Excerpts from the Preface to “The Man from Mars: His Morals, Politics, and Religion, by William Simpson, 3rd ed., Beattle, San Francisco, 1900.
PUBLIC DOMAIN
The persecution of Michael Servetus by John Calvin, one of the leaders of the Reformation, was one of the most unjust and inhuman exercises of religious authority that the world has seen. There were many features in this tragedy of burning at the stake, that were out of the common. The victim was a man of unblemished character, of great learning, and a scientist, with a genius for investigation. He was a skilled practitioner of medicine out of which profession he derived his income. He had made some advances in medical science, coming so near to a discovery to the circulation of the blood, that it is quite likely, but for his untimely death, he would have reached it instead of Harvey, many years afterward. His active mind led him to devote much of his leisure to the study of theology, and, laboring among its problems, he strove to reconcile a number of orthodox beliefs and doctrines with the scientific knowledge of his time, not combating them or contriving at their destruction, but by changing the sense of the words, to make them apparently accord with known elements of truth. He was an ardent supporter of the Reformation, and a friend and admirer of Calvin, and he began and maintained for some time, a correspondence with him, with the view of obtaining his advice and support. The proposed modification in the sense of scriptural texts was not favorable received by Calvin, and the two were drawn into a controversy which finally became acrimonious. The world, at present, partially recovered from its long period of hypnotized reason, is able to appreciate the small value of the questions which engaged these two men, and which led one to strike the other down to death, and it is also able to judge how much Servetus was in advance of his adversary in their discussions.
Calvin maintained, that under instructions from God through the Bible, an infant, dying without baptism, could not escape the tortures of Hell, a locality described by the same authority, as a place of horrors, of endless burning amid sulphurous fires, of never ending thirst, and of a “weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth” through all time to come. Servetus expressed his doubts of the justice of this infliction upon sinless infants, and attempted to show that it was not authorized by the Sacred Book. He also denied the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, as it was commonly received. He did not deny a kind of Trinity in the unity of God, but believing that it was merely formal, and not personal, mere distinctions in the divine essence, and that, as generally understood, it was a dream, and an invention of the Fathers of the Church. He also asserted, upon good authority, that there was a Christian doctrine before there was any adoption of the Hebrew legends; that these legends did not become a part of the church, until nearly a century after the great moral teacher had met his cruel death. He also came as near as he dared, to expressing his belief, that the Son was merely a man, with the divine inspiration in a large degree. Such advanced ideas as these, asserted with the positiveness of conviction, and backed with answerable argument, were the cause of his undoing.
Calvin, at this time, was at the head of a church already powerful. He ruled it with autocratic will, and upon all questions of doctrinal beliefs, he was the last court of appeal. He had long accepted the homage of his followers, as one selected by the Almighty for their spiritual guidance, and, with the common weakness of humanity, he became arbitrary and despotic in his management of church affairs. He was always ready to advise and direct, and in his first letters to Servetus, assumed some show of argument while denying his doctrines. Servetus answered him, not with that deference that his adversary usually received, but in all the spirit of earnest debate. Nothing more exasperating to Calvin could have occurred, and to cap the climax of affront, his adversary, a mere layman, published a book of “Christianity Restored” setting forth his advanced views and with a reckless temerity, sent the reformer a copy.
The controversy between them immediately degenerated into mutual recrimination and abuse. Calvin’s anger was raised to a white heat, when he saw the errors and blasphemies, as he regarded them and which he had vainly sought to combat, confided to the printed page, and thrown broadcast upon the world. Besides the alleged heretical matter of the book, he found himself taken to task, declared the error, and in his most cherished doctrines controverted. But he discovered withal some matter in the book which pleased him. His enemy had committed himself in abusing the Papacy: evidence sufficient to convict him at once of blasphemy in the Roman Catholic city of Vienne in France where Servetus then resided, and he proceeded at once to put the cruel scheme of his death into execution. By information to the authorities at Vienne through dictated letters, he succeeded in having Servetus thrown into prison there, from whence he escaped, and became an outcast for months. The malignant and inhuman manner in which this Christian leader followed his innocent victim, could scarcely have occurred upon any other question, but a religious one, and his murderous intent, form the first, is shown by a letter from Calvin to a friend in which he says “Servetus wrote to me lately, and besides his letter sent me a great volume of his ravings, telling me, with audacious arrogance, that I should find there things stupendous and unheard of until now. He offers to come thither if I approve; but I will not pledge my faith to him; for, did he come, if I have any authority here, “I SHOULD NEVER SUFFER HIM TO GO AWAY ALIVE.” And he proved himself, in this instance, true to his word.
The Roman Catholic authorities of Vienne, discovering after a while the connivance of Calvin, in putting the execution of his enemy on them, contrived, it is said, to make his escape easy. They had no mind to have this work thrust upon them. They probably felt that the reformers should take care of their own heretics. Servetus, after his escape, wandered about from place to place, all the time his life in imminent danger, and finally brought up in Geneva, the home of Calvin, disguising himself, and hiding on the outskirts. What induced him to take such desperate chances is not positively known. His intention is supposed to have been to go to Naples, and to be gone from Geneva on the first favorable opportunity. Weary of confinement, and always piously inclined, he ventured imprudently to show himself, at the evening service of a neighboring church, and being there recognized, intimation of his presence was conveyed to Calvin, who, without loss of a moment, demanded his immediate arrest, making his arraignment himself, and industriously working until the end, as chief prosecutor and witness. The barbaric cruelty during imprisonment to this famous man, in an eminently Christian community, and by a Christian leader is shown by the following letter from his prison cell. “Most noble Lords, it is now three weeks since I petitioned for an audience, and I have to inform you that nothing has been done, and I am in a more filthy plight than ever. In addition, I suffer terribly from the colic, and from colic and my rupture, which causes me miseries. It is very cruel that I am not allowed to speak, nor not have my most pressing wants supplied; for the love of God sirs, in pity give orders on my behalf.” And here is another one: “My most honored Lords, I humbly entreat of you to put an end to these great delays, or to exonerate me of the criminal charge. You must see that Calvin is at his wits ends, and knows not what more to say, but for his pleasure, would have me rot here in prison. The live eat me up alive, my breeches are in rags, and I have no change, no doublet, and but a single shirt in tatters.”
