The Truth on Religion and Violence

The Truth on Religion and Violence

The following is a reply to a young man on social media who was commenting on a post having to do with faith in God.  In the comments, there were a number of posts written by the new atheist type criticizing religion for the violence throughout the world.  Some went so far as to say that religion is the cause of most wars and most of the violence around the world.  Before beginning let me share with the reader that I don’t make any apologies for religion.  When religion does something wrong, it deserves the same criticism as the non-religious.

Let me begin by throwing some mud of my own; have not the ideologies of atheistic communism and liberalism been responsible for killing over two hundred million people since the French revolution?  That is more than all the other wars recorded in history.  If you take out the wars caused by economics and power-hungry kings, how much is left to blame on religion?  The belief that religion is the biggest source of war and violence is an atheist myth and propaganda disseminated by them to prejudice people against religion.

The idea of killing people for abstract ideas and ideology are a modern phenomenon with Muslims being the first to practice it on a large-scale in a religious sense.  Even here there are many scholars who point out that the Muslim faith more like resembles a fascist political system rather than a religion.  However, even if you count it as a religion it is the only major religion which has violence as a part of its core beliefs.  By this, I mean it is the only one whose Scriptures (Koran) preach violence.  The Jewish faith and its scripture in the Old Testament have stories of violence in them, but the violence was directed toward a certain ancient nation that no longer exists.  There is nothing in the Old Testament scripture that would justify Israel today committing violence against another nation or religion  except in self-defense.  The other major religions teach love and peace.

You asked me why God has made it so hard to find him.  I personally don’t think God has made it hard to find him.  I think it is Western culture that has made it tough for people to find him.  For example, a materialistic mindset has hardened the hearts of people in the west making it hard for them to see God.  To experience God it takes time and effort which men in Western culture are no longer willing to do.  They expect to find God the way a person would add up two plus two and get four.  Unfortunately, experiencing God is more different than that.  Finding God comes by way of subtraction, and not addition.

Our spiritual neglect has reached the point that our so-called Christian civilization is no longer Christian.  This hasn’t happened through progress in our education or by growth in our spirituality; it’s happened as a result of total neglect of the spiritual.  We have simply ignored God.  It was not long ago that anyone who was considered an informed person would have a working knowledge about their religion.  Today in general, the educated class is totally ignorant of their culture’s religions.  Two years ago, I was sitting at a table with four or five people with PhD’s.  To my amazement, I found that I could not carry on an intelligent conversation with any of them about religion, philosophy or science.  They were specialists who were only well-versed in their particular field.  When it came to religion, they were as ignorant as children.  Over the years they’re getting to be quite many; I have given numerous books to intellectuals to read on Christianity and to my best recollection not one of them has read the books.  It is people like this that criticize religion on Facebook and other social media.  They are as ignorant as rocks when it comes to religion and yet they parade themselves as knowledgeable.

You see, the rejection of religion is not a problem of the intellect.  It is a problem of the will or appetite.  All this intellectual crap that they parade before the world is just a smokescreen to cover up their indifference and bias towards religion.  It is all done to save the appearance that they are honest and sincere.  They fail to accept that the basic condition of mankind is one of ignorance, sinfulness and hypocrisy.  Their arrogance blinds them to God and it justifies God for turning them over to themselves.  They have forgotten God and God has turned them over to be the play thing of their own disgusting selves.

Secular people have even rewritten history exaggerating the depravity of the Greeks and Romans only to justify themselves.  We are in many ways the most depraved generation of humanity that has ever lived.  As the Scriptures say, “there is no one righteous, no not one; there is no one who seeks God.”  As a result the end of western civilization is near. Metaphorically, we are living out the story of Lot in Sodom.

Let me recommend a couple of authors; Joseph Peterson is excellent and can be watched on YouTube.  C.S. Lewis is still relative and is a good place to start for someone who is seeking God.  Start with his book ‘Mere Christianity’.  He is English and I find it easier to listen to him on tape or an audio book, than by reading him.  You can get his book and more on YouTube.

