Posts
There is a new theory floating around this planet that many people have taken firm hold of. It isn't actually new, but it's far more pervasive than any other time in history. This theory is that there are no moral absolutes. It's a completely atheistic idea.
To start with, it is founded upon the premise that there is no God. If there is no God, then several other things must go. First of all is morality. See, God is the source of morals--or at least, that's the claim made by all religions (except Buddhism, which is atheistic). So if there is no God, who says morals are true?
No one, except for the religious people. But if the religious people are just people, what makes them right? Nothing. So, their morals are fine for them, but that doesn't mean they're true. From this, it follows that there is no truth.
So all this is built on the fact that there is no God. So to refute this theory, all that must be done is to prove the existence of God. This is really hard, however, but not because there are no proofs. It's hard because the people who don't believe in God will cling to any tiny thing that could possibly be a difficulty for religion.
Since I'm not sure how to go about proving God, I'll just refute the idea of no absolutes.
Here's the first thing: There are absolutely no absolutes. I emphasized "absolutely" for the convenience of the reader. My view of the universe is only true for me, and yours only for you. Well, but my view of the universe states that there are absolutes. So that one isn't valid? Doesn't that mean that the only truth is that there are no truths? That's self-refuting.
Also, there's another big problem. What makes moral laws so different from the laws of physics? Just like the laws of physics are a vital part to the behavior of the universe, moral laws are a vital part of human behavior.
So here's an illustration. Right now, it is winter, and therefore it is cold. I don't like the cold. So, if physical laws are as malleable as we say that moral laws are, I can just say that it's mid-summer and 100 degrees outside, right? But if I decide to go swimming to ward off the heat, I'm going to freeze.
Moral laws are the same. Even if I don't like that I'm not allowed to kill, I'm still breaking a law if I decide to murder, both moral and civil laws.
If I applied this s upposed flexibility to anything but morality, it would cause some tremendous problems for me. Every sane person understands that. So it's just insane to apply such looseness to morality.
I don't know if any of my readers believes in the personalizing of morals, or knows someone who does, but I thought I'd write about it anyway.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Bricks
There are lots of different kinds of bricks. Some are made of concrete, and are very large and are actually mostly made of the core. These are called cinderblocks. Others are smaller, red and have much smaller cores. These are the kind you see in the construction of most brick houses. Yet another kind is about 2 1/2 pounds, is gray, and can be found inside the human skull.
I have a low opinion of human intellect (my own included). You may wonder why. You also may not, however, because you may have observed some of the same things I have.
1. Everyone in the world does hundreds of stupid things every day.
2. Everyone in the world says hundreds of stupid things every day.
3. Everyone in the world thinks hundreds of stupid things every day.
4. Ice cream is delicious.
These things demonstrate clearly how messed up our minds are. Maybe part of it is the fact that we can actually use only about ten percent of our brains, meaning that we are short about ninety percent of our needed intellect.
Whatever. It doesn't matter that much why we do dumb things. The main thing is that we do.
Think of the last really smart thing you said. This tends to be pretty hard for must of us. Now think of the last really dumb thing that you said. Again, this is pretty hard for me, because I can never remember which dumb thing was said most recently.
So dumb things are said, done and thought daily. I know what you're thinking. "We're only human, what do you expect?" This is not a dumb thought. The other day I was talking endlessly about holiness. We, being only human, cannot attain holiness. We also have a hard time with wisdom.
Even King Solomon, the wisest man ever to live, did some dumb things. Is there hope left for the rest of us?
So, what do we do? All problems have a solution. This problem is not special, because it's drowning in a solution.
Read the Bible. This is hard for a lot of people (like me) because we've never really entered the habit of reading the Bible frequently. But the Bible, being the word of God, has the answer to just about every problem you'll come across.
Actually, let me rephrase this. Read the Bible prayerfully. The Bible was written thousands of years ago, and is no longer relevant to this world. . .unless the Holy Spirit is guiding the reader. So if you are one of us who needs things like wisdom, go to the Bible. And more importantly: pray without ceasing.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
I have a low opinion of human intellect (my own included). You may wonder why. You also may not, however, because you may have observed some of the same things I have.
1. Everyone in the world does hundreds of stupid things every day.
2. Everyone in the world says hundreds of stupid things every day.
3. Everyone in the world thinks hundreds of stupid things every day.
4. Ice cream is delicious.
These things demonstrate clearly how messed up our minds are. Maybe part of it is the fact that we can actually use only about ten percent of our brains, meaning that we are short about ninety percent of our needed intellect.
Whatever. It doesn't matter that much why we do dumb things. The main thing is that we do.
Think of the last really smart thing you said. This tends to be pretty hard for must of us. Now think of the last really dumb thing that you said. Again, this is pretty hard for me, because I can never remember which dumb thing was said most recently.
So dumb things are said, done and thought daily. I know what you're thinking. "We're only human, what do you expect?" This is not a dumb thought. The other day I was talking endlessly about holiness. We, being only human, cannot attain holiness. We also have a hard time with wisdom.
Even King Solomon, the wisest man ever to live, did some dumb things. Is there hope left for the rest of us?
So, what do we do? All problems have a solution. This problem is not special, because it's drowning in a solution.
Read the Bible. This is hard for a lot of people (like me) because we've never really entered the habit of reading the Bible frequently. But the Bible, being the word of God, has the answer to just about every problem you'll come across.