Thirty-eight articles of impeachment were drawn up by Calvin, and after a protracted trial, wherein he acted as chief interrogator, this unhappy victim was sentenced to be burnt at the stake. Servetus, during his whole examination, showed himself to be a brave, conscientious, religious man. His answers to each one of the articles was able, consistent, and would have been considered in this day unanswerable, and what is more his views have since been adopted by the most advanced of Christian sects. The following is a description of his execution recorded at that time.
“When he came in sight of the fatal pile, the wretched Servetus prostrated himself on the ground and for a while was absorbed in prayer. Rising and advancing a few steps he found himself in the hands of the executioner, by whom he was made to sit on a block, his feet just reaching the ground. His body was then bound to the stake behind him by several turns of an iron chain, whilst his neck was secured in like manner by a coil of a hempen rope. His two books, - the one in manuscript sent to Calvin in confidence six or eight years before for his stricture, and a copy of the one lately printed at Vienned were fastened to his waist, and his head was encircled in mockery with a chaplet of straw and green twigs bestrewed with brimstone (sulfur). The deadly torch was then applied to the fagots and flashed in his face; and the brimstone catching, and the flames rising, wrung from the victim such a cry of anguish as struck terror in the surrounding crowd. After this his was bravely silent; but the wood being purposely green, although the people aided the executioner in heaping fagots upon him, a long half hour elapsed before he ceased to show signs of life and suffering. Immediately before giving up the ghost, with a last expiring effort he cried aloud, “Jesus, thou Son of the Eternal God, have compassion upon me!” All was then hushed, save hissing and crackling of the green wood, and by and by there remained no more of what had been Michael Servetus, but a charred and blackened trunk, and a handful of ashes.”
So died in advance of his age, this victim of religious fanaticism and personal hate, a fitting triumph of the theological over the scientific methods of thought, the result among many thousands like it of the adoption of the Jewish Legends by Christianity, and in this case, brought about by a Christian leader, the founder of a creed, in which to this day, enough of his spirit remains to make it the greatest enemy of free thought and liberal opinion, among all the creeds of Protestantism. Of this disgraceful tragedy was it the spirit of the Master which led the inhuman crowd to vie with each other in piling on the fagots, or was it the malign influence of a vindictive and cruel Hebrew God?
Every conflict between science and theology since the days of Copernicus has resulted in an unequivocal victory of the former. Both churches resisted the truth of the rotundity and movement of the earth as though their existence depended on it. They fought each question as it arose in the same spirit. The Mosaic account of the creation, the age of the world, the deluge, the length of man’s sojourn upon the earth, are questions as effectively settled adversely to the “truths of scripture” as the one for which Galileo suffered. (…)
…The intention of the new church (reformed church) was to do away with those rituals and ceremonies, which had been adopted from paganism a compromise in the second and third centuries, and to bring their church back as far as possible, to that simplicity which characterized the first teachings of Christianity. But the leaders of the Reformation never attempted nor had they any desire to bring back that entire freedom of thought and expression which existed in the early days. No one with immunity would be allowed to deny the doctrine of the Holy Trinity…as the Greek philosophers were wont to do. Such vital questions it was torture and death to adversely consider, Servetus being an early victim to such temerity. There were questions enough however within the limits of safe discussion, to set agoing those unending controversies which distinguished Protestantism to this day. The newly acquired privilege of discussing sacred affairs among laymen as well as others, were indulged in to such an extent that the debate between the sects, in defense of their several interpretations of scriptural texts, monopolized in society its hours of intercourse and conversation...Questions that had been settled centuries before by authority in the old church were dragged forth to renewed discussion.
In these beliefs the two churches (Catholic and Protestant) were in entire accord and must equally answer for the miseries and cruelties they have inflicted upon humanity in enforcing them. Theories and doctrines so persistently advanced and upheld by both churches, and which have proved so disastrous to humanity do not properly belong, and should have no place in Christianity. They are not only without the authority of the Master (Jesus Christ), but are mostly in opposition to his teaching and example. The most harmful of them owe their origin to the fables and myths introduced…
In these days of enlightenment and higher thought, the vestiges are everywhere of our fifteen centuries of misdirection. Almost every life bears the impress of these cruel traditions. If we have, for more than fifteen centuries, yielded ourselves to doctrines conveyed to us through all the highways of life, so assiduously, that neither infancy, youth, manhood, or old age, have escaped their tireless importunities for acceptance’ doctrines, which consign seven eighths of humanity to eternal torture for no faults to most of them but a lack of opportunity, which under (Calvin’s) Providence has been denied, it is not unreasonable to conclude, with this experience of the mutability of human understanding, that there are other beliefs fastened on our minds by ages of custom and mistaken thought, equally untenable, which may be as justly placed in our catalog of errors.
We shall never know how much the industrious promulgation of error is due to the selfish love of corporate, power. But for all that, we shall never arrive at the extremity of despair; for the cultivation of the mind, the deductive use of positive knowledge, and the untrammeled exercise of reason, lead to truth, as directly, as the line of gravity points to the center of the earth, and only by these will its reign be established in the world.
-- W.S.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Friday, February 13, 2009
The Expurgation of Reason: Manifesting the Doctrines of Calvin
Excerpts from the Preface to “The Man from Mars: His Morals, Politics, and Religion, by William Simpson, 3rd ed., Beattle, San Francisco, 1900.
