What the eyes can't see 49

The eight acts set in six days add up to a complete coverage of all the phenomena of the universe as we observe them from this planet. The scheme has symmetry. The first three days are days of separation, setting up three pairs of contrasting elements light/darkness; above/below; sea/land. The arrangement is stable, and vegetation (the fourth action) is part of the fixture. Then come three days in which moving things are placed successively in these three domains - lamps in the periods of light and darkness (Day 4 matches Day 1); birds and fish in air and water (Day 5 matches Day 2); animals and humankind on land (Day 6 matches Day 3). The effect is cumulative; the result is comprehensive. The style is simple, yet grand; the impression is majestic, overwhelming. It is a marvelous combination of plain narrative and high art. The fact that it is history should not shut our minds against its artistry. The fact that it is artistic should not soften our confidence in its truthfulness as history.
The word day in Genesis should then be read literally according to the above text, but lets just define it more clearly for anyone who might be skeptical. The word used for day is "yom" and can have various meanings depending on the content in which it is used. In Genesis 1 it is used in conjunction with the words evening and morning, and denotes a specific period of time, in this case 24 hours.The number and phrase evening and morning are used with each of the six days of creation. Outside Genesis 1 yom is used with the word evening or morning 23 times, these words appear in association but without the word yom another 38 times. In all 61 cases the text used refers to an ordinary day and no more. In Genesis 1:5 yom is used with the word night, and elsewhere is used with the same 53 times and once again can be seen to represent an ordinary day. The plural of the word yom does not appear in Genesis1, and can be used to communicate longer periods of time along with other Hebrew words like olam; tamid; dor or gedem. It may for some, be easier to look at the days of creation as longer time periods, but it does not confer with the language that is being used.In (Exodus 20:11) we read For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

I don't believe God meant the word day, in the statement above to mean millions of years, otherwise we would never have any rest. Put very simply I'm sure that if God wanted to convey the message of millions of years to us, He would have inspired the writer of the text to use language that better reflects long ages. I hope this long lecture has helped you all, my blog will now be taking another course in direction, so be sure to keep up.

What the eyes can't see 48

Many of you who know me, will appreciate that my literary skills leave a lot to be desired, however since I started studying the bible with greater intent, I have discovered the need to be able to differentiate between the various types and styles of literature, in order to better understand the content. Some of you might say its all to complicated and why cant we just read it as it is written, and I would agree with you in as much as the more times you read through the bible the more apparent the kind of literature becomes. This is fact, but some text requires a somewhat more in depth approach,what follows is written for those who are confronted with problems interpreting the book of genesis. The first step required when reading any portion of text is to work out what kind of literature it is, and what language it is written in. Each kind of literature has its own rules of composition, and these serve also as rules for its interpretation. To read any passage correctly, we must do four things: 1. Isolate the unit, find one style of writing for the section or book; 2. Identify the literary form (class, type, genre) of the composition; 3. Diagnose the dialect prose or poetry; 4. Use the grammatical and literary rules for that kind of composition. Unless this preliminary work is done correctly, the text can be misread. What, then is Genesis 1? Firstly, Genesis 1 is not a poem, it does not use verse forms. It is written in the standard literary dialect of narrative prose. It is completely devoid of poetic diction, imagery, figures of speech. Secondly, Genesis 1 is straight-forward narrative. It talks about the real world, completely familiar to us. It lists the cosmic elements and terrestrial phenomena such as we observe everyday ; sky, land, sea, heavenly lights, vegetation, fish, birds, and animals, including humankind. The terms "sky", "land", "grass", etc., have their simple meanings. The language is not mythological, allegorical, or parabolic. Genesis 1 states that God made all these things. The story is as simple as can be, straight-forward, matter-of-fact.Thirdly, Genesis 1 is followed by other stories which read like successive chapters in a book. The narrative is continuous, with transitions rather than breaks; and it goes right on through the accounts of the patriarchs, the careers of Moses and Joshua, followed by Judges and Kings. Genesis through Kings is a single, continuous, gigantic chronicle; and all of it is the same kind of writing. It is a unified history of God and his world. As the first part, and an integral part, of that history, Genesis 1 itself is also history. But we still have to work out how history is written in the Bible, and what kind of history-writing we have in Genesis 1. Again, it would be impudent to insist that we already know the answer to that question, even before we begin to read, and to insist on interpreting it in our way, instead of first finding out the biblical way of doing it. We notice, for instance, that Genesis 1 is very repetitious. The events take place on six days, and each day's events are reported in a similar cycle. It is highly schematic and formulaic. Is this artistic pattern a framework, carrying the list of things that God made? Or is it part of the factual information supplied? In all, eight acts of creation are reported. And, no matter how it is done, they have to be reported in some kind of sequence. One of the commonest mistakes in reading Genesis 1 is to assume that truthful history must report events in chronological sequence. Who made that rule?