Actually, let me rephrase this. Read the Bible prayerfully. The Bible was written thousands of years ago, and is no longer relevant to this world. . .unless the Holy Spirit is guiding the reader. So if you are one of us who needs things like wisdom, go to the Bible. And more importantly: pray without ceasing.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Friday, January 25, 2008
Fire
For the last 24 days, I have lived in a new house that I have never before lived in. This house has no central heat, and instead uses a wood-burning stove. This one stove actually keeps the house fairly warm--most of the time. The problem is, sometimes the fire goes out and is not noticed. So the house steadily loses its warmth, and house - heat = cold house.
But that has nothing to do with what I was actually planning to say. Actually I was going to talk about the fan on this stove.
About the fan on the stove: the wood-burning stove has a fan on it that blows heat out of the inside and into the outside. This means that the whole house is warm, not just the inside of the stove. Right in front of the stove, where the heat is constantly being blown out, it's really warm. So certain people (like me) enjoy standing a few feet in front of the stove, where heat is being poured out constantly.
But at some point, that person has to walk away from the stove to do something else. This person then becomes even colder than before, because he has been standing in a cloud of heat. So does that mean it's not good to stand in front of the stove? Because then I'm even worse than when I started.
My point is this: the stove in this picture represents God. The heat represents holiness, which is the thing I was talking about two days ago. Holiness is a good thing to have, just like heat. But like heat (in the house I live in), it can come from only one source. Holiness comes from God, heat comes from the stove.
I have two points I want to make. The first I mentioned already. When I step away from the stove and its warmth, I feel colder than I was before. I'm not really, but it certainly seems that way. Same with holiness. As soon as I step away from God, I seem to be worse than before, now that I've felt His glory.
So should I still strive for that holiness? I would say yes. If I had no warmth, I would eventually freeze to death. If I have no holiness, I'll eventually burn. Remember what I said about eternity? That's a long time to be sitting in Hell (whether the fire depicted throughout the Bible is literal or figurative, Hell will still not be fun by any stretch of the imagination.)
But that isn't the point that interests me the most. I might talk about that a little more later, but not now.
Here's what interests me: I can find warmth in other places. If I get in bed and pull the blanket over my head, it'll be warm. But it isn't nearly as warm as standing in front of the stove. And still, without the stove I'll eventually get cold again.
So the point is, we can find holiness elsewhere. But it isn't real holiness in that it's only a sort of morality. And again, it will eventually fade if the source isn't present. Cynicism is a powerful weapon against this fake holiness--people get jaded, and then decide that it isn't worth it to keep trying.
This is what's killing our planet. It isn't global warming or terrorism. It's false holiness. All religion is a failed attempt at creating holiness without God. Even Christianity, but only when it becomes so watered down that God is forgotten--sort of like our churches today. . . .
So what can we do about this? How do we turn the world around and start giving people real holiness?
Send them to the source. This could be rephrased with equal accuracy as "send them to Jesus."
That's all I have to say. I can't make you change, I can just make you aware that you need to. I hope that, if needed, you do change. I also hope that you can show others how to change.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
But that has nothing to do with what I was actually planning to say. Actually I was going to talk about the fan on this stove.
About the fan on the stove: the wood-burning stove has a fan on it that blows heat out of the inside and into the outside. This means that the whole house is warm, not just the inside of the stove. Right in front of the stove, where the heat is constantly being blown out, it's really warm. So certain people (like me) enjoy standing a few feet in front of the stove, where heat is being poured out constantly.
But at some point, that person has to walk away from the stove to do something else. This person then becomes even colder than before, because he has been standing in a cloud of heat. So does that mean it's not good to stand in front of the stove? Because then I'm even worse than when I started.
My point is this: the stove in this picture represents God. The heat represents holiness, which is the thing I was talking about two days ago. Holiness is a good thing to have, just like heat. But like heat (in the house I live in), it can come from only one source. Holiness comes from God, heat comes from the stove.
I have two points I want to make. The first I mentioned already. When I step away from the stove and its warmth, I feel colder than I was before. I'm not really, but it certainly seems that way. Same with holiness. As soon as I step away from God, I seem to be worse than before, now that I've felt His glory.
So should I still strive for that holiness? I would say yes. If I had no warmth, I would eventually freeze to death. If I have no holiness, I'll eventually burn. Remember what I said about eternity? That's a long time to be sitting in Hell (whether the fire depicted throughout the Bible is literal or figurative, Hell will still not be fun by any stretch of the imagination.)
But that isn't the point that interests me the most. I might talk about that a little more later, but not now.
Here's what interests me: I can find warmth in other places. If I get in bed and pull the blanket over my head, it'll be warm. But it isn't nearly as warm as standing in front of the stove. And still, without the stove I'll eventually get cold again.
So the point is, we can find holiness elsewhere. But it isn't real holiness in that it's only a sort of morality. And again, it will eventually fade if the source isn't present. Cynicism is a powerful weapon against this fake holiness--people get jaded, and then decide that it isn't worth it to keep trying.
This is what's killing our planet. It isn't global warming or terrorism. It's false holiness. All religion is a failed attempt at creating holiness without God. Even Christianity, but only when it becomes so watered down that God is forgotten--sort of like our churches today. . . .
So what can we do about this? How do we turn the world around and start giving people real holiness?
Send them to the source. This could be rephrased with equal accuracy as "send them to Jesus."
That's all I have to say. I can't make you change, I can just make you aware that you need to. I hope that, if needed, you do change. I also hope that you can show others how to change.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Infinity
When was the last time you thought sat down for a minute and thought about eternity? I say "sat down" because it's hard to do standing up. Eternity is a big amount of time. It's really big. It's so big, in fact, that there is no end.