PUBLIC DOMAIN
The persecution of Michael Servetus by John Calvin, one of the leaders of the Reformation, was one of the most unjust and inhuman exercises of religious authority that the world has seen. There were many features in this tragedy of burning at the stake, that were out of the common. The victim was a man of unblemished character, of great learning, and a scientist, with a genius for investigation. He was a skilled practitioner of medicine out of which profession he derived his income. He had made some advances in medical science, coming so near to a discovery to the circulation of the blood, that it is quite likely, but for his untimely death, he would have reached it instead of Harvey, many years afterward. His active mind led him to devote much of his leisure to the study of theology, and, laboring among its problems, he strove to reconcile a number of orthodox beliefs and doctrines with the scientific knowledge of his time, not combating them or contriving at their destruction, but by changing the sense of the words, to make them apparently accord with known elements of truth. He was an ardent supporter of the Reformation, and a friend and admirer of Calvin, and he began and maintained for some time, a correspondence with him, with the view of obtaining his advice and support. The proposed modification in the sense of scriptural texts was not favorable received by Calvin, and the two were drawn into a controversy which finally became acrimonious. The world, at present, partially recovered from its long period of hypnotized reason, is able to appreciate the small value of the questions which engaged these two men, and which led one to strike the other down to death, and it is also able to judge how much Servetus was in advance of his adversary in their discussions.
Calvin maintained, that under instructions from God through the Bible, an infant, dying without baptism, could not escape the tortures of Hell, a locality described by the same authority, as a place of horrors, of endless burning amid sulphurous fires, of never ending thirst, and of a “weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth” through all time to come. Servetus expressed his doubts of the justice of this infliction upon sinless infants, and attempted to show that it was not authorized by the Sacred Book. He also denied the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, as it was commonly received. He did not deny a kind of Trinity in the unity of God, but believing that it was merely formal, and not personal, mere distinctions in the divine essence, and that, as generally understood, it was a dream, and an invention of the Fathers of the Church. He also asserted, upon good authority, that there was a Christian doctrine before there was any adoption of the Hebrew legends; that these legends did not become a part of the church, until nearly a century after the great moral teacher had met his cruel death. He also came as near as he dared, to expressing his belief, that the Son was merely a man, with the divine inspiration in a large degree. Such advanced ideas as these, asserted with the positiveness of conviction, and backed with answerable argument, were the cause of his undoing.
Calvin, at this time, was at the head of a church already powerful. He ruled it with autocratic will, and upon all questions of doctrinal beliefs, he was the last court of appeal. He had long accepted the homage of his followers, as one selected by the Almighty for their spiritual guidance, and, with the common weakness of humanity, he became arbitrary and despotic in his management of church affairs. He was always ready to advise and direct, and in his first letters to Servetus, assumed some show of argument while denying his doctrines. Servetus answered him, not with that deference that his adversary usually received, but in all the spirit of earnest debate. Nothing more exasperating to Calvin could have occurred, and to cap the climax of affront, his adversary, a mere layman, published a book of “Christianity Restored” setting forth his advanced views and with a reckless temerity, sent the reformer a copy.
The controversy between them immediately degenerated into mutual recrimination and abuse. Calvin’s anger was raised to a white heat, when he saw the errors and blasphemies, as he regarded them and which he had vainly sought to combat, confided to the printed page, and thrown broadcast upon the world. Besides the alleged heretical matter of the book, he found himself taken to task, declared the error, and in his most cherished doctrines controverted. But he discovered withal some matter in the book which pleased him. His enemy had committed himself in abusing the Papacy: evidence sufficient to convict him at once of blasphemy in the Roman Catholic city of Vienne in France where Servetus then resided, and he proceeded at once to put the cruel scheme of his death into execution. By information to the authorities at Vienne through dictated letters, he succeeded in having Servetus thrown into prison there, from whence he escaped, and became an outcast for months. The malignant and inhuman manner in which this Christian leader followed his innocent victim, could scarcely have occurred upon any other question, but a religious one, and his murderous intent, form the first, is shown by a letter from Calvin to a friend in which he says “Servetus wrote to me lately, and besides his letter sent me a great volume of his ravings, telling me, with audacious arrogance, that I should find there things stupendous and unheard of until now. He offers to come thither if I approve; but I will not pledge my faith to him; for, did he come, if I have any authority here, “I SHOULD NEVER SUFFER HIM TO GO AWAY ALIVE.” And he proved himself, in this instance, true to his word.
The Roman Catholic authorities of Vienne, discovering after a while the connivance of Calvin, in putting the execution of his enemy on them, contrived, it is said, to make his escape easy. They had no mind to have this work thrust upon them. They probably felt that the reformers should take care of their own heretics. Servetus, after his escape, wandered about from place to place, all the time his life in imminent danger, and finally brought up in Geneva, the home of Calvin, disguising himself, and hiding on the outskirts. What induced him to take such desperate chances is not positively known. His intention is supposed to have been to go to Naples, and to be gone from Geneva on the first favorable opportunity. Weary of confinement, and always piously inclined, he ventured imprudently to show himself, at the evening service of a neighboring church, and being there recognized, intimation of his presence was conveyed to Calvin, who, without loss of a moment, demanded his immediate arrest, making his arraignment himself, and industriously working until the end, as chief prosecutor and witness. The barbaric cruelty during imprisonment to this famous man, in an eminently Christian community, and by a Christian leader is shown by the following letter from his prison cell. “Most noble Lords, it is now three weeks since I petitioned for an audience, and I have to inform you that nothing has been done, and I am in a more filthy plight than ever. In addition, I suffer terribly from the colic, and from colic and my rupture, which causes me miseries. It is very cruel that I am not allowed to speak, nor not have my most pressing wants supplied; for the love of God sirs, in pity give orders on my behalf.” And here is another one: “My most honored Lords, I humbly entreat of you to put an end to these great delays, or to exonerate me of the criminal charge. You must see that Calvin is at his wits ends, and knows not what more to say, but for his pleasure, would have me rot here in prison. The live eat me up alive, my breeches are in rags, and I have no change, no doublet, and but a single shirt in tatters.”
