If I say that I am a Christian then I must live as one, or else I am a hypocrite. Too often in my life I have been concerned about what other people think rather than what God thinks. I never want other people to determine how I live my life, or how I respond in various situations. God has proven over and over again in my life (through His guidance, direction and love) that following His Word and His ways are always best. I have never been let down by doing things according to what the Bible says. People on the other hand do let you down. It is for these reasons that I do not want to have my actions determined by other people, but rather by God. At the same time I feel it is very important not to be a person who turns people off by "preaching" at them. I simply want to be a person who believes the Word of God, lives it out with boldness and confidence and does not allow what other people think of me to keep me from doing this. Jesus died on the cross so that I may have a personal relationship with Him, and for me to show even the slightest hesitation to obey Him and acknowledge Him before other people is the highest form of ungratefulness.
I was thinking about this fact as well...I would never even consider denying the fact that I love my wife. I would never be even remotely hesitant to confess in front of others my incredible love for her. Therefore, why would I ever do this for God? How could I ever do this for the One who guides and directs my life, and who has offered me salvation through His Son's death on the cross?
Tuesday 11 December 2012
Monday 3 December 2012
When we let fear rule us we make it more powerful than God
When we let fear rule us, we make it more powerful than God. It is amazing how easy it can be to allow fear to determine the actions that you take. Fear of results, fear of what others will think, and many other circumstantial fears, guide our decisions and life steps. What a sad reality. It is scary to think of all that one could accomplish in life if they were to simply trust God and refuse to allow fear to determine their actions. I must ensure that it is God alone that is guiding my steps. I must make sure that I am surrendered to what He wants me to do, for His ways have always proven to be the best course of action for my life. And besides, if He calls me to something, He will always provide the strength and circumstances needed to accomplish the task. These are God's truths, and I know that I have seen them proven over and over again in my life, so I'm not sure why I struggle with trust and obedience so often.
I want God to rule my life, not fear. In order for this to happen, I need to continually seek His will and surrender myself to Him, reminding myself that His ways are always best, and that He has never failed to prove this to me over and over again in my life.
I want God to rule my life, not fear. In order for this to happen, I need to continually seek His will and surrender myself to Him, reminding myself that His ways are always best, and that He has never failed to prove this to me over and over again in my life.
God is in Control, Why do I Force Things?
-I don't understand how and that is why I think sometimes I feel like I have to force things, or I fear, but I can always look back and see clearly what He did, how He did it, and often why. He really does work all out for good, and according to His purposes. He teaches me time and again that I just need to focus on obeying Him and He will work it all out as He sees fit. Thank you Lord!
Is there a God Who created the universe? (Part 3)
Continued from part 2....
Fakes and Mistakes
There have even been proven fake fossils which have at one time been believed to be proof of common ancestry. A popular example was an animal they called an "archaeoraptor". It had the tail of a dinosoaur and the fore limbs of a bird. National Geographic even published the information on this fossil, but a Chinese paleontologist later proved that it was a fake, and that it had been glued together. I understand that this is not an accurate representation of the entire science community; however, the fact that this has happens should be noted. Jonathan Wells states that there are scores of fake fossils out there which "casts a dark cloud" over the field. I am not saying that fossils are not reliable, but this situation certainly does not help its credibility. And it gets worse...
There is the famous "Java Man". This refers to a archeological find by French scientist Eugene Dubois in 1891. Through his find he used the bones to create what seemed to be a half-man, half-ape, or in other words, a missing link. Many people today accept Java Man as proof of evolution. This has since been proven as a completely unrealistic piece of evidence. Upon further research of this find, one will discover that Dubois only found a skull-cap, a femur and three teeth. Therefore, it can be concluded that a great deal of imagination was involved in deciding that these bones belonged to a living organism which looked very much like a half-man, half-ape. Strobel puts it well in saying that in other words, this Java Man, which so many people over the years have bought into as absolute proof of evolution, was created through nothing more than "speculation fueled by evolutionary expectations of what he should have looked like if Darwinism were true". One can only logically conclude that in all likelihood, there are many, many other situations similar to these whereby people believe in "scientific facts" of evolution, which are anything but. Rather, they are misconceptions, which stem from downright misleading information.
Additional information which should be noted regarding Dubois' "Java Man" is as follows:
-Dubois' excavation would have disqualified the fossil from consideration by today's standards.
-The femur apparently didn't really belong to the skull cap.
-Examination by famous Cambridge University anatomist Sir Arthur Keith reveals that the skull cap "was distinctly human and reflected a brain capacity well within the range of humans living today".
-A 342-page scientific report from a fact-finding expedition of nineteen evolutionists discredits Dubois' claims and determines that Java Man plays no part in evolutionary history. (Keep in mind that this is the collaborative decision of nineteen scientists who believe in evolution).
In general, it must be noted that when fossils are found and pieced together, it is not a simple puzzle process. There is a lot of interpretation involved. Dubois' Java Man reveals this, but so have other events in acheological history. For instance, National Geographic once hired four artists to construct a female figure from seven fossil bones found in Kenya. Each artist came up with very different interpretations of what the original organism looked like. One appeared like a modern-day African American woman, one had a heavy gorilla-like brow, one had a missing forehead and jaws that looked like a dinosaur with a beak, while another looked like a werewolf.
All of this helps to display the sad fact that many people believe in evolutionary theory based off of information they have been told, or even seen in text books; which upon further examination is simply not reliable. The reason why texts still publish this information as fact - when it has clearly been proven otherwise - baffles me. The scientific community has long deemed such information as false, yet it is still printed as fact. I simply don't get it.
Jonathan Wells sums up the above arguments against Darwinism as follows:
"My conclusion is that the case for Darwinian evolution is bankrupt. The evidence for Darwinism is not only grossly inadequate, it's systematically distorted. I'm convinced that sometime in the not-too-distant future - I don't know, maybe twenty or thirty years from now - people will look back in amazement and say, 'How could anyone have believed this?' Darwinism is merely materialistic philosophy masquerading as science, and people are recognizing it for what it is. I believe science is pointing strongly toward design. To me, as a scientist, the development of an embryo cries out, 'Design!' The Cambrian explosion - the sudden appearance of complex life, with no evidence of anscestors - is more consistent with design than evolution. Homology, in my opinion, is more compatible with design. The origin of life certainly cries out for a designer. None of these things make as much sense from a Darwiniain perspective as they do from a design perspective."
In other words, what we know to be true clearly points toward design, not Darwinian theory.
Fakes and Mistakes
There have even been proven fake fossils which have at one time been believed to be proof of common ancestry. A popular example was an animal they called an "archaeoraptor". It had the tail of a dinosoaur and the fore limbs of a bird. National Geographic even published the information on this fossil, but a Chinese paleontologist later proved that it was a fake, and that it had been glued together. I understand that this is not an accurate representation of the entire science community; however, the fact that this has happens should be noted. Jonathan Wells states that there are scores of fake fossils out there which "casts a dark cloud" over the field. I am not saying that fossils are not reliable, but this situation certainly does not help its credibility. And it gets worse...
There is the famous "Java Man". This refers to a archeological find by French scientist Eugene Dubois in 1891. Through his find he used the bones to create what seemed to be a half-man, half-ape, or in other words, a missing link. Many people today accept Java Man as proof of evolution. This has since been proven as a completely unrealistic piece of evidence. Upon further research of this find, one will discover that Dubois only found a skull-cap, a femur and three teeth. Therefore, it can be concluded that a great deal of imagination was involved in deciding that these bones belonged to a living organism which looked very much like a half-man, half-ape. Strobel puts it well in saying that in other words, this Java Man, which so many people over the years have bought into as absolute proof of evolution, was created through nothing more than "speculation fueled by evolutionary expectations of what he should have looked like if Darwinism were true". One can only logically conclude that in all likelihood, there are many, many other situations similar to these whereby people believe in "scientific facts" of evolution, which are anything but. Rather, they are misconceptions, which stem from downright misleading information.
Additional information which should be noted regarding Dubois' "Java Man" is as follows:
-Dubois' excavation would have disqualified the fossil from consideration by today's standards.
-The femur apparently didn't really belong to the skull cap.
-Examination by famous Cambridge University anatomist Sir Arthur Keith reveals that the skull cap "was distinctly human and reflected a brain capacity well within the range of humans living today".
-A 342-page scientific report from a fact-finding expedition of nineteen evolutionists discredits Dubois' claims and determines that Java Man plays no part in evolutionary history. (Keep in mind that this is the collaborative decision of nineteen scientists who believe in evolution).
In general, it must be noted that when fossils are found and pieced together, it is not a simple puzzle process. There is a lot of interpretation involved. Dubois' Java Man reveals this, but so have other events in acheological history. For instance, National Geographic once hired four artists to construct a female figure from seven fossil bones found in Kenya. Each artist came up with very different interpretations of what the original organism looked like. One appeared like a modern-day African American woman, one had a heavy gorilla-like brow, one had a missing forehead and jaws that looked like a dinosaur with a beak, while another looked like a werewolf.
All of this helps to display the sad fact that many people believe in evolutionary theory based off of information they have been told, or even seen in text books; which upon further examination is simply not reliable. The reason why texts still publish this information as fact - when it has clearly been proven otherwise - baffles me. The scientific community has long deemed such information as false, yet it is still printed as fact. I simply don't get it.
Jonathan Wells sums up the above arguments against Darwinism as follows:
"My conclusion is that the case for Darwinian evolution is bankrupt. The evidence for Darwinism is not only grossly inadequate, it's systematically distorted. I'm convinced that sometime in the not-too-distant future - I don't know, maybe twenty or thirty years from now - people will look back in amazement and say, 'How could anyone have believed this?' Darwinism is merely materialistic philosophy masquerading as science, and people are recognizing it for what it is. I believe science is pointing strongly toward design. To me, as a scientist, the development of an embryo cries out, 'Design!' The Cambrian explosion - the sudden appearance of complex life, with no evidence of anscestors - is more consistent with design than evolution. Homology, in my opinion, is more compatible with design. The origin of life certainly cries out for a designer. None of these things make as much sense from a Darwiniain perspective as they do from a design perspective."
In other words, what we know to be true clearly points toward design, not Darwinian theory.
Is there a God Who created the universe? (Part 2)
Continued from part 1....
Human Genes and Ape Genes
Many people often cite the fact that 98% of human and ape genes are similar. Jonathan Wells states that this therefore means that the 2% of our genes which are not similar, would have to account for the differences in our physical features. The reason why this 98% similarity is not proof of common ancestry is because the 2% difference does not include the physical feature genes. Those genes are found in the 98% similarity genes. Therefore, similarity in genes does not prove common ancestry, because in order for it to do so, the differences in our physical features would have to be accounted for in the 2% difference, but it does not. This situation can be compared to a builder who builds various structures. They will design their structures using many of the same ingredients, or parts, such as woods, concrete, steel beams, etc., but just because they use the same ingredients does not mean that the structure will come out looking exactly the same. It appears that God has done the same thing here. He has used the same genes in many different organisms, but despite this, they all look different. So again, gene similarity does not prove common ancestry because organisms can have very different physical features from each other despite the fact that the genes which account for those physcial features are similar.
No missing link, and the archaeopteryx
A large problem with Darwin's theory is the fact that we have never found any missing links. And besides, even if we did find one or two, it would not be enough to effectively argue that Darwin's theory is reality. You would need overwhelming scientific evidence and discovery to deem the theory as fact.