Think about it like this: there is a robot that is programmed to repeat the words "hello, how are you?" He repeats it at five-second intervals. He is also absolutely indestructible, because who would want such a friendly thing destroyed? This robot was built a long time ago, so he's been saying those words for a long time.
Now, to complete the story, imagine that he keeps on saying this forever. Try to imagine this.
We have a hard time with this, because if he started at some point, he has to stop eventually. What goes up must come down. What begins must end. That's what we think, anyway. But he doesn't stop. Just goes on and on and on and etc.
Now imagine a little more. This robot has always been repeating this phrase. Always. Since before you or anyone you know was born. Before, in fact, the universe ever existed. How many hours has he been speaking? How many days? Years? Centuries?
We can't measure it. We can't even begin to measure it because something like this is so far beyond anything we can conceive of in our brains. Maybe if we were able to use 100% of our brains, rather than the 10% actually available, this would be a comprehensible thing. But maybe not. Like I said, this is a big amount of time.
God rules over it all. God absolutely and totally controls every part of this massive amount of time, and has existed through all of it. I know this has been said a million or more times (probably a lot more), but I'm still amazed every time I think about it.
So think for a while about eternity, and then think about God.
"Wow" is such an understatement, don't you think?
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Think about it like this: there is a robot that is programmed to repeat the words "hello, how are you?" He repeats it at five-second intervals. He is also absolutely indestructible, because who would want such a friendly thing destroyed? This robot was built a long time ago, so he's been saying those words for a long time.
Now, to complete the story, imagine that he keeps on saying this forever. Try to imagine this.
We have a hard time with this, because if he started at some point, he has to stop eventually. What goes up must come down. What begins must end. That's what we think, anyway. But he doesn't stop. Just goes on and on and on and etc.
Now imagine a little more. This robot has always been repeating this phrase. Always. Since before you or anyone you know was born. Before, in fact, the universe ever existed. How many hours has he been speaking? How many days? Years? Centuries?
We can't measure it. We can't even begin to measure it because something like this is so far beyond anything we can conceive of in our brains. Maybe if we were able to use 100% of our brains, rather than the 10% actually available, this would be a comprehensible thing. But maybe not. Like I said, this is a big amount of time.
God rules over it all. God absolutely and totally controls every part of this massive amount of time, and has existed through all of it. I know this has been said a million or more times (probably a lot more), but I'm still amazed every time I think about it.
So think for a while about eternity, and then think about God.
"Wow" is such an understatement, don't you think?
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Holiness
Have you ever thought about the word "holy"? It's used in a lot of different ways. For example "Holy Cow!" Or, "my old jeans have holy (holey) knees." But I don't really care about those particular usages, because they're too silly and pointless even for this blog. I want to focus on a very different usage, which is the way it's used in church.
We say things like "God is holy" all the time. The word is used in tens of thousands of worship songs. But what does it mean to be holy?
There are several simple qualifications. First of all, you have to be sinless to be holy. Anyone who is holy never sins, and never has. Not once. One sin, no matter how small, destroys the holiness in the same way that a brick destroys glass. All you've got left are a bunch of little bits of holiness.
The next qualification is perfection. This one is a lot more harsh, and seems to be mentioned less than holiness. Well, "perfection" is mentioned quite often in relation to God, but no one really seems to expound upon the theme.
Perfection is one of the things that keeps the Bible from being politically correct. In the Old Testament, along with the rest of the Law, God gives instructions on what can and cannot be sacrificed. He basically saws that He will only accept a perfect lamb--meaning that it cannot be blind, deaf, lame, etc.
Any handicap makes a person imperfect, and therefore that person is not holy. If you are reading this and you're blind, deaf or lame, don't quit reading yet. There's yet another qualification.
To be holy, a person must be clean. This excludes a pretty big portion of all the people in the world. I'll just mention a few things about cleanliness. If you want the rest you can read the book of Leviticus.
Anyone with any kind of skin disease is unclean. Sorry, this doesn't just include leprosy. It also applies to simple little things like warts and sores.
Anyone who is sick is unclean.
Anyone who has eaten an unclean animal is unclean.
Anyone who has touched an unclean thing or person.
And so on.
Basically, the point is that holiness is not an easy thing to attain. In fact, it's impossible. But God is holy. God is sinless, perfect and clean. He is absolutely holy.
So, think about holiness for a while, and tomorrow I'll talk about infinity.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell the unholy
We say things like "God is holy" all the time. The word is used in tens of thousands of worship songs. But what does it mean to be holy?
There are several simple qualifications. First of all, you have to be sinless to be holy. Anyone who is holy never sins, and never has. Not once. One sin, no matter how small, destroys the holiness in the same way that a brick destroys glass. All you've got left are a bunch of little bits of holiness.
The next qualification is perfection. This one is a lot more harsh, and seems to be mentioned less than holiness. Well, "perfection" is mentioned quite often in relation to God, but no one really seems to expound upon the theme.
Perfection is one of the things that keeps the Bible from being politically correct. In the Old Testament, along with the rest of the Law, God gives instructions on what can and cannot be sacrificed. He basically saws that He will only accept a perfect lamb--meaning that it cannot be blind, deaf, lame, etc.
Any handicap makes a person imperfect, and therefore that person is not holy. If you are reading this and you're blind, deaf or lame, don't quit reading yet. There's yet another qualification.
To be holy, a person must be clean. This excludes a pretty big portion of all the people in the world. I'll just mention a few things about cleanliness. If you want the rest you can read the book of Leviticus.