Thirty-eight articles of impeachment were drawn up by Calvin, and after a protracted trial, wherein he acted as chief interrogator, this unhappy victim was sentenced to be burnt at the stake. Servetus, during his whole examination, showed himself to be a brave, conscientious, religious man. His answers to each one of the articles was able, consistent, and would have been considered in this day unanswerable, and what is more his views have since been adopted by the most advanced of Christian sects. The following is a description of his execution recorded at that time.
“When he came in sight of the fatal pile, the wretched Servetus prostrated himself on the ground and for a while was absorbed in prayer. Rising and advancing a few steps he found himself in the hands of the executioner, by whom he was made to sit on a block, his feet just reaching the ground. His body was then bound to the stake behind him by several turns of an iron chain, whilst his neck was secured in like manner by a coil of a hempen rope. His two books, - the one in manuscript sent to Calvin in confidence six or eight years before for his stricture, and a copy of the one lately printed at Vienned were fastened to his waist, and his head was encircled in mockery with a chaplet of straw and green twigs bestrewed with brimstone (sulfur). The deadly torch was then applied to the fagots and flashed in his face; and the brimstone catching, and the flames rising, wrung from the victim such a cry of anguish as struck terror in the surrounding crowd. After this his was bravely silent; but the wood being purposely green, although the people aided the executioner in heaping fagots upon him, a long half hour elapsed before he ceased to show signs of life and suffering. Immediately before giving up the ghost, with a last expiring effort he cried aloud, “Jesus, thou Son of the Eternal God, have compassion upon me!” All was then hushed, save hissing and crackling of the green wood, and by and by there remained no more of what had been Michael Servetus, but a charred and blackened trunk, and a handful of ashes.”
So died in advance of his age, this victim of religious fanaticism and personal hate, a fitting triumph of the theological over the scientific methods of thought, the result among many thousands like it of the adoption of the Jewish Legends by Christianity, and in this case, brought about by a Christian leader, the founder of a creed, in which to this day, enough of his spirit remains to make it the greatest enemy of free thought and liberal opinion, among all the creeds of Protestantism. Of this disgraceful tragedy was it the spirit of the Master which led the inhuman crowd to vie with each other in piling on the fagots, or was it the malign influence of a vindictive and cruel Hebrew God?
Every conflict between science and theology since the days of Copernicus has resulted in an unequivocal victory of the former. Both churches resisted the truth of the rotundity and movement of the earth as though their existence depended on it. They fought each question as it arose in the same spirit. The Mosaic account of the creation, the age of the world, the deluge, the length of man’s sojourn upon the earth, are questions as effectively settled adversely to the “truths of scripture” as the one for which Galileo suffered. (…)
…The intention of the new church (reformed church) was to do away with those rituals and ceremonies, which had been adopted from paganism a compromise in the second and third centuries, and to bring their church back as far as possible, to that simplicity which characterized the first teachings of Christianity. But the leaders of the Reformation never attempted nor had they any desire to bring back that entire freedom of thought and expression which existed in the early days. No one with immunity would be allowed to deny the doctrine of the Holy Trinity…as the Greek philosophers were wont to do. Such vital questions it was torture and death to adversely consider, Servetus being an early victim to such temerity. There were questions enough however within the limits of safe discussion, to set agoing those unending controversies which distinguished Protestantism to this day. The newly acquired privilege of discussing sacred affairs among laymen as well as others, were indulged in to such an extent that the debate between the sects, in defense of their several interpretations of scriptural texts, monopolized in society its hours of intercourse and conversation...Questions that had been settled centuries before by authority in the old church were dragged forth to renewed discussion.
In these beliefs the two churches (Catholic and Protestant) were in entire accord and must equally answer for the miseries and cruelties they have inflicted upon humanity in enforcing them. Theories and doctrines so persistently advanced and upheld by both churches, and which have proved so disastrous to humanity do not properly belong, and should have no place in Christianity. They are not only without the authority of the Master (Jesus Christ), but are mostly in opposition to his teaching and example. The most harmful of them owe their origin to the fables and myths introduced…
In these days of enlightenment and higher thought, the vestiges are everywhere of our fifteen centuries of misdirection. Almost every life bears the impress of these cruel traditions. If we have, for more than fifteen centuries, yielded ourselves to doctrines conveyed to us through all the highways of life, so assiduously, that neither infancy, youth, manhood, or old age, have escaped their tireless importunities for acceptance’ doctrines, which consign seven eighths of humanity to eternal torture for no faults to most of them but a lack of opportunity, which under (Calvin’s) Providence has been denied, it is not unreasonable to conclude, with this experience of the mutability of human understanding, that there are other beliefs fastened on our minds by ages of custom and mistaken thought, equally untenable, which may be as justly placed in our catalog of errors.
We shall never know how much the industrious promulgation of error is due to the selfish love of corporate, power. But for all that, we shall never arrive at the extremity of despair; for the cultivation of the mind, the deductive use of positive knowledge, and the untrammeled exercise of reason, lead to truth, as directly, as the line of gravity points to the center of the earth, and only by these will its reign be established in the world.
-- W.S.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Will the Closing of Gitmo Launch the Mark?
The major question on everyone's mind lately, is "When President Obama closes Guantanamo Bay, what will happen to the terrorists?" I believe that the answer will unfold in this next year and a half.
If you have been following RFID, Verichip, GPS, and other implantable chip technology, it is not suprising that the technology exists to implant chips in people which track their whereabouts.
I submit that the world will be calmed when they learn that all of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners will be microchipped with GPS trackable chips contain a number code that will serve as their identification. They will not be able to make a move without alerting global authorities. Also, they will not be able to move money.