Some people argue that the archaeopteryx is an example of a missing link. It is an animal that existed many years ago which has characteristics from both a reptile and a bird. It cannot be considered as a missing link however for a couple of reasons. For one, in order for it to be considered a missing link, you would need to find other transitional forms which would show the gradual progression for how you went from reptile, to then archaeopteryx, to then bird. Evolution is based off of many small variations over time, and a 3 step process of reptile to archaeopteryx to bird is by no means a gradual process of small variations. The other problem with this is the fact that reptilian fossils which would serve as the best "examples" of being ancestors to birds actually appear many years after the archaeopteryx existed, thus making it impossible for them to be ancestors. If the archaeopteryx was truly a missing link, then the reptilian ancestors would have to come before it, but the opposite is true, the reptiles which would best be argued as being reptilian ancestors of the archaeopteryx come many years after, thus disproving the argument. These fossils would need to have come prior to the existence of the archaeopteryx. In order to even attempt to argue that the archaeopteryx is an example of a missing link, the fossil record would have to be the opposite of what it actually is. The archaeopteryx has not provided the missing link that scientists continue to search for.
Human Genes and Ape Genes
Many people often cite the fact that 98% of human and ape genes are similar. Jonathan Wells states that this therefore means that the 2% of our genes which are not similar, would have to account for the differences in our physical features. The reason why this 98% similarity is not proof of common ancestry is because the 2% difference does not include the physical feature genes. Those genes are found in the 98% similarity genes. Therefore, similarity in genes does not prove common ancestry, because in order for it to do so, the differences in our physical features would have to be accounted for in the 2% difference, but it does not. This situation can be compared to a builder who builds various structures. They will design their structures using many of the same ingredients, or parts, such as woods, concrete, steel beams, etc., but just because they use the same ingredients does not mean that the structure will come out looking exactly the same. It appears that God has done the same thing here. He has used the same genes in many different organisms, but despite this, they all look different. So again, gene similarity does not prove common ancestry because organisms can have very different physical features from each other despite the fact that the genes which account for those physcial features are similar.
No missing link, and the archaeopteryx
A large problem with Darwin's theory is the fact that we have never found any missing links. And besides, even if we did find one or two, it would not be enough to effectively argue that Darwin's theory is reality. You would need overwhelming scientific evidence and discovery to deem the theory as fact.
Some people argue that the archaeopteryx is an example of a missing link. It is an animal that existed many years ago which has characteristics from both a reptile and a bird. It cannot be considered as a missing link however for a couple of reasons. For one, in order for it to be considered a missing link, you would need to find other transitional forms which would show the gradual progression for how you went from reptile, to then archaeopteryx, to then bird. Evolution is based off of many small variations over time, and a 3 step process of reptile to archaeopteryx to bird is by no means a gradual process of small variations. The other problem with this is the fact that reptilian fossils which would serve as the best "examples" of being ancestors to birds actually appear many years after the archaeopteryx existed, thus making it impossible for them to be ancestors. If the archaeopteryx was truly a missing link, then the reptilian ancestors would have to come before it, but the opposite is true, the reptiles which would best be argued as being reptilian ancestors of the archaeopteryx come many years after, thus disproving the argument. These fossils would need to have come prior to the existence of the archaeopteryx. In order to even attempt to argue that the archaeopteryx is an example of a missing link, the fossil record would have to be the opposite of what it actually is. The archaeopteryx has not provided the missing link that scientists continue to search for.
Fine Tuning of the Universe
From Chapter 4: "Where Science Meets Faith" (Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel)
The fine tuning of the universe is incredible. One example is the fine expansion rate of the universe. If it were to slow down, or speed up, by even the most minuscule amount, we would not have a universe that could support life.
Scientist Stephen C. Meyer put it this way when discussing the argument for a Creator: "It is not an argument from ignorance. We are not inferring design just because the naturalistic evolutionary theories all fail to explain information. We infer design because all of those theories fail and we know of another causal entity that is capable of producing information - namely, intelligence. Personally I find this to be a very strong argument indeed".
We see design all throughout our world through the things that we as humans have created. The concept of design being necessary for the establishment of anything complex is very real. So I believe what Meyer is saying in the quote above to be an extremely strong point. As well, it should also be noted that in this chapter of "Case for a Creator", atheist Richard Dawkins is quoted as admitting that DNA follows patterns much like that of a computer program. In other words it follows a pattern of something which was designed. One may argue back saying that computers were created by following a pattern that we found in nature, but this does not change the fact that design follows certain patterns and those patterns are ones which we see all throughout our universe. This is a fact which cannot be ignored and serves to enhance Meyer's point in the quote above.
Wednesday 21 November 2012
Humility
Through my study of what it means to be humble, God's Word has taught me the following...
I need to have the attitude that He had while here on earth. I need to think less of myself, put others before myself, consider others better than myself, take a genuine interest in others, seek for all the ways that I can serve others. I am ashamed to admit that too often I think about myself. I think about my own wants, desires and preferences. I want to stop wasting my life in this way. I want to serve the Lord, and I want to do this through serving others as He calls me to. I need to stop thinking about myself and think about others. And besides, the Bible is clear that, "Pride comes before destruction", but on the other hand, those who are humble will be honored and blessed. This is what I want.
I need to have the attitude that He had while here on earth. I need to think less of myself, put others before myself, consider others better than myself, take a genuine interest in others, seek for all the ways that I can serve others. I am ashamed to admit that too often I think about myself. I think about my own wants, desires and preferences. I want to stop wasting my life in this way. I want to serve the Lord, and I want to do this through serving others as He calls me to. I need to stop thinking about myself and think about others. And besides, the Bible is clear that, "Pride comes before destruction", but on the other hand, those who are humble will be honored and blessed. This is what I want.
Tuesday 20 November 2012
The balance between results being up to our efforts or to God's will
I have always struggled to understand exactly what the balance is between me accomplish things through my own personal efforts compared to God's will being done to accomplish things in my life. Through studying 1 Corinthians 15:9,10 tonight I felt God was using this passage to give me some more insight into this matter. There is no doubt that God is a realistic God. He expects us to do our part and work hard at everything we do. "We must work hard as if it all depends on us, and then live realizing it all depends on Him". With that said, God is still in complete control of all results. I believe this passage is explaining that only when God chooses to bless our efforts will we achieve success through them. We can work hard at things all we want, but if God does not choose to bless those efforts, then I don't believe as Christians we will see the success we may want, or expect.
Work as if it all depends on me, then live realizing that it all depends on God. The success I achieve will directly relate to the degree that God decides to bless my efforts, for I can accomplish nothing apart from Him.
Work as if it all depends on me, then live realizing that it all depends on God. The success I achieve will directly relate to the degree that God decides to bless my efforts, for I can accomplish nothing apart from Him.
Friday 14 September 2012
Is there a God Who created the universe? (Part 1)
From "The Case for a Creator" (Chapter 3)
Many people are atheists because they feel that science proves there is no God. I would argue the exact opposite to be true. The more research that is conducted, the more proof there is that God created this universe.
Stanley Miller's experiments which claim to have created life
Some people argue that Stanley Miller in 1953 proved that life can be created from the conditions that would have been found within the atmosphere of a young earth. This is a study which is still printed in textbooks today, but foolishly so, because there are some serious issues with it. For one, experts state that it is impossible to know exactly what those conditions were like; therefore right off the bat, when Miller created an environment to test in, there is no way of knowing that he had it absolutely correct. Jonathan Wells, PHD, PHD states that the consensus within the scientific community is that the environment that Miller used was not at all like the atmosphere of early earth. On top of this, he created conditions and controlled those conditions in order to get the results that he wanted (created life). This is intelligent design! The reason why he had to do this is because the likelihood of all of the materials not only being combined, but being combined in the correct way (ratios, sequence, etc.) is insurmountable. Therefore, it is unlikely that he created accurate conditions of the atmosphere of early earth, but he also demonstrated the likelihood that a Designer was responsible for life.
Francis Crick, a biochemist and spiritual skeptic who won the nobel peace prize for his work in discovering the molecular structure of DNA admitted the following: "An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life apears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going".
Darwin's Tree of Life and the Cambrian Explosion
Darwin argued in his theories that a tree of life can explain the evolutionary progression of life forms. This is the famous idea that organisms start out simple and evolve over time into more complex organisms. When he made these hypotheses, he knew that the evidence did not support this, but believed that science would catch up. Science has not caught up. In fact, the opposite has occurred as a result of the "Cambrian Explosion". This refers to the fossil records which show that there were simple organisms which existed long ago, but then "bam!" all of a sudden in the fossil record there are fully developed complex organisms. They appear suddenly in the fossil record and there is no evolutionary progression in the fossil records which can account for their being evolved. They simply appear fully developed in the record, and this is the exact opposite of what Darwin's theories predicted. It is the opposite of evolutionary processes because the fully developed life forms appear first, without any predecessors. A logical explanation is that they did not evolve, but that they were created fully developed.
The crazy thing is that this theory still appears in textbooks and appears as fact. Jonathan Wells makes a good point in saying that it is not a terrible thing if it appears in textbooks and taught as an interesting theory, but it is wrong for it to be taught as fact, for science has proven that it is anything but. He goes even further to say that based off of all that we know from the science community, "...it is not even a good hypothesis at this point".
Haeckel's Embryos
Another fallacy that has for years been taught in textbooks as fact is “Haeckel’s Embryos”. The story of this is that Darwin hypothesized that embryos in their early stages would show common ancestries with other organisms. The thought was that similarities in the early stages would serve as proof of such common ancestries. Haeckel, in his own studies, had similar theories, and was so confident in his theory, that he created drawings of embryos which were tailored to make embryos appear more alike than they really are. For lack of a better term, he faked the drawings. The truth of the matter with these embryos was that they were quite different between various classes of organisms in the early stages, would become somewhat more similar (but still different) in the middle stages, and then they would become very different again. The inaccuracy of Haeckel’s embryos is a well-known fact in the science community, yet for some reason it is still found in textbooks and taught as fact. These facts are frustrating. Jonathan Wells states that what has happened is that the primary evidence for Darwin’s theories – the fossil record and early embryos – served as the primary evidence for Darwin’s theories being true, but when the evidence proved to be false, scientists said, “Well we know the theory is true, so we will use the theory to explain why the evidence doesn’t fit”, but this is crazy, because then there is no evidence for the theory. None of this makes any sense at all.
Some people state that early human embryos have slits which resemble slits in early embroys of fish that eventually become gills, and therefore argue that this is proof of the fact that we have an ancestry with aquatic organisms. The fact of the matter is that they are simply not gills. If you look down toward your belly and then feel the front of your neck, you will feel flaps of skin, or ridges in the skin of your neck. This is not to say that the ridges in a human embryo are simply skin flaps, for they are more complicated than that; however, what can be said is that these ridges are not gills, and the argument of common ancestry with aquatic life due to this resemblance has been long dismissed as simply not being accurate. In fact, these ridges in fish embryos, while they do eventually become gills, are not gills at that stage. In fish they become gills, in humans they become something else. Many people will argue that because fish and human embroys share this feature at early stages, with fish eventually developing gills, that this could still be considered proof of early ancestry between humans and fish. While it could seem to be a convincing argument superficially, science has determined that it is simply not fact. Human embryos at no point have gills.
Many people are atheists because they feel that science proves there is no God. I would argue the exact opposite to be true. The more research that is conducted, the more proof there is that God created this universe.
Stanley Miller's experiments which claim to have created life
Some people argue that Stanley Miller in 1953 proved that life can be created from the conditions that would have been found within the atmosphere of a young earth. This is a study which is still printed in textbooks today, but foolishly so, because there are some serious issues with it. For one, experts state that it is impossible to know exactly what those conditions were like; therefore right off the bat, when Miller created an environment to test in, there is no way of knowing that he had it absolutely correct. Jonathan Wells, PHD, PHD states that the consensus within the scientific community is that the environment that Miller used was not at all like the atmosphere of early earth. On top of this, he created conditions and controlled those conditions in order to get the results that he wanted (created life). This is intelligent design! The reason why he had to do this is because the likelihood of all of the materials not only being combined, but being combined in the correct way (ratios, sequence, etc.) is insurmountable. Therefore, it is unlikely that he created accurate conditions of the atmosphere of early earth, but he also demonstrated the likelihood that a Designer was responsible for life.