Anyone with any kind of skin disease is unclean. Sorry, this doesn't just include leprosy. It also applies to simple little things like warts and sores.
Anyone who is sick is unclean.
Anyone who has eaten an unclean animal is unclean.
Anyone who has touched an unclean thing or person.
And so on.
Basically, the point is that holiness is not an easy thing to attain. In fact, it's impossible. But God is holy. God is sinless, perfect and clean. He is absolutely holy.
So, think about holiness for a while, and tomorrow I'll talk about infinity.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell the unholy
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Monday, January 21, 2008
Question Number 4
Today, I seek to answer the final question. Why does God not just destroy the universe and start over?
The answer can be found in the biggest best-seller book of all time: the Bible. Exodus 20 describes an interesting occurrence. God gives Moses the law, including the widely-famed Ten Commandments. In the interest of time and space, I'm not going to list all ten. I'm just going to bring up one.
To paraphrase: don't kill anyone. Why does He tell us this? Because life is sacred. All ten of these commandments basically work the same way. Don't misuse God's name. Why? His name is sacred. Don't commit adultery. Why? Marriage is sacred. Don't work on the Sabbath. Why? Because the Sabbath is holy. Etc.
That last one (the Sabbath) is important to my coming argument, and here is why. God was the first one to keep the Sabbath. Following the six days of creation mentioned in Genesis, God took a day to rest. That means that He also keeps the Sabbath holy.
I don't think that God does nothing on Saturday just to keep it holy, but I think that He is mentioned as resting for a reason. Maybe to show that He believes in the holiness of that day. He's not a king who is above His own laws.
So it follows that He believes life to be sacred also. I'm sorry if you don't follow this leap of logic, but I'm not sure how else to phrase it. But the point is simple.
Because God believes life to be sacred, He will not destroy it. I can hear you arguing already: "wait a second, Mitchell, are you trying to tell me people don't die? Or that God isn't in charge of our lives?"
No. People do die, and God is in charge. But remember Question 3, and more importantly, the answer. If it wasn't for Adam and Eve eating from the Tree of Knowledge, they and all their children (everyone) would still be alive today. God didn't take life--we broke it.
There are exceptions, however. For example, in the Old Testament are mentioned several kings of various nations whom God kills for their sins. But think about it. What happened next? What is it preachers always say to try to get people saved?
"Do you want to live for eternity in Hell?" I most certainly do not, but the point is that word I so neatly italicized. Live. Even if He were to take our lives, God always leaves our souls. It may not be our choice when our lives end, but it's certainly our choice what happens next.
So He won't destroy the universe, because Heaven and Hell are part of it all. And to destroy the universe would mean that nothing would exist but Him. And He will not ever destroy one of His creations.
So, that should be either encouraging or terrifying. Because if you're with Him, that means eternity of happiness. If you're against Him, eternity of not-so-happiness. Choose wisely.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
The answer can be found in the biggest best-seller book of all time: the Bible. Exodus 20 describes an interesting occurrence. God gives Moses the law, including the widely-famed Ten Commandments. In the interest of time and space, I'm not going to list all ten. I'm just going to bring up one.
To paraphrase: don't kill anyone. Why does He tell us this? Because life is sacred. All ten of these commandments basically work the same way. Don't misuse God's name. Why? His name is sacred. Don't commit adultery. Why? Marriage is sacred. Don't work on the Sabbath. Why? Because the Sabbath is holy. Etc.
That last one (the Sabbath) is important to my coming argument, and here is why. God was the first one to keep the Sabbath. Following the six days of creation mentioned in Genesis, God took a day to rest. That means that He also keeps the Sabbath holy.
I don't think that God does nothing on Saturday just to keep it holy, but I think that He is mentioned as resting for a reason. Maybe to show that He believes in the holiness of that day. He's not a king who is above His own laws.
So it follows that He believes life to be sacred also. I'm sorry if you don't follow this leap of logic, but I'm not sure how else to phrase it. But the point is simple.
Because God believes life to be sacred, He will not destroy it. I can hear you arguing already: "wait a second, Mitchell, are you trying to tell me people don't die? Or that God isn't in charge of our lives?"
No. People do die, and God is in charge. But remember Question 3, and more importantly, the answer. If it wasn't for Adam and Eve eating from the Tree of Knowledge, they and all their children (everyone) would still be alive today. God didn't take life--we broke it.
There are exceptions, however. For example, in the Old Testament are mentioned several kings of various nations whom God kills for their sins. But think about it. What happened next? What is it preachers always say to try to get people saved?
"Do you want to live for eternity in Hell?" I most certainly do not, but the point is that word I so neatly italicized. Live. Even if He were to take our lives, God always leaves our souls. It may not be our choice when our lives end, but it's certainly our choice what happens next.
So He won't destroy the universe, because Heaven and Hell are part of it all. And to destroy the universe would mean that nothing would exist but Him. And He will not ever destroy one of His creations.
So, that should be either encouraging or terrifying. Because if you're with Him, that means eternity of happiness. If you're against Him, eternity of not-so-happiness. Choose wisely.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Question Number 3
The answers to questions 1 and 2, as we saw, basically came down to free will. So does question number 3. The question was "Why does God allow sin?" It could be phrased a little better by replacing the word sin with the words free will.
All sin and all pain come down to free will. So let's look at what is meant by "free will." What exactly does it mean?
Well, if you want to study something, you should go to the place where it began. To understand the meaning of a word, study the root, not the prefix. To study free will, look at the first time it was ever exercised--the Garden of Eden.