 

A Letter to a Christian Science Teacher

A Letter to a Christian Science Teacher

Your Zionist interpretation of the Bible seems to align with those that you dislike; i.e. fundamentalist’s, and your defense of science seems to contradict your statement, that it is not a religion.  However, you defend it as though it was your religion.  Furthermore, the way you defend it seems to be a little over the top.  If you view it simply as a method of finding the truth; i.e. the scientific method, then why the big fuss?  No one disagrees with the scientific method.  The question is do scientists really follow it?  I personal think not.  The scientific method is used pretty much to make the scientific community respectable and they keep it as law about as well as the Jews kept the Law of Moses.

I think it is self-evident that in most people’s minds science has become a metaphysical concept[1], which goes way beyond people in white jackets applying the scientific method to their research.  Science has become the authority that people appeal to in a secular atheistic culture and for many, science has evolved into a new religion.  It used to be that people would appeal to the Bible or the church.  They would say “Because the Bible says so” or “Because the church says so”.  Now it is nothing but “science says”.  For many in our culture the only knowledge that has not been debunked and found useless is called science.  This is nonsense; however it is fostered by many in the scientific community.  To me there is far more truth in a good work of art than in most scientific theories, or more power in a song than in all of the science in the world.  Science has given us many toys and made life easier in some ways, but I think it hasn’t given many people meaning, peace of mind, joy or love.  In fact, many scientists are arrogant jackasses.  “Knowledge puffs up, love builds up”.  Science does not teach this, the Bible does.  The false god (idol) of science has taken us to the very edge of the abyss.  It has given evil men the power to take away our humanity and turn us into machines.  The state is already using it to manipulate the herd in any direction it wishes.  Science is now the handmaid of the state, just as religion was a century ago.  I personally, value my freedom more than comfort, ease and pleasure.  To me science is like religion, it is human and therefore needs to be criticized and critiqued often.  The power that it has attained is equal to that of religion and is one of the powers that the Bible speaks about.  Remember that our battle is not with flesh and blood but rather with the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.  Those heavenly powers have their counterpart on this earth.  What do you thinks stands behind the metaphysical concept of science?

Science is the false god of many worldly people.  It promises them salvation if they will give it their money and commitment.  It promises health and wealth to all that follow it.  It claims to be able to predict the future (global warming).  Something the Bible says only God can do.  Not only does it claim to know the future, it also claims it can control it.  It also boasts of its miracles of healing and its signs and wonders.  To me this sounds a little like the antichrist in the book of Thessalonians[2] and surely sounds like religion.  I think science is what you make of it, but for many they have made it their faith and religion.

[1] Science is a concept that does not existence in reality. If it does where is it? Can I see it, smell it, taste it or touch it? I can do all these things to the people that practice it but I cannot do it to it. In this manner, it resembles religion.

[2]  ” The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing.  They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.  For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness” (2 Thess 2:8-12).

 

 

 

God and Einstein

 

God and Einstein

There has been much debate about the religious beliefs and faith of Albert Einstein.  Both the atheist community and the believing community have claimed him as one of their own.  However, I believe it can be demonstrated that Einstein was somewhat of a mystic and would not be overly comfortable in either group.

“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.  It is the source of all true art and science.  He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed.  This insight into the mystery of life, coupled though it be with fear, has also given rise to religion.  To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms — this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness.  In this sense, and in this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men.”

Rudolf Otto wrote a book entitled, ‘The Ideal Of The Holy’ in which he attempts to explain the spiritual experience that Einstein describes and what Otto goes on to refer to as the numinous which he believes is a sign which points to the deity and could be likened to the voice of God that beckons man to his true center.

The sub-title to Otto’s book, ‘The Idea of the Holy’ is ‘An inquiry into the non-rational factor in the idea of the divine and its relation to the rational’.  In the book Otto points out that numinous is not rational or reasonable but it’s not irrational or unreasonable, it is simply outside of those categories.  You might call it super-rational.

