...I just don't understand! I continued to hear things as we approached today, the Florida primary election day. I mentioned in a previous post that some of the concepts being thrown around by the average 'Joe' politically are unbelievable. They hear stuff on TV and buy it hook, line and sinker. The problem is, people stop thinking for themselves, as if they have handed their brain to someone they think they like and said, "Here you go. Stuff anything in there you'd like!" The more I've heard as we approached today, the more I've scratched my head...
Talk was being thrown out by a television show (sorry, I can't recall the station or the show...I know, that's bad) that argued that it was perfectly legitimate to compare President Bush to Adolph Hitler! Their reasoning? Well, Guantanamo Bay, of course! Just like Hitler had concentration camps for the Jews, Guantanamo Bay is like a concentration camp for Arabs...don't you see how precise the comparison is? Is it just me, or does anybody else realize that, even if it is conceded that inappropriate treatment of inmates is occurring at Guantanamo (which I'm not so sure I believe either), isn't there something to the fact that they are people who would destroy us if we didn't try to stop them first? And not only that, but they've already taken steps to do so, or they wouldn't be in Guantanamo in the first place. The Jews were innocent, folks...
Oh and of course, "the health care system is going down the wrong path! Who better to fix it than the government??!!" Really?!?! You really want to be giving more money to the same government so many of you already complain don't spend it wisely? You really want some bureaucrat you don't know telling you who your doctor will be? You really want the government to decide if your surgery, which your life depends on, is covered or not?
Thankfully, we know a God who is bigger than all of this. It's just too bad that so many people are determined to leave him out of the affairs of our country.
I'm in the midst of reading today, and I come across this article. I just had to stop and read it. Apparently, Dr. Gilbert Omenn, professor of Internal Medicine, Human Genetics, and Public Health at the University of Michigan thinks that if America elects a president that doesn't believe in evolution, America will be led to ruin. Um...what?
First of all, evolution teaches that man came from lower life forms, most recently, apes. This is taught as fact in schools. Is it any wonder that kids in those schools seem to act more and more like animals all the time? Evolution teaches us that we are here by chance. "You are a cosmic accident!" But of course it's those that believe we are created and thus are accountable to God that will lead the country to ruin, not the people who believe there is no meaning in life outside of self.
My apologies for the sarcasm, but doesn't his statement seem ironic to anyone else? If I believe in creation, then I believe there is a Creator. If there's a Creator, then as His creation, I'm accountable to Him. I was made for Him, so I must do as He wishes. The only reason I would be scared that creationists would ruin the country is if I thought that the Creator wanted to destroy it. However, it's generally recognized that people who believe in a Creator also believe that Creator said things like, don't lie, don't steal, don't murder, etc. I'm not seeing how following that creator will lead any people to ruin.
If I'm an evolutionist, I am my own god. I answer to no one. Yes, in many instances, keeping the peace with those around me is good for me, but many times it isn't. What if someone angers me? Can't I kill them? Survival of the fittest, folks...who are you to tell me that's wrong? I'm not accountable to you...you're not special; you're a fellow cosmic accident like I am.
Maybe that example is too extreme. But what about people in the business world who scratch and claw to get to the top, cheating, lying and slandering their way there. They tick off a lot of people in the process. Or people that steal? "I know it's yours, but I needed it more than you did, so I have every right to take it." Survival of the fittest. So which worldview with its logical end would lead a country to ruin?
The article quotes him also as saying that, "The logic that convinces us that evolution is a fact is the same logic we use to say smoking is hazardous to your health or we have serious energy policy issues because of global warming." All those who sent your kids to Michigan to study science with this guy ought to seriously reconsider. Last I checked, there were two types of science: operational and origin science. Evolutionary science is an origin science, which typically relies on eyewitness accounts (which obviously isn't the case with evolution) and circumstantial evidence. Therefore, it is not the same logic used to say smoking is bad for you, because that's operational science, which uses observable, repeatable experiments to discover truth. Has anyone been able to reproduce macro-evolution in a lab experiment? Has anyone been able to take random chemicals and create a big bang using the scientific method? Of course not! Therefore, assumptions have to be applied to circumstantial evidence. This is obviously not the same logic!
Our Creator has told us these things would happen as...well, read Romans 1 for yourself.
