from a rock, right? It seems almost comical that an Evolutionist will argue that a human being can come from a rock, but a mere image of one cannot. Since Evolution was introduced into our Public School System, suicide rates have skyrocketed. It could be just a coincidence, or perhaps the thought that life was an accident is really getting to the students of today’s school. If eliminating the study of evolution in our schools would allow children to live long and prosper, would it not be a worthwhile endeavor? Do the kids a favour: tell them there is a reason for life. After all, if it’s about keeping religion out of the schools, why is the Theory of Evolution being taught? Is that not just an idea? A hypothesis? A belief? Before Evolution was introduced, Creation was the common belief. So why don’t we get back to the basics? Or here’s another suggestion, eliminate both theories. If you really want to get rid of the religious aspect to our education system, don’t teach anything. It’s better than confusing the students with two theories on how the earth originated. Of course, it would be a shame to eliminate the theory of Evolution from the Education system entirely, so maybe it should be taught. But not in Science. If anything, it should be taught as History, or World Religions.

A Taste (revised)

This is an attempt. an experiment. to size your appetite. to see if you're hungry enough. to see how far you will go to find answers to your questions. the ones that haunt you. am i supposed to tell you that you will find the answers here? i hope not. i want you to keep looking. keep seeking... eagerly, patiently, fervently. to answer life's questions. to not ever give up. because you have to know. maybe you're reading this and you feel like you're missing something. key number one. and your biggest question is "where do i start?" well, obviously if i tell you that it will be biased. but i seem to be dangling a carrot in front of your face, so i'll tell you what i found: Jesus knew the answer. Jesus is worth knowing. find out about Jesus.

so. here you are. the next paragraph. and you still have questions. here's where i really wanted to go with this blog. the last 2 paragraphs were just to make sure you're on the right track for what's ahead. because that's the foundation for everything i know to be true. do you seek truth? i don't know why you wouldn't. but one thing you have to accept, as i have had to accept, is that truth stands apart from you, your opinions, and your beliefs. that's what makes it truth! truth stands alone! Jesus said "I am the way, the truth and the life!" if Jesus is the truth, then that means everything He says is true! for further understanding of this, take a look at John 7. if someone tells me they believe that the earth is flat, it does not mean it's truth. it just means that they're ignorant. and if they're ignorant of truth, then they're a fool, quite simply.

so maybe you're a christian. maybe you agree with some of what i've said so far. and you still have questions. problems. you want to be a better christian. you want to be stronger in your faith. you want to be out there on the front line, preaching the gospel. following God. hearing God. you want to know how to pray. you want to know about baptism. about the trinity. about speaking in tongues. about understanding scripture. about miracles. about church government. about denominational differences. about doctrine. about holiness. about dream interpretation. you need to get into the Bible. you need to know about repentance. get rid of your distractions. make God the centre of your life. focus on Him. His way. His heart. His will. we need to be fruitful and spread the message. we need to pray. make your time with God. ask the Holy Spirit to teach you how to pray. find a mentor.

okay, some of that was my sermon notes. but it's true! whether i tell you or not, it's true. so often we want to build this tall tower of ministry and works. but you need to have a deep, strong foundation first. otherwise, it will crumble. so many christians don't know what they believe. find out what God's Word says about what you believe - because God will not lead you astray. that's why He sent His Son. to show us what God is like.