Adam and Eve were the first people that God created. In the book of Genesis, He is described as creating the entire universe in six days, and then resting on the seventh. There's a debate among Christians whether these six days of creation are literal, or whether they actually span millions or billions of years, therefore including the theory of evolution in the story of creation.
It doesn't matter right now. The important thing is, Adam and Eve were the first people ever to live on this planet.
They lived in a beautiful garden, with trees bearing fruit of every kind. It was pretty much paradise. They were happy, and it seems that they were even a little childlike in some ways. For example, the Bible says that they were unaware of their nakedness. When the snake came to talk to Eve, she saw nothing strange in a talking snake. Everything was perfect.
But they were not childlike in one way. God put a tree in the middle of the garden, which they were not allowed to eat from. It was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They knew they should not eat from that tree. But they did.
Anyone who's made it this far probably already knows the story, so I'm not going to outline the rest of it. Here's the question that has arisen in my mind:
Why did God put the tree there? Did he want them to sin?
Adam and Eve had free will. They didn't have to eat the fruit, but they were capable of it. So this tree is the beginning of free will. It all comes down to the above question. Why did He put the tree there?
There are several possibilities.
1. He wanted them to eat the forbidden fruit. I really doubt this one. After Adam and Eve eat the fruit, the Bible records great disappointment from God. He did not want them to eat it. It just doesn't fit with His nature. Scratch off number one.
2. He was testing them. I've heard this theory stated from several sources, but it also doesn't fit with God's nature. Satan is the tempter. If God tempted us, one of the lines of the Lord's Prayer would become entirely void. "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the Evil One." God does not tempt us with evil.
3. It had a purpose later on. This is the most complex. Let's see if I can explain it. . .
Not for no reason is this the tree of knowledge. Knowledge is something that just happens. Anything thay has a fully functioning mind gathers knowledge. Anyone who's been around small children knows that it is important to humanity to gather knowledge. They constantly ask questions (like "what is that thing for?" "Why do you want to do that?" "But why would that happen?" etc.). They also tend to ask questions beyond their capacity to understand (i.e. "where do babies come from?).
Maybe Adam and Eve were the same way. Maybe God was waiting for them to be ready to understand good and evil before he allowed them to eat the fruit. Toddlers aren't taught about the source of life, because they aren't ready to understand it.
All this is just speculation. It may be none of the above. But the third possibility, to me, seems to be the most likely. So here's the answer:
God allowed sin into the world because the option had to be there, because the Tree of Good and Evil was there. It's as complexly simple as that.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
All sin and all pain come down to free will. So let's look at what is meant by "free will." What exactly does it mean?
Well, if you want to study something, you should go to the place where it began. To understand the meaning of a word, study the root, not the prefix. To study free will, look at the first time it was ever exercised--the Garden of Eden.
Adam and Eve were the first people that God created. In the book of Genesis, He is described as creating the entire universe in six days, and then resting on the seventh. There's a debate among Christians whether these six days of creation are literal, or whether they actually span millions or billions of years, therefore including the theory of evolution in the story of creation.
It doesn't matter right now. The important thing is, Adam and Eve were the first people ever to live on this planet.
They lived in a beautiful garden, with trees bearing fruit of every kind. It was pretty much paradise. They were happy, and it seems that they were even a little childlike in some ways. For example, the Bible says that they were unaware of their nakedness. When the snake came to talk to Eve, she saw nothing strange in a talking snake. Everything was perfect.
But they were not childlike in one way. God put a tree in the middle of the garden, which they were not allowed to eat from. It was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They knew they should not eat from that tree. But they did.
Anyone who's made it this far probably already knows the story, so I'm not going to outline the rest of it. Here's the question that has arisen in my mind:
Why did God put the tree there? Did he want them to sin?
Adam and Eve had free will. They didn't have to eat the fruit, but they were capable of it. So this tree is the beginning of free will. It all comes down to the above question. Why did He put the tree there?
There are several possibilities.
1. He wanted them to eat the forbidden fruit. I really doubt this one. After Adam and Eve eat the fruit, the Bible records great disappointment from God. He did not want them to eat it. It just doesn't fit with His nature. Scratch off number one.
2. He was testing them. I've heard this theory stated from several sources, but it also doesn't fit with God's nature. Satan is the tempter. If God tempted us, one of the lines of the Lord's Prayer would become entirely void. "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the Evil One." God does not tempt us with evil.
3. It had a purpose later on. This is the most complex. Let's see if I can explain it. . .
Not for no reason is this the tree of knowledge. Knowledge is something that just happens. Anything thay has a fully functioning mind gathers knowledge. Anyone who's been around small children knows that it is important to humanity to gather knowledge. They constantly ask questions (like "what is that thing for?" "Why do you want to do that?" "But why would that happen?" etc.). They also tend to ask questions beyond their capacity to understand (i.e. "where do babies come from?).
Maybe Adam and Eve were the same way. Maybe God was waiting for them to be ready to understand good and evil before he allowed them to eat the fruit. Toddlers aren't taught about the source of life, because they aren't ready to understand it.
All this is just speculation. It may be none of the above. But the third possibility, to me, seems to be the most likely. So here's the answer:
God allowed sin into the world because the option had to be there, because the Tree of Good and Evil was there. It's as complexly simple as that.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Friday, January 18, 2008
my pocket
Here are the contents of my pockets, in case you want to know:
1. A wallet. This is a useful thing to have for carrying money, a driver's liscense and credit cards. The only thing is, I have none of those.
2. A guitar pick. This is much more useful, because when I pick up my guitar I don't have to search for an hour before I can actually play it. Although usually the pick ends up magically in my wallet, making it harder than ever to find it.