In a global cashless fiscal system with implantable microchips, every transaction will be able to be tracked by the the number identifying the parties to the transaction, this number is embedded into the microchip and is scanned or used like a Social Security Number.
The gateways to the public acceptance of this process are these issues:
Freedom from Terrorism,
Access to medical records,
Identification, tracking,
Tracking of Criminals/Felons
Fraud prevention,
Identity theft prevention,
Tax fraud prevention
Controlling Illegal Immigration,
These things fit in very nicely with President Obama's declaration that we do not have to sacrifice our freedoms for our ideals.
Here are some likely scenarios:
CASH WILL NO LONGER BE VALUED AS A MEANS OF PURCHASE:
Why would people no longer desire to use cash?
Perhaps when the cash no longer has its value. When there is so much of it in the market that is not circulating that it drives inflation up so high that it becomes worthless like many African countries. When we no longer value our cash, and it is not backed by specie, we will demand revaluation of our currency. This will be demanded globally when triggered by a worldwide recession. By leveling global currencies electronically and insuring commerce and financial transactions through positive measures of identification, the chip will be introduced to the global scene as the "Solution" to most of the world's economic and social woes. Already more and more people are using cards instead of cash. When the government has large interested in private banks, and the banks cannot repay the loans, guess who owns the banks? The Government. When the government owns the banks, they own your entire personal banking history which includes your income, payments, debts, credit and more. The thin wall of separation between the public and private sector will be eroded to the point where it no longer exists.
UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE WILL BE THE STANDARD:
When the government introduces universal health care, the government will also demand that those records will be accessible nationwide. Universal Applications need systems and controls in place for them to be effective. The chip is that control. It positively identifies the patient whether or not they are conscious, links to their medical records, can be implanted/read by any medical staff with a scanner (just like your vet can do now!) This system is already FDA approved and it exists. The makers of this chip are already partnered with Microsoft to help deliver the network to patient consumers. Global applications of this technology will mean that governments will effectively be able to see outbreaks of infectious diseases as they are reported medically. By geo-tracking patients, they can contain viral diseases and pinpoint their origins, whether natural or contrived. Companies producing the chip are peddling fear with common diseases that require tracking like alzheimers, epilepsy heart disease, diabetes and more.
THE DEFEAT OF TERRORISM WILL COME THROUGH SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY:
By introducing the chip, it will allay fears of wondering who is hiding in the shadows to commit a heinous act of terrorism. It will positively identify who is entering or leaving a country. The identification capabilities can also be linked by virtue of the Patriot Act, inter-departmentally. This means any institution that the government has oversight into: Universities, Post Offices, Banks that are Federally Insured, Driver Licensing. It will also help civil and military authorities locate, identify, and track domestic and international criminal populations. Any time anyone buys or sells, travels, enrolls in a civil program, gets arrested, walks into an airport or courthouse, that ID will pop up on the network. In this way, criminals cannot escape being found. Military troops can be tracked using this technology.
FRAUD AND MANY OTHER CRIMES WILL BE VIRTUALLY ELIMINATED:
With the chip, no one will ever be able to steal your wallet and your ID, hack your computer for your credit card information. No one can kidnap your children and not be caught. Missing persons will never be missing. Drug dealers will no longer be able to move across borders with ease. Felons cannot disappear into the shadows when they can be tracked. If they even try to buy a stick of gum, they will need their chip. So how will the government handle catching and incarcerating all of these repeat offenders? In the secret FEMA prisons. The reason FEMA could not react to Hurricane Katrina is because it was spending so much money being diverted to create secret prisons. The closing of Guantanamo Bay is no problem because these prisons have already been built with Federal Dollars.
It is being peddled as the answer to crime, and also as a security measure to control access to secure government facilities.
What are the problems now facing our once-great nation?
Drugs and Gangs?
The chip can track them physically and financially
Medical Access?
Universal Healthcare and easy access to medical records via the chip
Immigration?
Anyone who is not chipped will not be able to get an income or buy food or escape taxation.
Kidnapping?
When children or travelers are chipped, they can be located via GPS
Terrorists?
They can be found, tracked, or monitored. Visas can be monitored and passports will be unneccessary.
Theft?
Who can steal cash or credit cards from you when you never have to carry them
Identity Theft/Fraud?
When all forms of identification are reconciled to the chip, no identity can be stolen.
Tax Evasion?
Making sure that everyone pays their fair share will be obligatory as the chip will be the gateway to your employee ID, your TAX ID, your Social Security, your Medicare, your Unemployment insurance.
So why if this all sounds like such an enormous resolution to world issues, does the Bible warn against it and proclaim it as part of the system of Antichrist?
First one must understand that Antichrist is not going to be some overtly diabolical mad person like one would see in "The Omen" or "The Exorcist". Instead, he will be a man of the world, highly intelligent, an inspiring leader with a global appeal. He will be seen as a visionary, and as a result of his work, the world will cry "Peace, Peace".
Antichrist simply means, opposed to, against, or countering Christ. Christ is controlled by God to offer salvation to people from heaven. The Antichrist will be controlled by Satan to offer salvation to people from within the world system.
There are many Antichrists, and there always has been a spirit of Antichrist.
Anyone who denies Christ, is in fact "anti" Christ. Because Hollywood has so portrayed evil as embodied by some Demon or creature from Evil Dead 2, the world has been deluded from understanding what evil really is. The AntiChrist will not be shockingly morbid or diabolical in appearance like Marilyn Manson. Rather he will be attractive and well-liked. Revered. Worshipped.
Evil is simply the opposite of Good. In essence Evil is Lie, Good is Truth. All evil has a root in some form of deception, distortion, omission, or perversion of Truth. Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no man comes to the Father but by me." But of Satan, Jesus warned that he was the "Father of Lies".