It is this numinous experience that the atheist lacks.  Because he has not experienced it, it is impossible for him to understand someone who has experienced it like Einstein.  Einstein had experienced the Totally Other which lied beyond his explanatory powers to communicate it to those who had not experienced it, those that he referred to as dead or blind.  Otto’s book is the best attempted I have seen to put the experience into words.  You can get a PDF copy at the below address.

http://churchsociety.org/docs/churchman/046/Cman_046_3_Harvey.pdf

Can You Be good Without God? 

Can You Be Good Without God?

Can you be good without God? Of the various questions raised in the theist/atheist debate, this question has, I believe, occasioned more witless commentary than any other. That witlessness is again on display in an essay for the Daily Beast, “Can you be good without God?” by Brandon Withrow of the University of Findlay. Withrow interviews a bunch of ticked-off atheists, who get the answer wrong.

He discusses a study titled, “Global evidence of extreme intuitive moral prejudice against atheists”:

“If God did not exist, then we would have to invent him,” said the French philosopher Voltaire. His point: that without a divine being to check right and wrong, any number of atrocities are possible and could go unpunished.

A recent study (of more than 3,000 people in 13 countries) published in the journal Nature Human Behavior echoes Voltaire’s maxim. Looking at intuitive thinking — presumptions drawn by individuals through unconscious biases — researchers led by Will M. Gervais, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Kentucky, discovered that most individuals intuitively conclude that a serial killer is more likely to be an atheist (approximately 60 percent) than religious (approximately 30 percent).

From the study’s Abstract:

Preliminary work in the United States suggests that anti-atheist prejudice stems, in part, from deeply rooted intuitions about religion’s putatively necessary role in morality. However, the cross-cultural prevalence and magnitude — as well as intracultural demographic stability — of such intuitions, as manifested in intuitive associations of immorality with atheists, remain unclear. Here, we quantify moral distrust of atheists by applying well-tested measures in a large global sample (N = 3,256; 13 diverse countries). Consistent with cultural evolutionary theories of religion and morality, people in most — but not all — of these countries viewed extreme moral violations as representative of atheists. Notably, anti-atheist prejudice was even evident among atheist participants around the world. [Emphasis added.]

The issue is simple, though. The answer to the question we started with hinges on what you mean by “without God.” Let’s take a look.

  1. If God does not exist, you cannot be good. You cannot be evil. You can’t conform or fail to conform to anytranscendental standard, because if there is no God, there are no transcendental standards. There is no Moral Law if there is no Moral Lawgiver. If there is no God, there are merely opinions and consequences of acting on opinions. We may label certain opinions “good,” but that’s just our opinion. What we really mean by calling something “good” is that we like it. Which is fine, as long as we understand that “good without God” is just a metaphor for “something I (or we) like.” If there is no God, all of our “moral” decisions are just opinions — perhaps opinions we like, or opinions we don’t like — but neither good nor bad.
  2. If God does exist, but you don’t believe in Him, then of course you can be “good without God”, in the sense that you can be good without believingin God. It is central to the moral theology of all the great faiths that non-believers may act in accordance with Moral Law without belief in God and even without knowing Moral Law in any formal sense. The Moral Law is written in our hearts, theists universally agree, and we feel the weight of morality whether we believe in God or not.

Now of course an additional question can be asked: Do theists actually behave better than atheists? I think this is the question that ticked off the atheists in the essay. If theists do, on the average, behave better than atheists, there are certainly many exceptions on both sides, and arguments can be made that particular groups of theists/atheists behave better/worse than other groups of atheists/theists. Mankind is a confusing mess.

Atheists, however, are on quicksand when they argue about “goodness” and “evil,” given that their metaphysics, if taken seriously, utterly rules out the existence of either. Also, it would seem to me that atheists could be a bit more contrite in light of the fact that whenever they have assumed state power — from the Reign of Terror to the gang currently launching missiles from North Korea — atheism has brought hell to earth.

The godless would garner more respect if they took their own metaphysics seriously, and if they showed at bit of contrition for what real atheists have done when in power. Author unknown.