3. A pocket knife. Always good to have, in case I get lost in the wilderness and have to kill a bear.
4. Coins. How else do you make a big decision?
5. Holes. These aren't technically in my pocket, but lots of coins seem to end up going through these tedious spots of emptiness.
And that's all. I think the tag (completely useless) is pretty accurate today.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
1. A wallet. This is a useful thing to have for carrying money, a driver's liscense and credit cards. The only thing is, I have none of those.
2. A guitar pick. This is much more useful, because when I pick up my guitar I don't have to search for an hour before I can actually play it. Although usually the pick ends up magically in my wallet, making it harder than ever to find it.
3. A pocket knife. Always good to have, in case I get lost in the wilderness and have to kill a bear.
4. Coins. How else do you make a big decision?
5. Holes. These aren't technically in my pocket, but lots of coins seem to end up going through these tedious spots of emptiness.
And that's all. I think the tag (completely useless) is pretty accurate today.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Question Number 2
Today, I will do my best to answer the second question. If God is a loving god, why does He send people to Hell?
Don't worry, I'll be quoting C.S. Lewis again. There are really only two kinds of Christian authors: the kind that quotes C.S. Lewis to further prove his point, and the kind that quotes C.S. Lewis because his point is really just a rephrasing of the one made by Lewis. I'm not going to tell you which one I am.
So, on to the answer.
This question is frequently asked, but often it's asked in the wrong way. See, there are two big problems with the phrase "why does God send people to Hell?" First of all, the problem is with the word "people." This word is too neutral. When people hear the word "people," a crowd of blank-faced folks without personality or life fills the mind. They aren't necessarily good, but certainly not bad. "People," we think, do not deserve to go to Hell.
Right there is the problem. Yes, right there. I'm pointing at the screen, but I guess you can't see that, can you? So let me fill in the question with some adjectives.
"Why would a loving God send evil, hateful, lustful, selfish and mean people to Hell?" Hmmm. . . And in case you think I'm being too harsh, read the book of Romans. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
Okay, now for the next problem. This is the word "send." God does not "send" anyone to Hell.
As C.S. Lewis said (I told you it would come), "in the end, there are only two kinds of people. The ones who say to God, 'thy will be done,' and the ones to which God says 'thy will be done.' "*
Again, the root of the problem is in free will. God isn't sending anyone to Hell--they go willingly. It's a simple choice: God, or no God.
So, here is the final draft of Question Number 2: "How could a loving God let evil, hateful, lustful selfish and mean people choose to go to Hell?"
It really takes all the power out of that question, doesn't it? Mark Twain once said "Humor and frogs can both be dissected, but both die in the process." The same is true of most atheistic questions.
So, here's my theistic question for you: have you chosen God or no God? Or, more specifically, has Jesus covered your sins, or have you rejected His sacrifice?
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
*I don't know which book he wrote this in (maybe Miracles), and yes, I paraphrased.
Don't worry, I'll be quoting C.S. Lewis again. There are really only two kinds of Christian authors: the kind that quotes C.S. Lewis to further prove his point, and the kind that quotes C.S. Lewis because his point is really just a rephrasing of the one made by Lewis. I'm not going to tell you which one I am.
So, on to the answer.
This question is frequently asked, but often it's asked in the wrong way. See, there are two big problems with the phrase "why does God send people to Hell?" First of all, the problem is with the word "people." This word is too neutral. When people hear the word "people," a crowd of blank-faced folks without personality or life fills the mind. They aren't necessarily good, but certainly not bad. "People," we think, do not deserve to go to Hell.
Right there is the problem. Yes, right there. I'm pointing at the screen, but I guess you can't see that, can you? So let me fill in the question with some adjectives.
"Why would a loving God send evil, hateful, lustful, selfish and mean people to Hell?" Hmmm. . . And in case you think I'm being too harsh, read the book of Romans. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
Okay, now for the next problem. This is the word "send." God does not "send" anyone to Hell.
As C.S. Lewis said (I told you it would come), "in the end, there are only two kinds of people. The ones who say to God, 'thy will be done,' and the ones to which God says 'thy will be done.' "*
Again, the root of the problem is in free will. God isn't sending anyone to Hell--they go willingly. It's a simple choice: God, or no God.
So, here is the final draft of Question Number 2: "How could a loving God let evil, hateful, lustful selfish and mean people choose to go to Hell?"
It really takes all the power out of that question, doesn't it? Mark Twain once said "Humor and frogs can both be dissected, but both die in the process." The same is true of most atheistic questions.
So, here's my theistic question for you: have you chosen God or no God? Or, more specifically, has Jesus covered your sins, or have you rejected His sacrifice?
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
*I don't know which book he wrote this in (maybe Miracles), and yes, I paraphrased.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Jesus Loves Me
This has nothing to do with the quartet of questions that I asked myself a few days ago. I just heard a song today, and I wanted to share it with all the three or four people reading this.
It goes like this:
Jesus loves me, this I know
For the Bible tells me so
Little ones to Him belong
They are weak but He is strong
I know this isn't a new song, and I also know that everyone who's ever been to Sunday School has heard it before. But recently, I came to a realization that greatly fascinates and enthralls me. It is commonly said that God loves us. Look at verses such as John 3:16 and Romans 8:38-39. Jesus loves me.
But until recently, I didn't realize how deeply He loves his people. I'm not sure how this thought came to me, but this was the thought: God would still love me if I cursed His name. God would still love me if I went around the world telling as many people that God doesn't exist.