So, a man being filled by Satan, or posessed, may truly be utterly wicked. But one forgets that Satan, a fallen archangel, posesses supreme intelligence and cunning. Of course he does use fear, violence, and malevolence to control people and shock them, but no one would truly accept a world leader so universally if this was his demeanor. He already tried it in Hitler. But... even Hitler used Charisma and oratory strength to delude the masses. Privately he was deeply involved in the occult.
No, the universal leader of our time will use the chip system and harness it as a global solution. He will broker true peace between Palestine and the Jews, how? Because Satan, being the spirit provoking the sides to violence, will send his ambassador (antichrist) to sort it out. He being the architect of the violence, will influence the concessions that will allow for the peace itself. The Bible even speaks of him confirming this Covenant, a 7 year treaty of peace which he himself will break after 3.5 years.
Some teach that the rapture of the church will help make this possible because the main wedge keeping the antichrist system from rising will be taken from the earth. However, even without that event happening before the advent of this system, many will compromise their beliefs when forced with the fact that they will not be able to make financial transactions without chip identification. They will choose financial security and "staying on the grid" rather than suffer being shut out of the entire domestic and global system. Some people will refuse to take the chip, but they will be forced out of mainstream civilization into pockets of resistance. With antichrist and that system having free reign, he will declare world peace and be hailed as the Messiah.
During this process, the Jewish Temple will be rebuilt. As I write this, everything is already in place for that to begin. The Sanhedrin, the artifacts, the red heifer, etc. The global man will declare himself to be messiah in that temple and will be accepted as such. Muslims will hail him as the Mahdi, some Jews as Messiah, some as the returned Christ, agnostics and atheists will revere him for his accomplishments.
So how close is this? in 2006 Tommy Thompson who was the former Secretary of Health and Human Services under GWB, joined (and now has left) the board of Verichip, the company owned by 'Digital Angel' (interesting name eh?) that produces the implantable chip, placed in the right arm that when scanned, produces a 16 digit number.
The gentleman Scott Silverman in this video, just took over Verichip as the controlling interest. The newscaster comments: "I already have them in my dogs, why wouldn't I have them in my children too?"
Revelation 13
16And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
If you have been following RFID, Verichip, GPS, and other implantable chip technology, it is not suprising that the technology exists to implant chips in people which track their whereabouts.
I submit that the world will be calmed when they learn that all of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners will be microchipped with GPS trackable chips contain a number code that will serve as their identification. They will not be able to make a move without alerting global authorities. Also, they will not be able to move money.
In a global cashless fiscal system with implantable microchips, every transaction will be able to be tracked by the the number identifying the parties to the transaction, this number is embedded into the microchip and is scanned or used like a Social Security Number.
The gateways to the public acceptance of this process are these issues:
Freedom from Terrorism,
Access to medical records,
Identification, tracking,
Tracking of Criminals/Felons
Fraud prevention,
Identity theft prevention,
Tax fraud prevention
Controlling Illegal Immigration,
These things fit in very nicely with President Obama's declaration that we do not have to sacrifice our freedoms for our ideals.
Here are some likely scenarios:
CASH WILL NO LONGER BE VALUED AS A MEANS OF PURCHASE:
Why would people no longer desire to use cash?
Perhaps when the cash no longer has its value. When there is so much of it in the market that is not circulating that it drives inflation up so high that it becomes worthless like many African countries. When we no longer value our cash, and it is not backed by specie, we will demand revaluation of our currency. This will be demanded globally when triggered by a worldwide recession. By leveling global currencies electronically and insuring commerce and financial transactions through positive measures of identification, the chip will be introduced to the global scene as the "Solution" to most of the world's economic and social woes. Already more and more people are using cards instead of cash. When the government has large interested in private banks, and the banks cannot repay the loans, guess who owns the banks? The Government. When the government owns the banks, they own your entire personal banking history which includes your income, payments, debts, credit and more. The thin wall of separation between the public and private sector will be eroded to the point where it no longer exists.
UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE WILL BE THE STANDARD:
When the government introduces universal health care, the government will also demand that those records will be accessible nationwide. Universal Applications need systems and controls in place for them to be effective. The chip is that control. It positively identifies the patient whether or not they are conscious, links to their medical records, can be implanted/read by any medical staff with a scanner (just like your vet can do now!) This system is already FDA approved and it exists. The makers of this chip are already partnered with Microsoft to help deliver the network to patient consumers. Global applications of this technology will mean that governments will effectively be able to see outbreaks of infectious diseases as they are reported medically. By geo-tracking patients, they can contain viral diseases and pinpoint their origins, whether natural or contrived. Companies producing the chip are peddling fear with common diseases that require tracking like alzheimers, epilepsy heart disease, diabetes and more.
THE DEFEAT OF TERRORISM WILL COME THROUGH SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY:
By introducing the chip, it will allay fears of wondering who is hiding in the shadows to commit a heinous act of terrorism. It will positively identify who is entering or leaving a country. The identification capabilities can also be linked by virtue of the Patriot Act, inter-departmentally. This means any institution that the government has oversight into: Universities, Post Offices, Banks that are Federally Insured, Driver Licensing. It will also help civil and military authorities locate, identify, and track domestic and international criminal populations. Any time anyone buys or sells, travels, enrolls in a civil program, gets arrested, walks into an airport or courthouse, that ID will pop up on the network. In this way, criminals cannot escape being found. Military troops can be tracked using this technology.
FRAUD AND MANY OTHER CRIMES WILL BE VIRTUALLY ELIMINATED:
With the chip, no one will ever be able to steal your wallet and your ID, hack your computer for your credit card information. No one can kidnap your children and not be caught. Missing persons will never be missing. Drug dealers will no longer be able to move across borders with ease. Felons cannot disappear into the shadows when they can be tracked. If they even try to buy a stick of gum, they will need their chip. So how will the government handle catching and incarcerating all of these repeat offenders? In the secret FEMA prisons. The reason FEMA could not react to Hurricane Katrina is because it was spending so much money being diverted to create secret prisons. The closing of Guantanamo Bay is no problem because these prisons have already been built with Federal Dollars.