Francis Crick, a biochemist and spiritual skeptic who won the nobel peace prize for his work in discovering the molecular structure of DNA admitted the following: "An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life apears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going".
Darwin's Tree of Life and the Cambrian Explosion
Darwin argued in his theories that a tree of life can explain the evolutionary progression of life forms. This is the famous idea that organisms start out simple and evolve over time into more complex organisms. When he made these hypotheses, he knew that the evidence did not support this, but believed that science would catch up. Science has not caught up. In fact, the opposite has occurred as a result of the "Cambrian Explosion". This refers to the fossil records which show that there were simple organisms which existed long ago, but then "bam!" all of a sudden in the fossil record there are fully developed complex organisms. They appear suddenly in the fossil record and there is no evolutionary progression in the fossil records which can account for their being evolved. They simply appear fully developed in the record, and this is the exact opposite of what Darwin's theories predicted. It is the opposite of evolutionary processes because the fully developed life forms appear first, without any predecessors. A logical explanation is that they did not evolve, but that they were created fully developed.
The crazy thing is that this theory still appears in textbooks and appears as fact. Jonathan Wells makes a good point in saying that it is not a terrible thing if it appears in textbooks and taught as an interesting theory, but it is wrong for it to be taught as fact, for science has proven that it is anything but. He goes even further to say that based off of all that we know from the science community, "...it is not even a good hypothesis at this point".
Haeckel's Embryos
Another fallacy that has for years been taught in textbooks as fact is “Haeckel’s Embryos”. The story of this is that Darwin hypothesized that embryos in their early stages would show common ancestries with other organisms. The thought was that similarities in the early stages would serve as proof of such common ancestries. Haeckel, in his own studies, had similar theories, and was so confident in his theory, that he created drawings of embryos which were tailored to make embryos appear more alike than they really are. For lack of a better term, he faked the drawings. The truth of the matter with these embryos was that they were quite different between various classes of organisms in the early stages, would become somewhat more similar (but still different) in the middle stages, and then they would become very different again. The inaccuracy of Haeckel’s embryos is a well-known fact in the science community, yet for some reason it is still found in textbooks and taught as fact. These facts are frustrating. Jonathan Wells states that what has happened is that the primary evidence for Darwin’s theories – the fossil record and early embryos – served as the primary evidence for Darwin’s theories being true, but when the evidence proved to be false, scientists said, “Well we know the theory is true, so we will use the theory to explain why the evidence doesn’t fit”, but this is crazy, because then there is no evidence for the theory. None of this makes any sense at all.
Some people state that early human embryos have slits which resemble slits in early embroys of fish that eventually become gills, and therefore argue that this is proof of the fact that we have an ancestry with aquatic organisms. The fact of the matter is that they are simply not gills. If you look down toward your belly and then feel the front of your neck, you will feel flaps of skin, or ridges in the skin of your neck. This is not to say that the ridges in a human embryo are simply skin flaps, for they are more complicated than that; however, what can be said is that these ridges are not gills, and the argument of common ancestry with aquatic life due to this resemblance has been long dismissed as simply not being accurate. In fact, these ridges in fish embryos, while they do eventually become gills, are not gills at that stage. In fish they become gills, in humans they become something else. Many people will argue that because fish and human embroys share this feature at early stages, with fish eventually developing gills, that this could still be considered proof of early ancestry between humans and fish. While it could seem to be a convincing argument superficially, science has determined that it is simply not fact. Human embryos at no point have gills.
Tuesday 28 August 2012
Proof of God
For the past 2 months I have been reading 3 books by author Lee Strobel titled "The Case for Christ", "The Case for Faith", and "The Case for a Creator". The best way to describe these books is that they are written by a journalist who was a hardcore atheist, but became a Christian when challenged to examine the evidence for whether or not Jesus truly was, and is, the Son of God. His books provide thoughtful examinations for such proof.
I read these books because I have been a Christian most of my life, but have never felt like I could speak to particular questions that some non-Christians might have about the faith. I could speak to my own personal experiences which have proven to me that God exists, but I wanted to be able to speak to more than that. I have therefore read these books and am now going to blog about the points made in them. I have always found I learn best when I write things out, but I also want these thoughts recorded to serve as a guide for my daughter, for it is my hope that one day she will be interested in doing her own research as she makes decisions pertaining to what she believes and how she will live her life.
I also write out my thoughts for anyone else who is interested. As I mentioned, I have been a Christian for a long time and have enjoyed studying the Bible and growing closer to God through it, but the study I have done through Lee Strobel's exhaustive research has been fascinating, and has truly strengthened my faith. I hope others can find a similar interest.
I read these books because I have been a Christian most of my life, but have never felt like I could speak to particular questions that some non-Christians might have about the faith. I could speak to my own personal experiences which have proven to me that God exists, but I wanted to be able to speak to more than that. I have therefore read these books and am now going to blog about the points made in them. I have always found I learn best when I write things out, but I also want these thoughts recorded to serve as a guide for my daughter, for it is my hope that one day she will be interested in doing her own research as she makes decisions pertaining to what she believes and how she will live her life.
I also write out my thoughts for anyone else who is interested. As I mentioned, I have been a Christian for a long time and have enjoyed studying the Bible and growing closer to God through it, but the study I have done through Lee Strobel's exhaustive research has been fascinating, and has truly strengthened my faith. I hope others can find a similar interest.
Saturday 7 July 2012
Response to Chalmers' Post
Many people believe Jesus existed, but they choose not to
believe in anything that would require them to change their life and adopt His
teachings. I think there is a bigger
issue here. It is the issue that people
don’t want to change. People don’t want
to accept something to be true that would require them to live their life in a
way which puts God before themself. They
also don’t want to live in a way which would cause the majority of society to
see them as different. I have never
heard one person argue that they believe Jesus existed and that He performed
miracles, but they don’t believe that He rose from the dead or that He was the
Son of God. If you accept that Jesus
existed, you are probably doing so partly because of the historical accounts of
His life. I cannot believe that Jesus
would have been someone who was worth making historical accounts over for
generations if He did not do amazing things to get people’s attention. What he did was perform miracles and one of
those was rising from the dead. People
argue that He was just a good teacher, but a simply good teacher would not draw
this type of historical attention. The
reason why these historical accounts started in the first place was partly because
of His miracles, so to say that He didn’t perform any miracles at all is very
hard to believe. Therefore, if you are
going to believe that Jesus existed, which we have more than sufficient proof
to argue He did, then you have to believe that He performed miracles because
this is a big part of what got people’s attention and led to historical
accounts.
As well, the disciples all went into hiding when Jesus was
killed because they were afraid that this would happen to them as well. However; after they saw Him risen from the
dead, they dedicated their lives to preaching His message, and this led to all
of them, except for one (who I believe was Mark – I may be mistaken on the
name) dying brutal deaths because of the message they were preaching. It is simple common sense to come to the
conclusion that something radical had to have happened, and that something was
that they saw that Jesus rose from the dead and therefore had to be God’s
Son. As well, you argue that legend was
thrown into the accounts. What about all
of these other disciples, some of whom wrote books of the Bible. These are the men whom it is historically
accounted were thrown into prison, beaten, excommunicated and eventually killed
for the message that they preached. These
men preached the message after seeing Jesus Himself alive in the flesh, after
death on the cross. Therefore, to say
that the Bible is not believable is to say that the disciples who contributed
to it are part of that larger legend.
And at this point, it is no longer making any sense. We know that the disciples existed, we also
know that they died. And we know that
they died brutal deaths for preaching the message that they wrote in the
Bible. The Bible therefore cannot be
legend. You can try to argue that the
disciples were lying about Jesus (which obviously I don’t believe), but you
cannot say that they created a legend.
That would be like saying I added in legend to the life story of my
grandfather, whose life I witnessed. If
I told anything false, I would be lying about accounts of his life, but not
creating legend. And besides, if I did
lie about his life, everyone else who witnessed his life would call me on it –
and this would be the same with Jesus.
If the disciples were lying, then people would have called them on it. But again, I can’t believe the disciples were
lying, because no one is going run and hide, and then go out and die a brutal
death for something that they don’t know for absolute certain to be true. The disciples did exactly this, and they died
because they preached the message of Jesus.
They had to have known it was true, they had to have seen Him alive, or
else they would not have given up their lives for it. Below is hopefully a clearer view of my
argument:
1.
The
disciples went into hiding.
2.
They came out of hiding and died brutal deaths
for preaching the message of Jesus. They had to have seen Jesus alive after His
death.
3.
We know the disciples lived and died because we
have accounts of their writings, and if you believe that Jesus lived, then how
can you believe that His disciples were made up? That does not make sense.
4.
You cannot say that the Bible has legend thrown
in because the gospels were written by the people who lived alongside Jesus
during His life. Therefore, you can say
that they lied if you want, but you can’t say they created “legend”.
5.
It does not make sense to say that the disciples
lied, because we have historical account of their lives, and their deaths,
which resulted from preaching the messages of Jesus Whom they lived
alongside. They would not have been
willing to die for something they did not know to be true, and they were
definitely willing, because they knew that preaching Jesus message would likely
result in such outcomes.
Other people might say, “Jesus was just a good man, but He
was not God’s Son”. Well if He was not
God’s Son, then He was not a good man, because the message He was preaching was
one which gave people hope of salvation and eternity with Him in Heaven. It would not be “good” to give people this
false hope. You cannot say that Jesus
was just a good man, but not God’s Son.
Either Jesus was God’s perfect and holy Son, or He was a liar and
evil. You have to choose one position or
the other, but you cannot mix them.
(This is an argument formulated by C.S. Lewis).
Monday 7 May 2012
Response to Chalmers Post
This is part of an ongoing discussion with my good friend Alex who has some views which vary from mine, we have always gotten along very well, and I apprecieate his friendship. For the rest of the conversation please see:
http://www.achalms.blogspot.ca/2012/03/response-to-response-of-original-post.html?zx=5392f7fc3f566eff
http://www.achalms.blogspot.ca/2012/03/response-to-response-of-original-post.html?zx=5392f7fc3f566eff
You are right in that it does seem confusing when you look
at John 8:7, combined with Matthew 5:18.
Before I provide my explanation, I want you to know that I am not one of
these Christians who feels He has to have all the answers. The truth of the matter is that I admit that
I do not by any means have all the answers.
I don’t believe I ever will until I get to Heaven. There are things that I struggle to
understand. There are things that I
wonder why God chose not to make them more clear; but with that said, I
understand that God is God, He chose to do things His way, and I will trust Him
regardless of what questions I have because He has proved Himself faithful over
and over in my life. I think one of the
most dangerous things to do is to decide that I will not believe something
unless I can 100% completely understand it.
Now this does not mean that I should not ask the questions, and that I
should believe just anything, all I am saying is that I have to understand that
there are certain things that God has chosen for me not to understand, and I’m
going to be okay with that because He is God and I know from His track record
in my life He has my best interests at heart.
In regards to John 8:7, Jesus definitely was upholding the
law of stoning as the penalty of adultery.
He said, “He that is without sin cast the first stone”. He was not saying not to stone her. The penalty from the Old Testament laws was that
she was to be stoned and He acknowledged this by what He said. I believe the lesson Jesus was teaching here
was that we must not be so quick to judge, because while the penalties for
different sins may be different, sin is still sin, and we are all guilty of
it. Now one might say that He was not
upholding the law because He let her go unpunished. He did that because He was God, and God has
the power, and the right, to condemn or to show grace. And His grace is one of the greatest gift He
gives to those who choose to believe in Him.