First of all, evolution teaches that man came from lower life forms, most recently, apes. This is taught as fact in schools. Is it any wonder that kids in those schools seem to act more and more like animals all the time? Evolution teaches us that we are here by chance. "You are a cosmic accident!" But of course it's those that believe we are created and thus are accountable to God that will lead the country to ruin, not the people who believe there is no meaning in life outside of self.
My apologies for the sarcasm, but doesn't his statement seem ironic to anyone else? If I believe in creation, then I believe there is a Creator. If there's a Creator, then as His creation, I'm accountable to Him. I was made for Him, so I must do as He wishes. The only reason I would be scared that creationists would ruin the country is if I thought that the Creator wanted to destroy it. However, it's generally recognized that people who believe in a Creator also believe that Creator said things like, don't lie, don't steal, don't murder, etc. I'm not seeing how following that creator will lead any people to ruin.
If I'm an evolutionist, I am my own god. I answer to no one. Yes, in many instances, keeping the peace with those around me is good for me, but many times it isn't. What if someone angers me? Can't I kill them? Survival of the fittest, folks...who are you to tell me that's wrong? I'm not accountable to you...you're not special; you're a fellow cosmic accident like I am.
Maybe that example is too extreme. But what about people in the business world who scratch and claw to get to the top, cheating, lying and slandering their way there. They tick off a lot of people in the process. Or people that steal? "I know it's yours, but I needed it more than you did, so I have every right to take it." Survival of the fittest. So which worldview with its logical end would lead a country to ruin?
The article quotes him also as saying that, "The logic that convinces us that evolution is a fact is the same logic we use to say smoking is hazardous to your health or we have serious energy policy issues because of global warming." All those who sent your kids to Michigan to study science with this guy ought to seriously reconsider. Last I checked, there were two types of science: operational and origin science. Evolutionary science is an origin science, which typically relies on eyewitness accounts (which obviously isn't the case with evolution) and circumstantial evidence. Therefore, it is not the same logic used to say smoking is bad for you, because that's operational science, which uses observable, repeatable experiments to discover truth. Has anyone been able to reproduce macro-evolution in a lab experiment? Has anyone been able to take random chemicals and create a big bang using the scientific method? Of course not! Therefore, assumptions have to be applied to circumstantial evidence. This is obviously not the same logic!
Our Creator has told us these things would happen as...well, read Romans 1 for yourself.
In spite of my own team's inability to reach the national championship game, I just thought I'd mention how nice it was to watch the Buckeyes get run over by LSU tonight. Few things warm my heart more than watching OSU go home with their tail between their legs. If only that would happen after they play the Wolverines...
2008 has only just begun, but I'm already growing tired of the political banter leading up to an election that is still 11 months away. But I suppose it isn't the actual banter I'm tired of. I'm tired of the fact that so many people have uninformed opinions but spout off as if they have CIA-level intelligence of the issue. Here are just a few of those things:
- Embryonic Stem Cell Research - People like Michael J. Fox get in front of a camera and say that if you don't support embryonic stem cell research then you're against finding a cure. How can you be against finding a cure?! But so many have failed to notice that there are other types of stem cell research, like studying adult stem cells. This doesn't harm an embryo and has proven to cure diseases, while no one has ever been cured through the use of embryonic stem cells. Few have failed to notice, also, that the reason embryonic stem cell research is still being pushed hard isn't because it works, but it is largely because of - you guessed it - money!
- S-CHIP - This stands for State Children's Health Insurance Program and it was/is trumpeted as the only answer for those who can't speak out for themselves - children - who need health insurance. If you aren't for S-CHIP, you aren't for children! How can you be against children!?!? What many don't understand is that it's a program that's already been in place and was in need of being renewed. But under the program, many adults were getting free health care (approximately 10% of SCHIP health care recipients...I thought it was for children), children in a family whose income was less than $72,000/year were eligible for the program (are you telling me that someone who makes that much a year can't afford to have their own children, who are their responsibility, on their own health plan?), and that's not everything. No, were not against children...we're against a poor system in favor of a better one!
- Evolutionism/Creationism in school - If evolutionists are so sure that evolution is hard, scientific fact, then shouldn't they welcome dialog about the issue? What are they trying to hide?
Happy New Year, everyone! Sorry it's been so long since I've posted, but I find so much enjoyment reading other blogs, it's hard for me to stop long enough to post on my own!