It is being peddled as the answer to crime, and also as a security measure to control access to secure government facilities.
What are the problems now facing our once-great nation?
Drugs and Gangs?
The chip can track them physically and financially
Medical Access?
Universal Healthcare and easy access to medical records via the chip
Immigration?
Anyone who is not chipped will not be able to get an income or buy food or escape taxation.
Kidnapping?
When children or travelers are chipped, they can be located via GPS
Terrorists?
They can be found, tracked, or monitored. Visas can be monitored and passports will be unneccessary.
Theft?
Who can steal cash or credit cards from you when you never have to carry them
Identity Theft/Fraud?
When all forms of identification are reconciled to the chip, no identity can be stolen.
Tax Evasion?
Making sure that everyone pays their fair share will be obligatory as the chip will be the gateway to your employee ID, your TAX ID, your Social Security, your Medicare, your Unemployment insurance.
So why if this all sounds like such an enormous resolution to world issues, does the Bible warn against it and proclaim it as part of the system of Antichrist?
First one must understand that Antichrist is not going to be some overtly diabolical mad person like one would see in "The Omen" or "The Exorcist". Instead, he will be a man of the world, highly intelligent, an inspiring leader with a global appeal. He will be seen as a visionary, and as a result of his work, the world will cry "Peace, Peace".
Antichrist simply means, opposed to, against, or countering Christ. Christ is controlled by God to offer salvation to people from heaven. The Antichrist will be controlled by Satan to offer salvation to people from within the world system.
There are many Antichrists, and there always has been a spirit of Antichrist.
Anyone who denies Christ, is in fact "anti" Christ. Because Hollywood has so portrayed evil as embodied by some Demon or creature from Evil Dead 2, the world has been deluded from understanding what evil really is. The AntiChrist will not be shockingly morbid or diabolical in appearance like Marilyn Manson. Rather he will be attractive and well-liked. Revered. Worshipped.
Evil is simply the opposite of Good. In essence Evil is Lie, Good is Truth. All evil has a root in some form of deception, distortion, omission, or perversion of Truth. Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no man comes to the Father but by me." But of Satan, Jesus warned that he was the "Father of Lies".
So, a man being filled by Satan, or posessed, may truly be utterly wicked. But one forgets that Satan, a fallen archangel, posesses supreme intelligence and cunning. Of course he does use fear, violence, and malevolence to control people and shock them, but no one would truly accept a world leader so universally if this was his demeanor. He already tried it in Hitler. But... even Hitler used Charisma and oratory strength to delude the masses. Privately he was deeply involved in the occult.
No, the universal leader of our time will use the chip system and harness it as a global solution. He will broker true peace between Palestine and the Jews, how? Because Satan, being the spirit provoking the sides to violence, will send his ambassador (antichrist) to sort it out. He being the architect of the violence, will influence the concessions that will allow for the peace itself. The Bible even speaks of him confirming this Covenant, a 7 year treaty of peace which he himself will break after 3.5 years.
Some teach that the rapture of the church will help make this possible because the main wedge keeping the antichrist system from rising will be taken from the earth. However, even without that event happening before the advent of this system, many will compromise their beliefs when forced with the fact that they will not be able to make financial transactions without chip identification. They will choose financial security and "staying on the grid" rather than suffer being shut out of the entire domestic and global system. Some people will refuse to take the chip, but they will be forced out of mainstream civilization into pockets of resistance. With antichrist and that system having free reign, he will declare world peace and be hailed as the Messiah.
During this process, the Jewish Temple will be rebuilt. As I write this, everything is already in place for that to begin. The Sanhedrin, the artifacts, the red heifer, etc. The global man will declare himself to be messiah in that temple and will be accepted as such. Muslims will hail him as the Mahdi, some Jews as Messiah, some as the returned Christ, agnostics and atheists will revere him for his accomplishments.
So how close is this? in 2006 Tommy Thompson who was the former Secretary of Health and Human Services under GWB, joined (and now has left) the board of Verichip, the company owned by 'Digital Angel' (interesting name eh?) that produces the implantable chip, placed in the right arm that when scanned, produces a 16 digit number.
The gentleman Scott Silverman in this video, just took over Verichip as the controlling interest. The newscaster comments: "I already have them in my dogs, why wouldn't I have them in my children too?"
Revelation 13
16And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Nicene Creed and the Trinity - Another Look
A nice exposition on the roots of modern trinitarianism.
http://www.sullivan-county.com/deism/trinity.htm
http://www.sullivan-county.com/deism/trinity.htm
Thomas Jefferson Weighs in on the Trinity in favor of Unity
The following are excerpts from Thomas Jefferson's Deistic refutations of the Trinity. taken from http://www.sullivan-county.com/deism/jeff_letters.htm
Letters from Thomas Jefferson are as follows:
----- To John Adams, 1813
It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one . . . But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests. Sweep away their gossamer fabrics of factitious religion, and they would catch no more flies. We should all then, like the Quakers, live without an order of priests, moralize for ourselves, follow the oracle of conscience, and say nothing about what no man can understand, nor therefore believe.
----- To Dr. Waterhouse, 1815
The priests have so disfigured the simple religion of Jesus that no one who reads the sophistications they have engrafted on it, from the jargon of Plato, of Aristotle and other mystics, would conceive these could have been fathered on the sublime preacher of the Sermon on the Mount. Yet, knowing the importance of names, they have assumed that of Christians, while they are mere Platonists, or anything rather than disciples of Jesus.
----- To Carey, 1816: N. Y. Pub Lib., MS, IV, 409
On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind. Were I to enter on that arena, I should only add an unit to the number of Bedlamites.