In this case He displayed mercy and grace to the adulteress telling her
to, “Go and sin no more”. This too is a
great message to all those who choose to follow Christ. While He died to pay the penalty of our sins,
He still tells us to repent from our mistakes and to go and stop sinning.
Now in regards to Matthew 5:18; Jesus does say that the law
will remain; however, this does not mean that it is therefore okay to nowadays
go out and stone someone who commits adultery. We have to recognize that the contexts are
very different between now and then.
With this said, the fact that we carry out punishments for breaking the law differently today, does not mean
that the law has changed. The law still
states that adultery is wrong, and therefore the law has not changed, and
therefore what Jesus said in Matthew 5:18 is accurate and in no way a
contradiction.
Now I know that you said that you don’t buy into the “context”
argument. You say that Jesus teachings
should still apply to us today if He was truly the Son of God. They do! Please try and find for me one teaching of
Jesus that does not apply to us today.
If there is one, I would love to examine it, because I can’t think of
any. You say that His teachings should still
apply today so that we do not fall into “iron-age morality”. His moral teachings do still apply
today. As mentioned above, the societal
punishments may now be carried out differently, but the moral principles are
all the same. And I agree with you, if
Jesus was the Son of God, His teachings should still apply today, and I hope
this helps reveal that they in fact do, further proving that He is in fact the
Son of God.
You talk about how the Bible is exactly how we expect it to
be because of the fact that it was passed down from generation to
generation. I mean, how else would it
have been recorded? I understand when
people make the argument that it seems like the accounts may be unreliable, and
therefore this “proves” that it is false.
But remember, we are talking over 2000 years ago. It’s not like there were data banks to record
information and keep it “safe and sound” until computers and other
technological advances came along so that we could preserve them that much
better. And even if there were such data
banks, the Jews and/or Romans would have simply destroyed all of the texts. They killed Jesus because of what He
preached, so they definitely would have destroyed any literature which proved
that he was God, and that they were idiots for killing Him.
You are also forgetting the fact that even though there are
translations, incredible initiatives were taken to ensure that copies of these
text were accurate and not deviating from the original writings in any
way. Research shows that it is crazy how
much effort was put into this. As well,
it is my understanding (although I have not researched this personally I must
admit) that we have a very significant amount of documentation of the Biblical
text which has been recovered and restored.
While yes there have been many translations, we can always go back to
the originals if we think things have gotten misconstrued. I would prefer to have people go and examine
the Bible in this way instead of just saying that we can speculate that it has
been “tampered with”.
And you mentioned about the fact that you are surprised that
only one gospel contains accounts of the dead being resurrected. While you make a good point that you would
think that an individual would include that in their writing, but the fact that
they didn’t cannot be held as proof that the Bible is unreliable. What about the proof that shows that it is reliable. What about the fact that there are different
authors for each of the gospels, yet their writings are incredibly
similar. This is another counter
argument to you saying that the “Bible is exactly what we would expect it to
be”. If that was true, then we would
expect the various accounts to be incredibly varied. It is the “broken telephone” principle. If the Bible was a document created purely
by humans, with no Divine inspiration, then we would expect to see the broken
telephone principle all-throughout the texts.
Even today if you were to have two people write about an experience that
they shared together – one where they were both in the same place at the same
time and witnessed the exact same things.
If you had them write about their experiences, you would see that their
perceptions of situations lead to varied accounts of the events. We don’t see this in the Bible. People try and find things of the sort and
call them contradictions, but the fact is that the gospel accounts are
overwhelmingly similar and that is because those accounts were inspired by
God. This is further proof that the
Bible truly is the Word of God, and that because of these facts, God must
exist, and if He exists and inspired the Bible, then what it says is true and
needs to be taken very seriously.
I’m a bit confused by your last point. What do you mean by “knowing what we know”
divinity is not a valid option? You
provided an option of what you think could have happened, but what exactly is
it that we know which makes it so that we can’t accept Jesus’ divinity?
Monday 30 April 2012
It's not worth not spending time with God
The last month or so I have found myself becoming somewhat complacent in my relationship with God. I have allowed myself to get distracted by events taking place in my life and have not dedicated the time that I should to spending time with God in prayer and study of the Bible. And it has been through this time that I have noticed that I don't have the same sense of fullfillment, peace, joy and general happiness that I have had during those times where I have been better focused on my relationship with Him.
The reason why I bring this up is because I have had discussions with people who dismiss my own personal experiences with God as valid proof of His existence. While I understand why they may be hesitant to take my word for it, the fact of the matter is that my claims are true. When I am putting forth my best effort in pursuing and developing my relationship with God, it is during those times that I am most fullfilled. This past month or so has proven this that much further to me. It's not something I'm faking. It's just fact. I know that when others hear this they often become skeptical because they feel that I am doing this in my own mind. They think things like because I am so used to pursuing my relationship with God, that when I am not doing it in a way that I feel is putting forth my best effort, I don't feel "myself" and therefore I don't feel fullfilled, joyful, happy, etc.. I don't buy this argument for one second; with the reason being that if this were true - if people could simply "fool" themselves into happiness and fulfillment - then the universal truth that "money does not buy happiness" would not be exactly that - universal truth. If God were not real, then the joy and fullfillment that Christians who pursue Him feel would all be in their heads. And if this is true, then that means that we are able to make ourselves happy and fullfilled through anything that we truly believe will make us happy - as long as we believe strongly enough in it. Well, a very large percentage of people in our world today believe very strongly that money can make them happy, but human history has proven otherwise. We cannot make ourselves happy by simply believing strongly enough in something. In order to experience true happiness, joy and fullfillment, that "something" has to be real. Jesus is real, and that is why when I pursue Him, love Him, and grow in my relationship with Him, I do feel fullfilled, joyful and happy; and when I am not pursuing Him like I should, I do not feel as much so. It's not something I'm imagining, it's truth. I'd love for all people to be able to experience this for themselves, but sadly most choose not to. In the words of C.S. Lewis, "We are far too easily pleased".
The reason why I bring this up is because I have had discussions with people who dismiss my own personal experiences with God as valid proof of His existence. While I understand why they may be hesitant to take my word for it, the fact of the matter is that my claims are true. When I am putting forth my best effort in pursuing and developing my relationship with God, it is during those times that I am most fullfilled. This past month or so has proven this that much further to me. It's not something I'm faking. It's just fact. I know that when others hear this they often become skeptical because they feel that I am doing this in my own mind. They think things like because I am so used to pursuing my relationship with God, that when I am not doing it in a way that I feel is putting forth my best effort, I don't feel "myself" and therefore I don't feel fullfilled, joyful, happy, etc.. I don't buy this argument for one second; with the reason being that if this were true - if people could simply "fool" themselves into happiness and fulfillment - then the universal truth that "money does not buy happiness" would not be exactly that - universal truth. If God were not real, then the joy and fullfillment that Christians who pursue Him feel would all be in their heads. And if this is true, then that means that we are able to make ourselves happy and fullfilled through anything that we truly believe will make us happy - as long as we believe strongly enough in it. Well, a very large percentage of people in our world today believe very strongly that money can make them happy, but human history has proven otherwise. We cannot make ourselves happy by simply believing strongly enough in something. In order to experience true happiness, joy and fullfillment, that "something" has to be real. Jesus is real, and that is why when I pursue Him, love Him, and grow in my relationship with Him, I do feel fullfilled, joyful and happy; and when I am not pursuing Him like I should, I do not feel as much so. It's not something I'm imagining, it's truth. I'd love for all people to be able to experience this for themselves, but sadly most choose not to. In the words of C.S. Lewis, "We are far too easily pleased".
I Don't Want to Be "Religious"
The following are notes that I took in church this past Sunday while listening to a great message by Rick Buck, the Pastor at Emmanuel Church in Barrie, Ontario.
Religion is never a good substitute for love of God and others.
Love God passionately and others selflessly If God truly has our heart then we will do this. We should never be focused on being religious, but rather on simply loving God and loving others as He loves us, for when we do this, we are living as Christ calls us to. We will be in the position to live for Him and be used by Him as He sees fit.
It is about relationship not religion. The acts that we do for God needs to be from love and devotion to Him not out of "religious duty" for that is foolish and meaningless.
I don't want to be seen as a religious person. I want to be seen, and to be a person who is in absolute love with God and who's actions are always a reflection of that love. The Bible is not about mechanics, it is about an amazing relationship with God. And this makes sense because if you look at any relationship, it is always about the meaningful experiences you have with that other person. If relationships were about "mechanics" or "rituals" which had to be performed, then the relationship would not be meaningful.
And a true relationship with God must be about what we can do for Him, not about what He can do for us. And the cool thing about this is that when we pursue God in this way it is only then that we can truly benefit from the relationship with Him. But when our focus is on us and what we can gain then we will not fully benefit from the relationship as we could/should.
One of the biggest strategies of satan is to attempt to get us complacent in our relationship with God. It is an attempt to get our relationship to be surface level and about acts of "religious duty". He wants us to feel like being a Christian is about following very specific ritualistic guidelines (i.e. read your Bible for 30 minutes every night - any less and you aren't a Christian). The reason why he wants us to think this way is because such guidelines are meaningless, annoying and leave us feeling empty rather than excited. God wants us to be excited about the relationship we have with Him, and it is a very exciting thing when understood and pursued the appropriate way - and that way is to develop a meaningful relationship with Him which is based on love for Him, and love for others.
Religion is never a good substitute for love of God and others.
Love God passionately and others selflessly If God truly has our heart then we will do this. We should never be focused on being religious, but rather on simply loving God and loving others as He loves us, for when we do this, we are living as Christ calls us to. We will be in the position to live for Him and be used by Him as He sees fit.
It is about relationship not religion. The acts that we do for God needs to be from love and devotion to Him not out of "religious duty" for that is foolish and meaningless.
I don't want to be seen as a religious person. I want to be seen, and to be a person who is in absolute love with God and who's actions are always a reflection of that love. The Bible is not about mechanics, it is about an amazing relationship with God. And this makes sense because if you look at any relationship, it is always about the meaningful experiences you have with that other person. If relationships were about "mechanics" or "rituals" which had to be performed, then the relationship would not be meaningful.
And a true relationship with God must be about what we can do for Him, not about what He can do for us. And the cool thing about this is that when we pursue God in this way it is only then that we can truly benefit from the relationship with Him. But when our focus is on us and what we can gain then we will not fully benefit from the relationship as we could/should.
One of the biggest strategies of satan is to attempt to get us complacent in our relationship with God. It is an attempt to get our relationship to be surface level and about acts of "religious duty". He wants us to feel like being a Christian is about following very specific ritualistic guidelines (i.e. read your Bible for 30 minutes every night - any less and you aren't a Christian). The reason why he wants us to think this way is because such guidelines are meaningless, annoying and leave us feeling empty rather than excited. God wants us to be excited about the relationship we have with Him, and it is a very exciting thing when understood and pursued the appropriate way - and that way is to develop a meaningful relationship with Him which is based on love for Him, and love for others.
Thursday 15 March 2012
Response to Alex's Blog
The following is a response to my friend Alex's blog....
Thanks man for giving me the chance to read the blog. You say you are a poor writer, you’re definitely not, you write very well.
Here are my thoughts. I put them quite bluntly, not out of disrespect, but because based on how you write your blog, I believe this is what you prefer and appreciate.