What the eyes can't see 47

I want to look at the main reason why I believe what I do, and at this point I also want to say, you can believe whatever you want, as to the age of the Earth, as long as you don't try and change the meaning of the text in the bible. The text in question here being in the book of Genesis, there are others but for now I want to look at Genesis. Before we get into it ,lets just look at one of the alternatives to reinterpretation of Gods word. The challenge of the distance of the stars, the speed of light and the time taken to travel to the Earth= a very old creation. Now there are many theories as to how both parties could be right (see one here) or using my own very simple theory of the light always being here, in other words it started out here, and is traveling away from us and not toward us. These are just a few ways whereby if you apply your mind to something there are always alternatives, so lets leave the scriptures intact and seek other means of satisfying our inquiring minds. For the next few blogs I want to look at how I see Genesis in context to my beliefs.

Numerous themes run through the Bible yet none may have more of a dramatic effect on our understanding of the theme of the Bible than the opening chapters of Genesis. Creation, sin and the fall begin the journey which finally culminates in the coming of the Messiah. Perhaps no other story line plays such a pivotal role in the theology and understanding of the Old Testament and the necessity of the New Testament. It would not be an exaggeration to suggest that without the first three chapters of Genesis, the rest of the Bible would be meaningless. What effect do these chapters have on believers today? Do the Genesis events have to be taken as allegory (story), meant to convey spiritual truths but not actual reality? Is this report history? Or is it something else - parable, allegory, legend, myth, whatever? It is easy enough to make the statement: "It must be history!" Such an assertion often arises from anxiety for the truth of the Bible. It is intended to protect the Bible from skeptics, liberals, and other bad persons who have suggested that Genesis is not history, but rather parable or allegory or myth or whatever. So where do we begin?

What the eyes can't see 46

Geoffrey Miller, in the November 2006 edition of New Scientist said: “Evolutionary moral psychology will reveal the social conditions under which human moral virtues flourish. The US will follow the UK in realizing that religion is not a prerequisite for ordinary human decency. Thus, science will kill religion - not by reason challenging faith, but by offering a more practical, universal and rewarding moral framework for human interaction. A naturalistic moral philosophy will replace the rotting fictions of theological ethics.” Dr. John Bradshaw, Professor of Neuropsychology at Monash University Melbourne wrote: “Evolutional models are every bit as beautiful, intellectually and morally satisfying as the myths, stories and precepts of an ossified theology - and they can explain, predict and be applied in hosts of important and socially useful ways.
This is the kind of statements you can expect to find on websites of many an evolutionist/atheist, here is one come from the site of Richard Dawkins. We encourage you to make visits to our web site a part of your Atheist lifestyle. We also urge you to share Atheism with friends and family. We need to be activists for Atheism! By making your Atheism known to others, you will be surprised how easy it becomes for others to admit that perhaps they, too, are Atheists! The world will become a less lonely place in an otherwise unrelentingly religious society.
On the up side take note of two things 1) look at the word "Probably" on the bus, this must imply that he has doubts in his own beliefs, he's not sure. 2)The most visible proof that is staring us all in the face, of Gods existence,and has been throughout history is this, why does Richard Dawkins and others like him, go to so much trouble and expense to try and disprove that God exists, if they don't believe in Him? If anything they are confirming the fact that He does exist. This bus does regular tours, to spread the gospel of atheism. Looks to me like Satan has found himself a financial backer
( Mark4:15) Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. I hope this doesn't happen to any of you.

What the eyes can't see 45

Most of you are probably thinking, why such a fervent attack on evolution? or what is his agenda? Well let me take you on a picturesque journey into the world of evolution, and at this point I will apologize to all those out there who have no options when it comes to being associated with the name of evolution, perhaps I should be labeled as being narrow minded.There is apparently a good side to evolution, and maybe a new definition should be sought to describe these merits of an otherwise damning subject. Now the sad part of it all is that the original meaning of the word, as well as some of its current definitions, are far removed from its current status quo. Just ask anyone to define the meaning of evolution, and probably they would say something like, from ape to man, and the first name that will be mentioned will be Charles Darwin, strangely enough he didn't even like the word, and I can only find one quote of his with it in. He did however, perhaps unintentionally promote it to its more accepted definition.

Many are also of the impression that the evolutionary theory is a relatively new one, but this is not the case and it dates back to before Christ. Empedocles (495-435 B.C.) was the father and original proponent of the evolution theory, followed by advocates such as Democritus (460-370 B.C. ), Epicurus (342-270 B.C.), Lucretius (98-55 B.C.), Abubacer (1107-1185 A.D.), Bruno (1548-1600), Buffon (1707-1788), Helvetius (1715-1771), Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802), Lamarck (1744-1829), Goethe (1749-1832), Lyell (1797-1875), Charles Darwin (1809-1882) and many others.