Think about it: what if someone starting saying that you don't exist, just because he/she doesn't like you? That person would be hard to love.
Jesus loves me, and Jesus loves you. That's your inspirational message for today.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
It goes like this:
Jesus loves me, this I know
For the Bible tells me so
Little ones to Him belong
They are weak but He is strong
I know this isn't a new song, and I also know that everyone who's ever been to Sunday School has heard it before. But recently, I came to a realization that greatly fascinates and enthralls me. It is commonly said that God loves us. Look at verses such as John 3:16 and Romans 8:38-39. Jesus loves me.
But until recently, I didn't realize how deeply He loves his people. I'm not sure how this thought came to me, but this was the thought: God would still love me if I cursed His name. God would still love me if I went around the world telling as many people that God doesn't exist.
Think about it: what if someone starting saying that you don't exist, just because he/she doesn't like you? That person would be hard to love.
Jesus loves me, and Jesus loves you. That's your inspirational message for today.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Mitchell
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Question Number 1
Today I will try to answer the first question, which is why God's people seem to have so many problems. It seems like it should be the immoral people that have the problems, but like I said in my previous post: life doesn't fit the blueprints.
First of all, the pain that Christians experience comes in two varieties. The first is pretty simple. It's called "discipline."
Revelation 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; therefore be zealous and repent.
This is Jesus speaking to the church at Laodicea. He chastens--disciplines--the ones that He loves. So that covers a part of it. God doesn't discipline those who aren't His children. They don't experience pain, although ultimately it won't be a painful experience.
C.S. Lewis pointed out* that to a puppy, discipline is a terrible thing, and therefore the master who is disciplining him must be cruel and terrible. But years later, this dog will be much better-off than the wild one that never received any discipline at all.
But surely this doesn't cover everything. What about the people who are actually doing well, morally? A master doesn't punish a good dog, right? So there must be a different kind of suffering that is not instigated by God.
There is.
Think about this question with me, for a moment. When is driving the most frustrating? Is it while you're on the highway, cruising along at seventy--or eighty-five, if you're inclined to break the law--or stuck in heavy traffic? Driving on an empty road doesn't require much thought. It's when other vehicles are around that you have to use your brain.
So?
Driving is harder with other people around. So is writing. I was doing well, and then a large amount of people walked into the room, and I can't seem to keep my train of thought. Business is harder when competition comes in. Socializing alone is easier when other people are around, and this is one of the hardest things imaginable.
Life is not excluded from this list. It would be incalculably easier to be the only person on Earth. Of course, it would also be a lot lonelier.
The point is, other people cause the most pain in life. Whether because your friend dies or because your friend stabs you in the back, people cause you pain far more than God. After all, it was people who smashed planes into the World Trade Center, and it's people--not God--who go around starting wars.
This has sort of led us in a circle, because the next logical question is really the one I started with. Why does God allow pain? although it's become, Why does God allow people to cause pain to each other?
Followed through to the end, what would it mean that God doesn't let us cause pain to each other? It would mean that we have no free will. Free will means that we can do whatever we want, no matter how stupid it is or how much it might hurt someone. For God to be constantly preventing people from shooting each other and treating their neighbor as they don't want to be treated, He would take away a huge chunk of our options.
I guess you can still blame it on God--Why did He give us free will, then?--but life wouldn't be worth much if we couldn't actually do anything. And free will doesn't just create pain. It also creates ample opportunity for kindness, mercy and generosity.
So make sure to use your free will wisely, and I'll use mine to go eat dinner.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Hungry Mitchell
*In, "The Problem of Pain," I think.
First of all, the pain that Christians experience comes in two varieties. The first is pretty simple. It's called "discipline."
Revelation 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; therefore be zealous and repent.
This is Jesus speaking to the church at Laodicea. He chastens--disciplines--the ones that He loves. So that covers a part of it. God doesn't discipline those who aren't His children. They don't experience pain, although ultimately it won't be a painful experience.
C.S. Lewis pointed out* that to a puppy, discipline is a terrible thing, and therefore the master who is disciplining him must be cruel and terrible. But years later, this dog will be much better-off than the wild one that never received any discipline at all.
But surely this doesn't cover everything. What about the people who are actually doing well, morally? A master doesn't punish a good dog, right? So there must be a different kind of suffering that is not instigated by God.
There is.
Think about this question with me, for a moment. When is driving the most frustrating? Is it while you're on the highway, cruising along at seventy--or eighty-five, if you're inclined to break the law--or stuck in heavy traffic? Driving on an empty road doesn't require much thought. It's when other vehicles are around that you have to use your brain.
So?
Driving is harder with other people around. So is writing. I was doing well, and then a large amount of people walked into the room, and I can't seem to keep my train of thought. Business is harder when competition comes in. Socializing alone is easier when other people are around, and this is one of the hardest things imaginable.
Life is not excluded from this list. It would be incalculably easier to be the only person on Earth. Of course, it would also be a lot lonelier.
The point is, other people cause the most pain in life. Whether because your friend dies or because your friend stabs you in the back, people cause you pain far more than God. After all, it was people who smashed planes into the World Trade Center, and it's people--not God--who go around starting wars.
This has sort of led us in a circle, because the next logical question is really the one I started with. Why does God allow pain? although it's become, Why does God allow people to cause pain to each other?
Followed through to the end, what would it mean that God doesn't let us cause pain to each other? It would mean that we have no free will. Free will means that we can do whatever we want, no matter how stupid it is or how much it might hurt someone. For God to be constantly preventing people from shooting each other and treating their neighbor as they don't want to be treated, He would take away a huge chunk of our options.