You say that you don’t know whether or not God exists, but it seems like you’re writing is simply a way to try and take Christian arguments and look for the way that you can disprove them. I believe that any topic can always be argued against in some way, shape or form. I respect the fact that you admit that you don’t have all the answers (neither do I; none of us do), but it seems like you spend your time arguing against the existence of God. Therefore, it seems like you are saying that you don’t know if God exists, but at the same time trying to prove that He doesn’t. I feel like you may be sitting on the fence here, when you have to choose one side or the other. Either God exists and you accept Him, or you choose to believe that He doesn’t, and like you’ve described in your blog, if you are wrong, you will absolutely spend eternity in hell, because this is what God, Whom you chose not to believe in, said would happen. (Again, I know this is blunt. I don’t mean for it to sound disrespectful or obnoxious, but based on what you wrote in your blog, I believe that you agree that these statements are true if God does in fact exist). Now, I believe in God for many different reasons. I have chosen to be on the God side of the fence. I gotta tell you honestly, if I were to look at this circumstance from a probability standpoint, like it seems you do, I see myself as being in a no lose situation. And I see anyone who chooses not to believe in God as being in a situation where they could end up losing. What I mean by this is as follows: If God does not exist, then when I die nothing happens, and I do not end up in hell. From a worldly standpoint, this is a win (I say worldly because I believe this to be the thought of most non-believers, for I can’t see them sitting back and accepting that they were going to hell). But if God does exist, then I get to spend eternity with Him in Heaven because I chose to live my life for Him. I don’t think anyone would argue that eternity in Heaven as it is described in the Bible is anything but the greatest “win” imaginable. Now the non-Christian on the other hand, the only “win” they could possibly obtain is if God does not exist; but if God does exist, then they spend eternity in hell because this is what God said would happen. Eternal damnation is a big-time lose! The reason why I bring this up is because you have admitted that you don’t know, but are going off of what you consider as most probable. I have to say that I think you are putting yourself in a very dangerous place. As a Christian I am in a position whereby if I’m wrong I don’t end up damned for eternity in hell, but if you are wrong then that is exactly what ends up occurring. Based off of your argument of probability, I feel that as a Christian, I am in a circumstance where the probability is in my favour, with the reason being that I can’t lose. (Please don’t think that the reason why I personally am a Christian is to “play it safe”, although I am thankful for the reality of this argument). I also know you spoke about the fact that if you end up at the pearly gates and have to answer to God, you will tell Him that you used the brain that He gave you to come to a conclusion based on probability. I can’t say exactly what He’ll say back in that moment, but I know what Jesus said when He was here on Earth, and that was, “You believe because you have seen me, but blessed are those who have not seen me and still believe” (John 20:29). And in general, Jesus’ entire message was one of repentance and salvation. The Bible makes it very clear that God gives us the choice while we are here on earth, and only then. We have to make that choice now. He’s given us everything He feels fit to give us, and yes, we have the choice to question it, but in the end we have to answer to Him for whatever decision we make.
Like I mentioned before, you will always be able to argue against any point of view or argument. One can always find a way to try and structure the argument in one direction or another. For this reason, will non-Christians who say they need absolute proof ever be able to find it? Will they ever be fully satisfied? No they will not, because an argument can always be posed, and they often want facts which are indisputable. Christians look at the evidence we do have and see it as enough to go off of, but unfortunately for non-Christians, they always want more. They are never satisfied until there is nothing that can be argued. The fact is that we will never have all the answers. I encourage all people, Christians and non-Christians alike, to ask themselves: “Is it not possible that some truth simply cannot be proven from a worldly standpoint? Is it not possible that to accept the truth means accepting that God chose for us not to have all of the answers, but left us enough to be able to follow Him, which is what He wanted?” He hasn’t given us all the answers, and honestly I don’t know why; but with what He has given us I choose to believe in Him, and love Him, and know that He loves me. I believe that He has given us more than enough to go off of, and I don’t want to forgo living my life for Him and securing a spot for myself in Heaven just because I was not satisfied with the fact that I was not given all the answers.
The fact is that yes, there are a lot of arguments out there that sound very convincing in proving that God does not exist, and because of these, many people choose not to seek after God for themselves. Like I’ve said, I don’t have all the answers. I honestly can’t explain why each and every argument, which is out there going against the existence of God, is false. I’m not smart enough to do that. But what I am smart enough to do is to know that I have personally sought after God and now have a personal relationship with Him, and because of that, I know that what anybody else says about why He does not exist simply cannot be true. It cannot be true based off of my personal experiences. I recognize that the following is not the best analogy, but it is something like if someone was to say to me that my parents don’t love me. They could create some very convincing arguments. They could bring up all the mistakes that my parents ever made, and tie all those life events together as proof to show that my parents simply don’t love me. They could even take all the good things they’ve done, and contrast them to their mistakes to find a convincing way to show that their mistakes are actually a clearer picture of how my parents feel about me than are the things they did a good job at. Well, I know based off of the experiences of my life that my parents do in fact love me. While all those arguments that were posed may in fact be true, or at least appear to be true, I cannot deny the fact that my parents love me, and I will not allow myself to buy into the idea that they don’t. It is the same with God. I can’t explain why every argument against Him is false. They very well may seem to be true, but based off of my personal life experiences, I cannot deny His existence.
The truth of the matter is that as I write this, I know that I myself can’t change your mind. I believe God can, but He’s the only One. You’ve spent a lot of time looking for proof of God. I respect this, I really do. You’ve done more than many other non-believers have. But I have to be honest with you; I believe strongly that you’ve spent your time searching for the wrong thing. If you really want to know the truth, which I believe you do, I would recommend you actually seek after God Himself. The Bible says, “You will seek Me and find Me, when you seek Me with all of your heart” (Jeremiah 29:13). Rather than seeking after proof that the world tries to come up with, why wouldn’t you simply seek after God, Whom you are trying to discover about? Pursue Him through prayer and reading of the Bible, and through commentaries and meaningful conversations with those who do believe. In general, seek after Him. You’ve spent a lot of time seeking after what the world says about God, but I encourage you, that if you really want to find the true answers, you at least owe it to yourself to seek after Him, and to do it on a personal level.
I enjoy our conversations man, and I look forward to many more! Heck, we should do it over a beer sometime. I’m not one of those Christians against alcohol…just don’t expect me to get drunk, because in case you haven’t realized, I have a moral standard I’m trying to stick to….lol.
Tuesday 6 March 2012
Non-Christians Have a Hard Time Understanding Christians
I often think about how non-Christians view Christians and the church in general. What do they think when a Christian says, "I have Jesus in my heart", or, "I am completely surrendered to Christ", "I am in love with Jesus", "I would die for Jesus", and other sayings of similar nature?
Each of these sayings above, I personally claim, and I do so proudly and unashamedly; but at the same time I definitely understand why a non-Christian might get "wierded out" by such statements.
I was thinking about this last night while driving in the car on my way to hockey, and I came to the realization that many non-Christians find these things odd due to the fact that they don't fully understand what it means to have a relationship with God. They don't understand the excitement, the joy, the fullfillment of it. The reasons why I can boldly make statements like those listed above is because I am experiencing a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and the love and joy that comes with such a relationship leads to me saying these things about Him does not come out of obligation, but because it is how I actually feel. Having a true, meaningful relationship with God leads to such joy, and so while it is hard for non-Christians to understand, Christians definitely understand, and are excited about all that they are experiencing.
Each of these sayings above, I personally claim, and I do so proudly and unashamedly; but at the same time I definitely understand why a non-Christian might get "wierded out" by such statements.
I was thinking about this last night while driving in the car on my way to hockey, and I came to the realization that many non-Christians find these things odd due to the fact that they don't fully understand what it means to have a relationship with God. They don't understand the excitement, the joy, the fullfillment of it. The reasons why I can boldly make statements like those listed above is because I am experiencing a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and the love and joy that comes with such a relationship leads to me saying these things about Him does not come out of obligation, but because it is how I actually feel. Having a true, meaningful relationship with God leads to such joy, and so while it is hard for non-Christians to understand, Christians definitely understand, and are excited about all that they are experiencing.
Saturday 3 March 2012
I've Never Accomplished Anything Significant on My Own.
I was just thinking about how I can't think of any time where I have ever set out to accomplish something, and done so based off of sheer will. You hear all these great stories about how successful people go out and accomplish what they set their mind to because they never gave up until they reached their goal. Even though I consider myself a pretty driven person (with certain things), I don't have any stories like that. I can honestly say that anything I've ever accomplished has happened when I least expected it, not because I decided that I was going to go out and get it done.
With this said, there have been many things that I have gone out and tried to accomplish, and some of them I have actually accomplished, but the interesting thing is that my statements above still hold true. Even though I accomplished them, they happened when I least expected it. They happened in God's timing, not my own. Where I have most often found this to be true in my life is in sports. One example was with a particular goal that I set out to accomplish in my Freshman year of college golf. I wanted so badly to accomplish this goal, but I figured that in order for it to happen I was going to have to work my tail off and will myself to do it. The crazy thing was that I did end up accomplishing it in my Junior year, but I did so when I was actually playing some of the worst golf that I had played in my entire college career. I all of a sudden had a really good day on the course which led to me accomplishing the goal. I don't know how else to explain it, but to say that it was a blessing from God.
Now when I say these things, I am not saying that God "fixes" results - in sports or in any other areas of life. Truth be told, maybe He does, He's God and He can do whatever He wants. If I had to bet on it though, I would bet that He doesn't do this. I do believe however that He blesses, and that He blesses efforts when we do our part and work our hardest.
What I am saying now may seem hypocritical. It may sound like I am saying that I have never been able to will myself to accomplish something, but then just said that God doesn't fix results and that you have to do your part and work your hardest to get things done. Truth be told, I am having a hard time putting my thoughts into words, but what I am actually trying to say is the following: I have learned that I need to always work my hardest at everything I ever pursue as if the results depend solely on me, but I must recognize in doing so that they do not depend on me, they depend on God. Therefore, I need to work my hardest at all things, and then surrender all results to God. I believe that this is why I feel like I have never been able to will myself to accomplish things. My efforts have definitely played a part in the accomplishments, but I have put the efforts in, and then had to wait on God and His timing for whether or not the goals are accomplished. And truthfully many times they haven't been, but that's okay because I believe that God knows what's best for me, and I only want to accomplish that which He wants me to.
I have sometimes thought about this and thought, "I wish I could will myself to accomplish things. I wish I could be one of those people who wills themself to success". I now think differently. I love the fact that it is God who decides what I accomplish. He is in control of all things, and is good enough to allow me to pursue my goals and dreams, as long as my attitude in doing so is pleasing to Him. I am thankful for the fact that I can honestly say that anything I've ever accomplished has been directly related to His timing and His blessings, that it has been Him who has been in control of the results of all my efforts in life. I'm glad that I'm not willing myself to accomplish things that I think are best for me when they really aren't. I'm glad that the One who knows what's best for me, and has my absolute best interests at heart, is the One in control of the things that I accomplish in life. I find this exciting because it means that the God of the universe, the ultimate "Celebrity" takes an interest in me and my life. He cares about me, wants what's best for me, and is leading me along the path that He wants. I think that's pretty cool.
With this said, there have been many things that I have gone out and tried to accomplish, and some of them I have actually accomplished, but the interesting thing is that my statements above still hold true. Even though I accomplished them, they happened when I least expected it. They happened in God's timing, not my own. Where I have most often found this to be true in my life is in sports. One example was with a particular goal that I set out to accomplish in my Freshman year of college golf. I wanted so badly to accomplish this goal, but I figured that in order for it to happen I was going to have to work my tail off and will myself to do it. The crazy thing was that I did end up accomplishing it in my Junior year, but I did so when I was actually playing some of the worst golf that I had played in my entire college career. I all of a sudden had a really good day on the course which led to me accomplishing the goal. I don't know how else to explain it, but to say that it was a blessing from God.