Lets look at a few of these men and their agendas in life. (Epicurus) His idea was to explain everything mechanistically avoiding direct causes by God, was a reason that he was considered as an atheist, and was also the founder of epicureanism, Bruno He was an occultist believed in extra terrestrial life, was considered heretic and burned at the stake in 1600. All of these men had one thing in common, a disbelief in God as the creator, and often made public statements renouncing God or placing Him below mans own abilities, many embraced the ideas of a unified religion (atheism) working toward a better more peaceful future. Now if we look closer we will find that evolution is the accepted origin doctrine of atheism, and herein lies the problem. These guys were tame in comparison to current day counterparts as you will see in my next blog.

What the eyes can't see 44

In (Ephesians6:11-12) we read this. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Now what is Paul talking about here, and does it pertain to us today? He is talking of a battle going on in a realm, that is outside of normal vision of man, and even if we don't want to believe it, this battle is going on right now. And where does man look for the answers? he looks toward himself, and that is just what Satan wants.

When the world tumbles into recession and poverty, as in the past and even now in the present, you will find men who are driven by ulterior motives, asserting their wills on the masses, in the name of justice. Hitler was one of these men, look at this statement he made, it tells a story on its own. Christianity makes no distinction of race or of color; it seeks to break down all racial barriers. In this respect the hand of Christianity is against that of Nature, for are not the races of mankind the evolutionary harvest which Nature has toiled through long ages to produce?"

August of 2000, in the United Nations, the world religious leaders gathered to discuss global crisis situations. The UN general assembly hall, which is often filled with questions of war and discord, resounded with prayers, meditations and sacred ceremonies, as a distinguished and colorful delegation discussed the role of faith, love, and forgiveness in solving the world’s problems. The summit opened August 28, with the blowing of the conch by Swami Bua, the hundred and twelve year old ascetic who lives in New York City. The hall was then steeped in prayers offered from nearly every faith on earth: Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Shinto, Islam, Buddhism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, indigenous faiths, Sikhism, Taoism and Baha', all the world’s religions. (Hinduism Today) So what do we see happening here? I would say it looks very much like someone trying to unite all religions into one.

Just over a year later we have a date that many will never forget 11 September 2001, and we all know how tragic that was. From that point on we have heard a lot of talk about religion and peace. It was on January 24, 2002 in Assisi, Italy that Pope John Paul II invited the religious leaders from around the world to gather for a day of prayer. Representatives included Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, Shintoists, tribal religions, Confucianism, Zoroastrianism, Catholics, Lutherans, Quakers, Mennonites, and Orthodox Christians. So as you can see throughout the years, a trend developing, in a direction where things are headed. And of course we are being told the requirements for peace are to unify religions. In books like Earthminds and Communicating with the Living World of Gaia, they say it is all about science and understanding evolution. But when we look back historically, we see that the Greeks worshiped Gaia as a goddess. I think that there are few people today who are prepared to stand up for their beliefs, and there are many Christians among them, and they are all being swept along in a wave of worldly delusions, orchestrated by Satan.

What the eyes cant see 43

Erasmus Darwin was a religious man, and worshipped the gods Bacchus and Venus, he seemed to have a personal agenda to attack biblical authority. He was not alone, in fact, he was one of fourteen members who formed what was called the Lunar Society. The Lunar Society met in Birmingham on the Monday closest to the full moon, which may give you some insight into the spiritual interest that some of these men had. Erasmus Darwin himself worshipped Bacchus and Venus, and was interested in Eastern philosophy, Eastern religion. The Lunar Society projected the concept that the biblical view of the origin of man was a mythological concept and what we need to do is rely upon science in order to determine the truth. It is interesting that Erasmus Darwin was one of the members of the Lunar Society, but so was Josiah Wedgewood,Darwin’s grandfather on his mother’s side.

Most people know the story of Charles Darwin, and some claim that because he was buried at Westminster Abbey that it was his or his families wishes, and it was only because of his daughters death that he became bitter, I think not. Read this statement by him."Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and I have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so, the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe—and this would include my father, brother, and almost all my best friends—will be everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine".What Darwin was doing, was setting a precedent for all those who followed in his footsteps, one just needs to look at Richard Dawkins,and some of his statements Many of us saw religion as harmless nonsense. Beliefs might lack all supporting evidence but, we thought, if people needed a crutch for consolation, where's the harm? September 11th changed all that. (see more here) as can be seen here, there seems to be somewhat more to all this, and the deeper you scratch beneath the surface the more scary it becomes.So what does the bible tell us?

(Colossians2:8)See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.