I guess you can still blame it on God--Why did He give us free will, then?--but life wouldn't be worth much if we couldn't actually do anything. And free will doesn't just create pain. It also creates ample opportunity for kindness, mercy and generosity.
So make sure to use your free will wisely, and I'll use mine to go eat dinner.
Goodbye, valiant reader,
Hungry Mitchell
*In, "The Problem of Pain," I think.
Friday, January 11, 2008
inconsistent
Life is inconsistent sometimes. Well, not totally. To be inconsistent, one part of it would have to conflict with some other part--for example, one day George Washington is dead and gone, and the next he's sitting on your couch watching TV. It is, however, inconsistent with its design. It's the kind of inconsistency you would find when the blueprints show a room as 279' by 612' (yes, I know how enormous that would be), and yet its 2' by 4'. I'm not exaggerating--the world is nothing like its blueprints.
Here's what I mean: the Bible states that the first will be last (Matthew 19:30). It also says that the humble--the inconspicuous and the small--will rule the world (Matthew 5:5). This isn't how the world works. It didn't work that way 2000 years ago, either. Jesus knew that when he said these things.
One story from the Gospel of Mark especially fascinates me. In chapter 12, verses 41-44, it describes a widow going to the temple and dropping two copper coins into the collection box. This is the equivalent of someone going to church today and putting a single penny into the offering plate.
All around her, the rich and powerful are dropping massive amounts of money into this box, proudly displaying to the world just how rich they are. Most likely, they're watching this little widow give the most useless gift imaginable (except for one copper coin, I guess).
Then Jesus says a thing that is so-often repeated that its oddity is nearly forgotten. He calls his disciples around him and says, (v. 43-44) "I assure you: This poor widow has put in more than all those giving to the temple treasury. For they all gave out of their surplus, but she out of her poverty has put in everything she possessed--all she had to live on."
Wait a second. . .she gave a penny, and Mr. Zechariah Rich-Man just put in a million dollars. She gave the most?
I can imagine what the disciples must have said to their teacher. "Do you need a drink, Jesus?" "Are you talking about that widow?"
I'm not saying that Jesus was wrong, but here's what I am saying. Life doesn't fit the blueprints. This widow didn't give the most money, although on a percentage scale she was certainly the highest. But what happened when she went home? She had nothing left. As pessimistic as this sounds, my guess is that she didn't do real well. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from giving 100%, that's just how it typically works.
"So? That isn't the point of the story!" I know this. The thing is, I can't get over the fact that God doesn't seem to bless the people who do the most for Him. Why not? Why? Why why why?
I'm going to close with a list of "whys sort of about suffering," which will be answered in entirety. . .someday. Maybe.
Uno: Why do God's people have to suffer, and the devil's seem to have everything they want?
Dos: If God is so loving, why does He send people to Hell?
Tres: Why did God allow sin in the first place?
quatro cuattro kwatro Four: Why doesn't God just destroy the universe and start over?
Goodbye, valiant reader (and sorry if I wasted your time),
Mitchell
Here's what I mean: the Bible states that the first will be last (Matthew 19:30). It also says that the humble--the inconspicuous and the small--will rule the world (Matthew 5:5). This isn't how the world works. It didn't work that way 2000 years ago, either. Jesus knew that when he said these things.
One story from the Gospel of Mark especially fascinates me. In chapter 12, verses 41-44, it describes a widow going to the temple and dropping two copper coins into the collection box. This is the equivalent of someone going to church today and putting a single penny into the offering plate.
All around her, the rich and powerful are dropping massive amounts of money into this box, proudly displaying to the world just how rich they are. Most likely, they're watching this little widow give the most useless gift imaginable (except for one copper coin, I guess).
Then Jesus says a thing that is so-often repeated that its oddity is nearly forgotten. He calls his disciples around him and says, (v. 43-44) "I assure you: This poor widow has put in more than all those giving to the temple treasury. For they all gave out of their surplus, but she out of her poverty has put in everything she possessed--all she had to live on."
Wait a second. . .she gave a penny, and Mr. Zechariah Rich-Man just put in a million dollars. She gave the most?
I can imagine what the disciples must have said to their teacher. "Do you need a drink, Jesus?" "Are you talking about that widow?"
I'm not saying that Jesus was wrong, but here's what I am saying. Life doesn't fit the blueprints. This widow didn't give the most money, although on a percentage scale she was certainly the highest. But what happened when she went home? She had nothing left. As pessimistic as this sounds, my guess is that she didn't do real well. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from giving 100%, that's just how it typically works.
"So? That isn't the point of the story!" I know this. The thing is, I can't get over the fact that God doesn't seem to bless the people who do the most for Him. Why not? Why? Why why why?
I'm going to close with a list of "whys sort of about suffering," which will be answered in entirety. . .someday. Maybe.
Uno: Why do God's people have to suffer, and the devil's seem to have everything they want?
Dos: If God is so loving, why does He send people to Hell?
Tres: Why did God allow sin in the first place?
Goodbye, valiant reader (and sorry if I wasted your time),
Mitchell
Thursday, January 10, 2008
It's been a while since I blogged last. This isn't my fault; I haven't forgotten. But I've been moving, and have not had internet access until a few minutes ago. There were a lot of things that I wanted to say over the last few weeks (or however long it's been), but I've forgotten them all. Sorry.
I just want to let you know: I'm still alive, and my brain is still working.
Goodbye, valiant reader
Mitchell
I just want to let you know: I'm still alive, and my brain is still working.
Goodbye, valiant reader
Mitchell
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)