Now when I say these things, I am not saying that God "fixes" results - in sports or in any other areas of life. Truth be told, maybe He does, He's God and He can do whatever He wants. If I had to bet on it though, I would bet that He doesn't do this. I do believe however that He blesses, and that He blesses efforts when we do our part and work our hardest.
What I am saying now may seem hypocritical. It may sound like I am saying that I have never been able to will myself to accomplish something, but then just said that God doesn't fix results and that you have to do your part and work your hardest to get things done. Truth be told, I am having a hard time putting my thoughts into words, but what I am actually trying to say is the following: I have learned that I need to always work my hardest at everything I ever pursue as if the results depend solely on me, but I must recognize in doing so that they do not depend on me, they depend on God. Therefore, I need to work my hardest at all things, and then surrender all results to God. I believe that this is why I feel like I have never been able to will myself to accomplish things. My efforts have definitely played a part in the accomplishments, but I have put the efforts in, and then had to wait on God and His timing for whether or not the goals are accomplished. And truthfully many times they haven't been, but that's okay because I believe that God knows what's best for me, and I only want to accomplish that which He wants me to.
I have sometimes thought about this and thought, "I wish I could will myself to accomplish things. I wish I could be one of those people who wills themself to success". I now think differently. I love the fact that it is God who decides what I accomplish. He is in control of all things, and is good enough to allow me to pursue my goals and dreams, as long as my attitude in doing so is pleasing to Him. I am thankful for the fact that I can honestly say that anything I've ever accomplished has been directly related to His timing and His blessings, that it has been Him who has been in control of the results of all my efforts in life. I'm glad that I'm not willing myself to accomplish things that I think are best for me when they really aren't. I'm glad that the One who knows what's best for me, and has my absolute best interests at heart, is the One in control of the things that I accomplish in life. I find this exciting because it means that the God of the universe, the ultimate "Celebrity" takes an interest in me and my life. He cares about me, wants what's best for me, and is leading me along the path that He wants. I think that's pretty cool.
Friday 2 March 2012
Pride vs. Humility
"God opposes the proud but favors the humble."
(James 4:6)
Too often I have read this verse, and recognized that it teaches me the importance of being humble, but I have failed to really recognize what it is saying despite the fact that it states it very clearly. Not only is it telling me that God wants me to be humble, but He is opposed to me when I strive to draw attention to myself rather than to others, and to Him. This is a very serious fact. When the Creator of all things, and the One in control of all things, says that He is opposed to me when I am prideful, that is downright frightening. This goes to show just how serious He is about the subject.
Honestly, pride is something I've struggled with. I have no problem being the center of attention, and I tend to enjoy it. I'm not happy to say that, but I also can't deny it. The thing that makes me even more stupid is the fact that I have always felt better about myself whenever I have strived to be humble. Jesus said, "Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted". So not only have I been stupid because I have been prideful, but the attention that I seek actually comes when I don't pursue it. I am not saying this to say, "Just don't be prideful, and then you get the attention that you desire", because this also is not the proper attitude. If we are truly being humble, Jesus is clear that we will end up being exalted, but true humility does not desire the attention in the first place. True humility strives to draw attention to God and to others.
The other side of the coin is that no one likes one who is prideful. I believe that this could be one of the reasons why Jesus said what He did about the humble being exalted. Nobody wants to exalt someone who exalts themselves. They don't want to "feed" their ego any more. Quite frankly, prideful people are annoying, and nobody wants to be around them when they act those ways. It makes everyone annoyed and uncomfortable. Why would I ever want to behave in these ways? It's foolish and stupid. What I want is for people to see Jesus when they look at me. I want them to see all the amazing things that He's done in my life, and to see how He's been constantly working on me and changing me to make me more like Him. Pride is the exact opposite of what I want to display.
I also want to make sure that I am not falsely humble. I believe it is still pride when we attempt to appear humble before others, when all the while we are craving that attention. There is no fooling God, and He is the Judge, and I believe He is opposed in these situations too, for it is still pride.
In order to be humble, I need to actively work to draw attention to others, in positive lights, and away from myself. I need to make sure that I do more listening, rather than talking, and am focusing on the needs and desires of others rather than my own. I need to seek to serve others like Jesus did, not be served. I praise God for my wife Bryane, because next to Jesus, she is the best example I have ever seen of what it means to be humble. She never seeks attention for herself, and is always doing whatever she can to build others up, and to serve.
(James 4:6)
Too often I have read this verse, and recognized that it teaches me the importance of being humble, but I have failed to really recognize what it is saying despite the fact that it states it very clearly. Not only is it telling me that God wants me to be humble, but He is opposed to me when I strive to draw attention to myself rather than to others, and to Him. This is a very serious fact. When the Creator of all things, and the One in control of all things, says that He is opposed to me when I am prideful, that is downright frightening. This goes to show just how serious He is about the subject.
Honestly, pride is something I've struggled with. I have no problem being the center of attention, and I tend to enjoy it. I'm not happy to say that, but I also can't deny it. The thing that makes me even more stupid is the fact that I have always felt better about myself whenever I have strived to be humble. Jesus said, "Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted". So not only have I been stupid because I have been prideful, but the attention that I seek actually comes when I don't pursue it. I am not saying this to say, "Just don't be prideful, and then you get the attention that you desire", because this also is not the proper attitude. If we are truly being humble, Jesus is clear that we will end up being exalted, but true humility does not desire the attention in the first place. True humility strives to draw attention to God and to others.
The other side of the coin is that no one likes one who is prideful. I believe that this could be one of the reasons why Jesus said what He did about the humble being exalted. Nobody wants to exalt someone who exalts themselves. They don't want to "feed" their ego any more. Quite frankly, prideful people are annoying, and nobody wants to be around them when they act those ways. It makes everyone annoyed and uncomfortable. Why would I ever want to behave in these ways? It's foolish and stupid. What I want is for people to see Jesus when they look at me. I want them to see all the amazing things that He's done in my life, and to see how He's been constantly working on me and changing me to make me more like Him. Pride is the exact opposite of what I want to display.
I also want to make sure that I am not falsely humble. I believe it is still pride when we attempt to appear humble before others, when all the while we are craving that attention. There is no fooling God, and He is the Judge, and I believe He is opposed in these situations too, for it is still pride.
In order to be humble, I need to actively work to draw attention to others, in positive lights, and away from myself. I need to make sure that I do more listening, rather than talking, and am focusing on the needs and desires of others rather than my own. I need to seek to serve others like Jesus did, not be served. I praise God for my wife Bryane, because next to Jesus, she is the best example I have ever seen of what it means to be humble. She never seeks attention for herself, and is always doing whatever she can to build others up, and to serve.
Friday 24 February 2012
Marriage
On Valentines day, my wife Brie and I went and saw the movie "The Vow". Although the movie was not the typical "everything is perfect in their relationship" story that you can often see in romantic movies, it did get me thinking about love. We can be very quick to say that the love we see in movies can only be seen in these scripts, but that is simply not true. We can experience this love ourselves. It takes a lot of effort, but if we are truly devoted to each other, why wouldn't we put forth that effort? Why wouldn't we want to have an incredibly exciting love story - the type God wants for us to have. The reason why we feel good watching these movies is because we get a glimpse of what God meant for marriage to be like - how He has designed for us to experience it. We want it, and the truth is that we can have it, if we are willing to work for it.
The book Song of Songs (aka Song of Solomon) in the Bible also paints a picture of how God means for marriage to be experienced, and it is a love which all should desire. It is a love full of excitment and joy. It is a love where husbands and wives are completely devoted to one another, where they take seriously the promises made in their vows on their wedding day, where they lay down their lives for each other - never looking for ways to please ourselves, but rather seeking to serve each other in any ways possible. This is the type of love which we see in movies like "The Vow" and books like Song of Songs. Once again, the reason why we find them so exciting and inspiring, is because deep down we have a longing to experience this love ourselves, and the longing comes from the God who created us. He designed us to be most fullfilled in our love lives when we experience it the way He designed for us to. We will only ever find the greatest degree of fullfillment when we love in the ways which He calls us to love.
1 Corinthians 13:4-7 further spells out what love is:
The book Song of Songs (aka Song of Solomon) in the Bible also paints a picture of how God means for marriage to be experienced, and it is a love which all should desire. It is a love full of excitment and joy. It is a love where husbands and wives are completely devoted to one another, where they take seriously the promises made in their vows on their wedding day, where they lay down their lives for each other - never looking for ways to please ourselves, but rather seeking to serve each other in any ways possible. This is the type of love which we see in movies like "The Vow" and books like Song of Songs. Once again, the reason why we find them so exciting and inspiring, is because deep down we have a longing to experience this love ourselves, and the longing comes from the God who created us. He designed us to be most fullfilled in our love lives when we experience it the way He designed for us to. We will only ever find the greatest degree of fullfillment when we love in the ways which He calls us to love.
1 Corinthians 13:4-7 further spells out what love is:
" 4 Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud 5 or rude. It does not demand its own way. It is not irritable, and it keeps no record of being wronged. 6 It does not rejoice about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. 7 Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance."
And Ephesians 5:25-30 provides further insight into God's guidance and expectations:
" 25 For husbands, this means love your wives, just as Christ loved the church. He gave up his life for her 26 to make her holy and clean, washed by the cleansing of God’s word.[b] 27 He did this to present her to himself as a glorious church without a spot or wrinkle or any other blemish. Instead, she will be holy and without fault. 28 In the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as they love their own bodies. For a man who loves his wife actually shows love for himself. 29 No one hates his own body but feeds and cares for it, just as Christ cares for the church. 30 And we are members of his body."
Husbands have a tremendous responsibility. We are called to sacrifice our lives for our wives, and do to so willingly, even to the point of death. This is a non-stop, no resting commitment. We are called to be laying down our lives for our wives. Does this require hard work and dedication? Absolutely it does, but the benefits that come from doing so last a lifetime. The sad thing is that too often we choose not to put forth the effort that is required and as a result we miss out tremendously. I'm definitely guilty of this, but because I love God, because I love my wife and because I want both Brie and I to experience the greatest love imaginable for our entire lives, it is my goal to sacrifice myself for her. It is my goal to continually hold myself accountable to love her and devote myself to her in these ways. And this should not sound like, "I'll do it because I have to". The reason why I'll do it is because I love her, I want what's best for her, and I'm excited to experience love with her the way that God designed for us to experience it. I married her due to this love and excitement, and I intend to spend my life pursuing this love, not wasting my life and missing out. It's a privilege to be her husband and I never want to take her, and the love she has for me, for granted. I want her to fall more in love with me every day, just like I fall more in love with her every day, but I can't expect that to happen if I am not pursuing her 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for the rest of my life.
I never want to get sucked into the false belief that this type of love is unrealistic. The fact of the matter is that we can all experience this type of love, and it comes from being sold out to the guidelines that God has so graciously laid out for us in His Word.
Something which hurts so many marriages nowadays is the media and their warped views of what love is. What our world has bought into is the false misconception that lust is what true love looks like. Because of this too many men and women look at people other than their spouse, compare them to their spouse, and fantasize and lust after what they believe would make them happy. They believe that true love means constant lusting after their spouse and that if this isn't happening, then they must not be in love anymore. This leads to adultery and divorce. When you examine these trends it is clear how misguided we really are. True love is described in the verses above. It is where we make a commitment to love our spouse no matter what "until death do us part". It is where we recognize the fact that love is not lust, that love is just as much a decision as it is a feeling. And the truth that we often fail to realize is that the exciting feelings that come with love are not as a result of lust, and they cannot be forced. Rather, they are as a result of choosing to be committed to your spouse and choosing to love them no matter what life throws at you. When you are truly committed to your spouse in this way, this is what brings excitement, this is what brings the butterflies in your stomach, this is what brings joy and fullfillment in love and marriage. Yes, when you started dating your spouse you had those feelings of excitement that came from a new and exciting relationship, and no, those feelings won't be there every single day for the rest of your life. They will still be there, just not at every moment like you might want them to be. That was "new" love. As you live fully committed to your spouse, that love changes into "old" love. When new love becomes old love, that is the best type of love, because it is based off of commitment to God and each other. It is based off of a committment to love no matter what for the rest of your life. It is based off of true love, not lust. As the Bible says, "Love never fails" (1 Corintians 13:8), but our society proves that lust always fails because lust is not love, and certainly not a foundation to build any relationship on.