I saw something today that caught me off guard, and I decided to scratch the surface to see if what it was that startled me had validity or not. In 2007, a Gallup Poll was conducted here in the United States. The results of that poll were released in an article (not written by the AP or Reuters, but by the Christian Post itself) entitled, "American Christianity Remains Strong in 2007." It was this headline that startled me a little, and wanting to dig deeper, I decided to read on, only to find some disturbing numbers coming from an article who's title is spun so positively.
A quick recap of the survey of religiosity in the United States -
51% Protestant
23% Roman Catholic
11% did not identify with a religion
5% "other Christian"
3% "another Christian faith" (apparently 2/3 of the 3% are Mormon)
2% did not answer
(The article fails to identify the remaining 5%)
First of all, let me start by pointing out that the poll does not define Christianity; it simply allows the polled public determine what they consider themselves. This provides for interesting numbers, as we're about to find out.
The number of Protestants in the country has dropped by 18% over the last 60 years, but that number seems to be the least of our concerns based on what else we find. The article states that 82% of Americans claim to identify themselves in some way with Christianity, but only 62% of that 82% consider themselves to be members of a Church! Not even two-thirds! Now, I'm sure a portion of them probably said that because they're between churches (they just moved, just went through a split, etc.) But at the least, it still means that about a third of Americans who claim to be followers of Christ lack a basic understanding of the necessity of the church.
Approximately 44% of Americans claim to go to church at least "almost every week." That's barely more than half of the people who claim any sort of Christianity at all. Now don't get me wrong...attending church isn't an end in and of it self. But how are we to be the church if we don't even spend much time with it? And if barely half of people only attend "almost every week," what does that say about the percentage of people who actually are the church every week?
56% of Americans claim religion is very important in their lives, the article says. What, then, are we to think of the 25% of Americans (at least) who claim some sort of Christianity, but don't claim that religion is very important?
I don't know about you, but this study tells me a couple things. First, there's a severe lack of understanding in our country about what Christianity truly is. Second, there's a severe lack of understanding in our country about what (or should I say, 'who') the church really is. And we're saying that American Christianity remains strong based on these statistics? It makes me want to hit my knees...
I saw something today that caught me off guard, and I decided to scratch the surface to see if what it was that startled me had validity or not. In 2007, a Gallup Poll was conducted here in the United States. The results of that poll were released in an article (not written by the AP or Reuters, but by the Christian Post itself) entitled, "American Christianity Remains Strong in 2007." It was this headline that startled me a little, and wanting to dig deeper, I decided to read on, only to find some disturbing numbers coming from an article who's title is spun so positively.
A quick recap of the survey of religiosity in the United States -
51% Protestant
23% Roman Catholic
11% did not identify with a religion
5% "other Christian"
3% "another Christian faith" (apparently 2/3 of the 3% are Mormon)
2% did not answer
(The article fails to identify the remaining 5%)
First of all, let me start by pointing out that the poll does not define Christianity; it simply allows the polled public determine what they consider themselves. This provides for interesting numbers, as we're about to find out.
The number of Protestants in the country has dropped by 18% over the last 60 years, but that number seems to be the least of our concerns based on what else we find. The article states that 82% of Americans claim to identify themselves in some way with Christianity, but only 62% of that 82% consider themselves to be members of a Church! Not even two-thirds! Now, I'm sure a portion of them probably said that because they're between churches (they just moved, just went through a split, etc.) But at the least, it still means that about a third of Americans who claim to be followers of Christ lack a basic understanding of the necessity of the church.
Approximately 44% of Americans claim to go to church at least "almost every week." That's barely more than half of the people who claim any sort of Christianity at all. Now don't get me wrong...attending church isn't an end in and of it self. But how are we to be the church if we don't even spend much time with it? And if barely half of people only attend "almost every week," what does that say about the percentage of people who actually are the church every week?
56% of Americans claim religion is very important in their lives, the article says. What, then, are we to think of the 25% of Americans (at least) who claim some sort of Christianity, but don't claim that religion is very important?
I don't know about you, but this study tells me a couple things. First, there's a severe lack of understanding in our country about what Christianity truly is. Second, there's a severe lack of understanding in our country about what (or should I say, 'who') the church really is. And we're saying that American Christianity remains strong based on these statistics? It makes me want to hit my knees...