Due to the fact that our world is so geared toward lust, we need to always ensure that we are keeping our guard up. Too often I've heard men, as well as women, make comments such as, "You can look at the menu, as long as you don't eat from it". This is lust. This is in no way keeping the commitment you made to your spouse on your wedding day. And this is in no way beneficial to your marriage because you are adding thoughts to your marriage of people other than your spouse. When you add such lustful thoughts you will never be able to respond to your spouse sexually, or in any other form of love, in a way that is healthy. Instead you will always feel like you are spinning your wheels in your marriage and wondering why your marriage is not growing and becoming what you've hoped and dreamed it would be. If we truly want to have the marriage that we've always dreamed of, if we truly meant the promises we made in our vows on our wedding day, then we will guard our hearts and minds and in doing so turn and run from any thoughts or feelings about anyone other than our spouse. Will this be hard, yes, because Satan will always try and tempt you, but God says in the book of James that, "God will never allow you to be tempted beyond what you can bear", and he also tells us that if we, "Resist the devil, he will flee from you" and that if we instead draw near to God, "He will draw near to us". Therefore, yes this will be hard work, but God is with us and He wants what's best for us. And if we want what is best for us and our spouse, then we will make the effort to love our spouse as God has designed for us to, and when we do so, we have a whole lot of excitement to look forward to. True excitement!
Thank you God for the model you've provided in your Word which allows us to have that love which many believe "can only be seen in movies".
And Ephesians 5:25-30 provides further insight into God's guidance and expectations:
" 25 For husbands, this means love your wives, just as Christ loved the church. He gave up his life for her 26 to make her holy and clean, washed by the cleansing of God’s word.[b] 27 He did this to present her to himself as a glorious church without a spot or wrinkle or any other blemish. Instead, she will be holy and without fault. 28 In the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as they love their own bodies. For a man who loves his wife actually shows love for himself. 29 No one hates his own body but feeds and cares for it, just as Christ cares for the church. 30 And we are members of his body."
Husbands have a tremendous responsibility. We are called to sacrifice our lives for our wives, and do to so willingly, even to the point of death. This is a non-stop, no resting commitment. We are called to be laying down our lives for our wives. Does this require hard work and dedication? Absolutely it does, but the benefits that come from doing so last a lifetime. The sad thing is that too often we choose not to put forth the effort that is required and as a result we miss out tremendously. I'm definitely guilty of this, but because I love God, because I love my wife and because I want both Brie and I to experience the greatest love imaginable for our entire lives, it is my goal to sacrifice myself for her. It is my goal to continually hold myself accountable to love her and devote myself to her in these ways. And this should not sound like, "I'll do it because I have to". The reason why I'll do it is because I love her, I want what's best for her, and I'm excited to experience love with her the way that God designed for us to experience it. I married her due to this love and excitement, and I intend to spend my life pursuing this love, not wasting my life and missing out. It's a privilege to be her husband and I never want to take her, and the love she has for me, for granted. I want her to fall more in love with me every day, just like I fall more in love with her every day, but I can't expect that to happen if I am not pursuing her 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for the rest of my life.
I never want to get sucked into the false belief that this type of love is unrealistic. The fact of the matter is that we can all experience this type of love, and it comes from being sold out to the guidelines that God has so graciously laid out for us in His Word.
Something which hurts so many marriages nowadays is the media and their warped views of what love is. What our world has bought into is the false misconception that lust is what true love looks like. Because of this too many men and women look at people other than their spouse, compare them to their spouse, and fantasize and lust after what they believe would make them happy. They believe that true love means constant lusting after their spouse and that if this isn't happening, then they must not be in love anymore. This leads to adultery and divorce. When you examine these trends it is clear how misguided we really are. True love is described in the verses above. It is where we make a commitment to love our spouse no matter what "until death do us part". It is where we recognize the fact that love is not lust, that love is just as much a decision as it is a feeling. And the truth that we often fail to realize is that the exciting feelings that come with love are not as a result of lust, and they cannot be forced. Rather, they are as a result of choosing to be committed to your spouse and choosing to love them no matter what life throws at you. When you are truly committed to your spouse in this way, this is what brings excitement, this is what brings the butterflies in your stomach, this is what brings joy and fullfillment in love and marriage. Yes, when you started dating your spouse you had those feelings of excitement that came from a new and exciting relationship, and no, those feelings won't be there every single day for the rest of your life. They will still be there, just not at every moment like you might want them to be. That was "new" love. As you live fully committed to your spouse, that love changes into "old" love. When new love becomes old love, that is the best type of love, because it is based off of commitment to God and each other. It is based off of a committment to love no matter what for the rest of your life. It is based off of true love, not lust. As the Bible says, "Love never fails" (1 Corintians 13:8), but our society proves that lust always fails because lust is not love, and certainly not a foundation to build any relationship on.
Due to the fact that our world is so geared toward lust, we need to always ensure that we are keeping our guard up. Too often I've heard men, as well as women, make comments such as, "You can look at the menu, as long as you don't eat from it". This is lust. This is in no way keeping the commitment you made to your spouse on your wedding day. And this is in no way beneficial to your marriage because you are adding thoughts to your marriage of people other than your spouse. When you add such lustful thoughts you will never be able to respond to your spouse sexually, or in any other form of love, in a way that is healthy. Instead you will always feel like you are spinning your wheels in your marriage and wondering why your marriage is not growing and becoming what you've hoped and dreamed it would be. If we truly want to have the marriage that we've always dreamed of, if we truly meant the promises we made in our vows on our wedding day, then we will guard our hearts and minds and in doing so turn and run from any thoughts or feelings about anyone other than our spouse. Will this be hard, yes, because Satan will always try and tempt you, but God says in the book of James that, "God will never allow you to be tempted beyond what you can bear", and he also tells us that if we, "Resist the devil, he will flee from you" and that if we instead draw near to God, "He will draw near to us". Therefore, yes this will be hard work, but God is with us and He wants what's best for us. And if we want what is best for us and our spouse, then we will make the effort to love our spouse as God has designed for us to, and when we do so, we have a whole lot of excitement to look forward to. True excitement!
Thank you God for the model you've provided in your Word which allows us to have that love which many believe "can only be seen in movies".
Tuesday 21 February 2012
Dealing with Temptation
I've often heard it said that a great way to combat temptation is to view the tempation as God does - see it from His perspective and deal with it as He would have you. I like this saying, but it is easier said then done.
It can be very easy to view situations which are tempting and say something like, "God doesn't like that because it draws my attention away from Him and hurts others as well as myself". It is one thing to have such knowledge, but we must do more than just recall information when resisting temptation. To truly view the temptation from God's perspective does not simply mean to know how God feels about it, but it means to actually feel ourselves as He feels toward tempations. If we are truly viewing temptation from God's perspective then we will actually feel the sickness and disgust that He sees in all the things that draw us further from Himself.
Part of feeling as He does toward sin is to really examine the sin. We need to look at all it's parts, including how it affects God and those around us. Many times we know a temptation is wrong, but because we are being selfish, we only view it from our own pespective; and that perspective is one which has us desiring in some way shape or form to give in...hence the term "temptation". But when we sit back and view the situation through God's eyes, rather than our own, we can get a more clear perspective. Another strategy is to look at the situation from the perspective of someone else commiting the sinful act. Sometimes that can help us gain increased clarity on how foolish it really would be for us to give in, because we see how disgusting it is when someone else gives in.
In general, sin hurts God, and if we truly love God, we should be running from all forms of it. We should not be sitting around contemplating how we could manage to "give in", for when we do we are hurting ourselves. God wants what is best for us, and He knows what is best for us. It is imperative that we resist temptations and run toward the things that He says is right, for we will always benefit from doing so.
I feel it is important to remember, that any time we are not greatly bothered by sin and temptation, then we have not accurately viewed the situation from God's perspective.
It can be very easy to view situations which are tempting and say something like, "God doesn't like that because it draws my attention away from Him and hurts others as well as myself". It is one thing to have such knowledge, but we must do more than just recall information when resisting temptation. To truly view the temptation from God's perspective does not simply mean to know how God feels about it, but it means to actually feel ourselves as He feels toward tempations. If we are truly viewing temptation from God's perspective then we will actually feel the sickness and disgust that He sees in all the things that draw us further from Himself.
Part of feeling as He does toward sin is to really examine the sin. We need to look at all it's parts, including how it affects God and those around us. Many times we know a temptation is wrong, but because we are being selfish, we only view it from our own pespective; and that perspective is one which has us desiring in some way shape or form to give in...hence the term "temptation". But when we sit back and view the situation through God's eyes, rather than our own, we can get a more clear perspective. Another strategy is to look at the situation from the perspective of someone else commiting the sinful act. Sometimes that can help us gain increased clarity on how foolish it really would be for us to give in, because we see how disgusting it is when someone else gives in.
In general, sin hurts God, and if we truly love God, we should be running from all forms of it. We should not be sitting around contemplating how we could manage to "give in", for when we do we are hurting ourselves. God wants what is best for us, and He knows what is best for us. It is imperative that we resist temptations and run toward the things that He says is right, for we will always benefit from doing so.
I feel it is important to remember, that any time we are not greatly bothered by sin and temptation, then we have not accurately viewed the situation from God's perspective.
Sunday 19 February 2012
Do Not Be Anxious, Just Work Hard and Trust God For All Results
"Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not depend on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight."
(Proverbs 3:5,6)
"Dedicate all you do to the Lord and your plans will succeed."
(Proverbs 16:3)
These are notes that I took at church today from a message by the Pastor, Rick Buck. I really appreciated how he addressed this issue of worry and ambition as it is spelled out by God, in the Bible.
Many times people worry about their futures. Whether it be about not being successful, or bad things happening, they worry. God tells us we are not to worry, but rather we are to trust in Him, allowing Him to guide us. He calls us to surrender all aspects of our lives to Him.
This can lead people to incorrectly think that in order to be properly surrendered to God, we must sit back and allow God to bring our way whatever He sees fit. In other words, they think that we should be without ambition in life, because they incorrectly feel that ambition is a sign that they are pursuing their own interests rather than being surrendered compeltely to God. God does not say we should not have ambition, but rather the right kind of ambition. We are to work hard and make it our ambition to do our best in everything that He brings our way, and to do so with an attitude of dependence and surrender to Him. Therefore, it is not wrong to be ambitious in life, as long as we have a continual attitude of dependence on God and surrender to Him.
We are to do our best in all things as an act of worship to Him. Once we have done our best we are to surrender those efforts to God and allow His will to be done in regards to all the results.
Worry comes as a result of not trusting in, and being completely surrendered to, God. Life surrendered to God does not bring stress but rather a life of peace. In being completely surrendered, we know that God is in control and that even if bad or stressful things happen, we can find peace knowing that He holds our situation in His hands, and that He always wants what's best for us. As Rick Buck said today, "I would rather be in the storm with God than in the sunshine without Him".
When we examine worry, it is easy to see that it is pointless and nonsensical. After all, much of what we worry about doesn't actually end up happening, or it has happened in the past and cannot be changed but only learned from. And many people also tend to worry about health issues, but worry negatively affects health. Worrying never changes anything in positive ways, only negative. Worry just never makes sense.
I feel the following poem grants further insight into this topic:
(Proverbs 3:5,6)
"Dedicate all you do to the Lord and your plans will succeed."
(Proverbs 16:3)
These are notes that I took at church today from a message by the Pastor, Rick Buck. I really appreciated how he addressed this issue of worry and ambition as it is spelled out by God, in the Bible.
Many times people worry about their futures. Whether it be about not being successful, or bad things happening, they worry. God tells us we are not to worry, but rather we are to trust in Him, allowing Him to guide us. He calls us to surrender all aspects of our lives to Him.
This can lead people to incorrectly think that in order to be properly surrendered to God, we must sit back and allow God to bring our way whatever He sees fit. In other words, they think that we should be without ambition in life, because they incorrectly feel that ambition is a sign that they are pursuing their own interests rather than being surrendered compeltely to God. God does not say we should not have ambition, but rather the right kind of ambition. We are to work hard and make it our ambition to do our best in everything that He brings our way, and to do so with an attitude of dependence and surrender to Him. Therefore, it is not wrong to be ambitious in life, as long as we have a continual attitude of dependence on God and surrender to Him.
We are to do our best in all things as an act of worship to Him. Once we have done our best we are to surrender those efforts to God and allow His will to be done in regards to all the results.
Worry comes as a result of not trusting in, and being completely surrendered to, God. Life surrendered to God does not bring stress but rather a life of peace. In being completely surrendered, we know that God is in control and that even if bad or stressful things happen, we can find peace knowing that He holds our situation in His hands, and that He always wants what's best for us. As Rick Buck said today, "I would rather be in the storm with God than in the sunshine without Him".
When we examine worry, it is easy to see that it is pointless and nonsensical. After all, much of what we worry about doesn't actually end up happening, or it has happened in the past and cannot be changed but only learned from. And many people also tend to worry about health issues, but worry negatively affects health. Worrying never changes anything in positive ways, only negative. Worry just never makes sense.
I feel the following poem grants further insight into this topic:
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
as it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make all things right
if I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life
and supremely happy with Him
Forever in the next.
Amen.
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
as it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make all things right
if I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life
and supremely happy with Him
Forever in the next.
Amen.
--Reinhold Niebuhr
Sunday 12 February 2012
Paul Henderson Message
Today I had the opportunity to listen to Paul Henderson speak about a variety of issues; including the 1972 Summit Series where he scored the greatest goal in Canadian hockey history, his current battle with cancer and how his relationship with God has impacted all areas of his life. I was very excited to hear him speak, but I gotta say, I didn't expect to be inspired like I was.
The thing he spoke most about was how thankful he is for his relationship with God. He was not always a Christian. It wasn't until 1975 that he decided to follow Jesus. Because of this he said that he has had the opportunity to live on "both sides of the fence". He mentioned that there is not much that this world has to offer that he has not experienced in some way shape or form. With that, he said that he can therefore speak to what it is like to live as a Christian, obtaining fulfillment through God and His ways, and what it is like to seek fulfillment from the things of this world. He followed this up by stating that he can honestly say that 100% of the time, since becoming a Christian, he has never regretted living for God. He made it clear that he hasn't always felt like doing things God's way, but he has always been glad when he does. At the same time, he said that he has 100% of the time always regretted the times when he has messed up and made mistakes because he has failed to do things God's way. I appreciate what he's saying here, and although I have been a Christian most of my life, I feel the same as him. It wasn't until after high school that I started getting serious about living the life that God wants for us to live, and since that time, I have always found myself to be most fulfilled when I am seeking after God and striving to obey Him, learn more about Him, and become more like Him through continual relationship with Him. When people ask me how I know God to be true, I often come back to this point. I cannot deny these experiences, and I can't see me feeling those ways if God was not real. As Paul Henderson put it today, we have a God Who created us, Who loves us, and Who knows what's best for us. It is for this reason that when we accept Him as Savior and Lord, build a relationship with Him and do things His way, we are able to experience true fullfillment and joy - the fullfillment and joy that God wants so desperately for us all to have, and invites each of us to have. I find it sad that so many people choose to deny Christ and therefore never get to experience this.
Paul also spoke today about the love that he has for his wife Eleanor. He spoke about how he has always been so in love with her, and that he loves her more now than he ever has. He said, "When new love becomes old love, that's the best type of love". I was so encouraged to hear this. I love my wife Bryane more and more every day, and to hear from someone older that the love that develops as a result of this is "the best kind of love", is excting. I can't say I am surprised,but it confirms my expectations and fuels my tremendous excitement to spend my life with my beautiful soulmate.
He then went in to speak about his cancer. He is currently battling a form of Leukemia with no known cure. Most people would be devestated by such news, but not Paul Henderson. It was incredibly inspiring to hear him speak about how he is actually thankful in some ways that he developed cancer. He said that having cancer has, "Allowed me to seperate that which is important and that which is trivial very easily," and that it has also, "Allowed me to experience a greater sense of intimacy with God". Upon hearing him say these things, I couldn't help but think that I want to live these ways. I don't want to develop a life-threatening illness, but I do want to live every day with the same attitude as one who is "living like they are dying". After all, only God knows when we will leave this world, and so I want to make the most of every day that I am given to live for Christ and further His Kingdom and purposes here on earth - all for His glory and honor. I want to experience the greatest sense of intimacy that I possibly can with my Lord and Savior, and living with this attitude will assist me in this.
The thing he spoke most about was how thankful he is for his relationship with God. He was not always a Christian. It wasn't until 1975 that he decided to follow Jesus. Because of this he said that he has had the opportunity to live on "both sides of the fence". He mentioned that there is not much that this world has to offer that he has not experienced in some way shape or form. With that, he said that he can therefore speak to what it is like to live as a Christian, obtaining fulfillment through God and His ways, and what it is like to seek fulfillment from the things of this world. He followed this up by stating that he can honestly say that 100% of the time, since becoming a Christian, he has never regretted living for God. He made it clear that he hasn't always felt like doing things God's way, but he has always been glad when he does. At the same time, he said that he has 100% of the time always regretted the times when he has messed up and made mistakes because he has failed to do things God's way. I appreciate what he's saying here, and although I have been a Christian most of my life, I feel the same as him. It wasn't until after high school that I started getting serious about living the life that God wants for us to live, and since that time, I have always found myself to be most fulfilled when I am seeking after God and striving to obey Him, learn more about Him, and become more like Him through continual relationship with Him. When people ask me how I know God to be true, I often come back to this point. I cannot deny these experiences, and I can't see me feeling those ways if God was not real. As Paul Henderson put it today, we have a God Who created us, Who loves us, and Who knows what's best for us. It is for this reason that when we accept Him as Savior and Lord, build a relationship with Him and do things His way, we are able to experience true fullfillment and joy - the fullfillment and joy that God wants so desperately for us all to have, and invites each of us to have. I find it sad that so many people choose to deny Christ and therefore never get to experience this.
Paul also spoke today about the love that he has for his wife Eleanor. He spoke about how he has always been so in love with her, and that he loves her more now than he ever has. He said, "When new love becomes old love, that's the best type of love". I was so encouraged to hear this. I love my wife Bryane more and more every day, and to hear from someone older that the love that develops as a result of this is "the best kind of love", is excting. I can't say I am surprised,but it confirms my expectations and fuels my tremendous excitement to spend my life with my beautiful soulmate.
He then went in to speak about his cancer. He is currently battling a form of Leukemia with no known cure. Most people would be devestated by such news, but not Paul Henderson. It was incredibly inspiring to hear him speak about how he is actually thankful in some ways that he developed cancer. He said that having cancer has, "Allowed me to seperate that which is important and that which is trivial very easily," and that it has also, "Allowed me to experience a greater sense of intimacy with God". Upon hearing him say these things, I couldn't help but think that I want to live these ways. I don't want to develop a life-threatening illness, but I do want to live every day with the same attitude as one who is "living like they are dying". After all, only God knows when we will leave this world, and so I want to make the most of every day that I am given to live for Christ and further His Kingdom and purposes here on earth - all for His glory and honor. I want to experience the greatest sense of intimacy that I possibly can with my Lord and Savior, and living with this attitude will assist me in this.
Saturday 11 February 2012
Run the Race
"Don’t you realize that in a race everyone runs, but only one person gets the prize? So run to win! All athletes are disciplined in their training. They do it to win a prize that will fade away, but we do it for an eternal prize. So I run with purpose in every step. I am not just shadowboxing. I discipline my body like an athlete, training it to do what it should."
(1 Corinthians 9:24-27)
I really like this passage because of the sport imagery. Living life as a Christian really does involve training. I have often looked at this verse and appreciated it, but I feel like today was the first time that it really hit me like it should. If I say that I am a Christian and that I want to live my life for Christ, then I need to live like this verse says to. I need to train, and work and sweat and do whatever it takes to become more like Jesus. It will be hard, it will never come easy, but it is definitely worth it - for I am working to glorify God, and in doing so the Bible is clear that God will reward me for my efforts when I get to Heaven. The world will definitely see me as strange, but I can never care about that. God has created me for His purposes, and a major part of that is to know Him personally on a very deep level. I want to make Him proud. I don't want to be a hypocrite. I don't want to say that I love Jesus and that He is Lord of all aspects of my life, but then serve Him non-chalantly. This is a 24/7 commitment....a 24/7 blood, sweat and tears, work my tail off commitment, so as to love, serve and become more like Him. I am in training, running toward the finish line, running as hard as I can until He alone decides it's time for me to stop.
(1 Corinthians 9:24-27)
I really like this passage because of the sport imagery. Living life as a Christian really does involve training. I have often looked at this verse and appreciated it, but I feel like today was the first time that it really hit me like it should. If I say that I am a Christian and that I want to live my life for Christ, then I need to live like this verse says to. I need to train, and work and sweat and do whatever it takes to become more like Jesus. It will be hard, it will never come easy, but it is definitely worth it - for I am working to glorify God, and in doing so the Bible is clear that God will reward me for my efforts when I get to Heaven. The world will definitely see me as strange, but I can never care about that. God has created me for His purposes, and a major part of that is to know Him personally on a very deep level. I want to make Him proud. I don't want to be a hypocrite. I don't want to say that I love Jesus and that He is Lord of all aspects of my life, but then serve Him non-chalantly. This is a 24/7 commitment....a 24/7 blood, sweat and tears, work my tail off commitment, so as to love, serve and become more like Him. I am in training, running toward the finish line, running as hard as I can until He alone decides it's time for me to stop.
Friday 3 February 2012
Welcome Failure
Often times in my life I have feared failure. I have feared the idea that bad things will come my way. Today I read an article which helped me recognize to a greater extent exactly why I need to change my perspective on this. It is very often through failure that God teaches us and molds us into His likeness. He even allows these difficult times to come our way so that this growth process can occur. Therefore, if God sees it fit for these things to happen in my life, then who am I to argue? And why would I fear them if God wants them to happen for my good? After all, His ways are always best! Instead of fearing these difficult times, I should actually expect them, and furthermore, welcome them. This does not mean take them likely, for they are difficult for a reason. It also does not mean like them; but I should be preparing myself to rely on God and His strength to get through them when they do come, so that I can take full advantage of the opportunity to become more like Christ.
Once again, God allows failure and difficult times in general to come into my life. Since He sees it fit, and His ways are always best, I should welcome these occurrences, never fear them. God is with me and has my best interests at heart. Anything He allows to come my way, He will provide the strength to get through it in a way which brings glory to His name. Praise Him!
Once again, God allows failure and difficult times in general to come into my life. Since He sees it fit, and His ways are always best, I should welcome these occurrences, never fear them. God is with me and has my best interests at heart. Anything He allows to come my way, He will provide the strength to get through it in a way which brings glory to His name. Praise Him!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)