----- To Van der Kemp, 1816
Altho' I rarely waste time in reading on theological subjects, as mangled by our Pseudo-Christians, yet I can readily suppose Basanistos may be amusing. Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. If it could be understood it would not answer their purpose. Their security is in their faculty of shedding darkness, like the scuttlefish, thro' the element in which they move, and making it impenetrable to the eye of a pursuing enemy, and there they will skulk.
----- To C. Thompson, 1816
I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call me infidel and themselves Christians and preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw. They have compounded from the heathen mysteries a system beyond the comprehension of man, of which the great reformer of the vicious ethics of deism of the Jews, were he to return on earth, would not recognize one feature.
----- To E. Styles, 1819
I am not [a Calvinist]. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know. I am not a Jew, and therefore do not adopt their theology, which supposes the God of infinite justice to punish the sins of the fathers upon their children, unto the third and fourth generation; and the benevolent and sublime reformer of that religion has told us only that God is good and perfect, but has not defined him. I am, therefore, of his theology, believing that we have neither words nor ideas adequate to that definition. And if we could all, after this example, leave the subject as undefinable, we should all be of one sect, doers of good, and eschewers of evil. No doctrines of his lead to schism. It is the speculations of crazy theologists which have made a Babel of a religion the most moral and sublime ever preached to man, and calculated to heal, and not to create differences. These religious animosities I impute to those who call themselves his ministers, and who engraft their casuistries on the stock of his simple precepts. I am sometimes more angry with them than is authorized by the blessed charities which he preaches.
----- To Van der Kemp, 1820
The genuine and simple religion of Jesus will one day be restored: such as it was preached and practised by himself. Very soon after his death it became muffled up in mysteries, and has been ever since kept in concealment from the vulgar eye. To penetrate and dissipate these clouds of darkness, the general mind must be strengthened by education.
----- To Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse, June 26, 1822
Dear Sir,- I have received and read with thankfulness and pleasure your denunciation of the abuses of tobacco and wine. Yet, however sound in its principles, I expect it will be but a sermon to the wind. You will find it as difficult to inculcate these sanative precepts on the sensualities of the present day, as to convince an Athanasian that there is but one God. I wish success to both attempts, and am happy to learn from you that the latter, at least, is making progress, and the more rapidly in proportion as our Platonizing Christians make more stir and noise about it. The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.
1. That there is one only God, and he all perfect.
2. That there is a future state of rewards and punishments.
3. That to love God with all thy heart and thy neighbor as thyself, is the sum of religion.
These are the great points on which he endeavored to reform the religion of the Jews. But compare with these the demoralizing dogmas of Calvin.
1. That there are three Gods.
2. That good works, or the love of our neighbor, are nothing.
3 That faith is every thing, and the more incomprehensible the proposition, the more merit in its faith.
4. That reason in religion is of unlawful use.
5. That God, from the beginning, elected certain individuals to be saved, and certain others to be damned; and that no crimes of the former can damn them; no virtues of the latter save.
Now, which of these is the true and charitable Christian? He who believes and acts on the simple doctrines of Jesus? Or the impious dogmatists, as Athanasius and Calvin? Verily I say these are the false shepherds foretold as to enter not by the door into the sheepfold, but to climb up some other way. They are mere usurpers of the Christian name, teaching a counter-religion made up of the deliria of crazy imaginations, as foreign from Christianity as is that of Mahomet. Their blasphemies have driven thinking men into infidelity, who have too hastily rejected the supposed author himself, with the horrors so falsely imputed to him. Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would now have been Christian. I rejoice that in this blessed country of free inquiry and belief, which has surrendered its creed and conscience to neither kings nor priests, the genuine doctrine of one only God is reviving, and I trust that there is not a young man now living in the United States who will not die an Unitarian.
But much I fear, that when this great truth shall be re-established, its votaries will fall into the fatal error of fabricating formulas of creed and confessions of faith, the engines which so soon destroyed the religion of Jesus, and made of Christendom a mere Aceldama; that they will give up morals for mysteries, and Jesus for Plato. How much wiser are the Quakers, who, agreeing in the fundamental doctrines of the gospel, schismatize about no mysteries, and, keeping within the pale of common sense, suffer no speculative differences of opinion, any more than of feature, to impair the love of their brethren. Be this the wisdom of Unitarians, this the holy mantle which shall cover within its charitable circumference all who believe in one God, and who love their neighbor! I conclude my sermon with sincere assurances of my friendly esteem and respect.
----- An additional letter to theologian James Smith -- December 8, 1822 -- further elaborates Jefferson's views on the subject.
"Sir, -- I have to thank you for your pamphlets on the subject of Unitarianism, and to express my gratification with your efforts for the revival of primitive Christianity in your quarter.
No historical fact is better established, than that the doctrine of one God, pure and uncompounded, was that of the early ages of Christianity; and was among the efficacious doctrines which gave it triumph over the polytheism of the ancients, sickened with the absurdities of their own theology. Nor was the unity of the Supreme Being ousted from the Christian creed by the force of reason, but by the sword of civil government, wielded at the will of the fanatic Athanasius. The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs. And a strong proof of the solidity of the primitive faith, is its restoration, as soon as a nation arises which vindicates to itself the freedom of religious opinion, and its external divorce from the civil authority. The pure and simple unity of the Creator of the universe, is now all but ascendant in the Eastern States; it is dawning in the West, and advancing towards the South; and I confidently expect that the present generation will see Unitarianism become the general religion of the United States. The Eastern presses are giving us many excellent pieces on the subject, and Priestley's learned writings on it are, or should be, in every hand. In fact, the Athanasian paradox that one is three, and three but one, is so incomprehensible to the human mind, that no candid man can say he has any idea of it, and how can he believe what presents no idea? He who thinks he does, only deceives himself. He proves, also, that man, once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without a rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons gullibility which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck."
"I write with freedom, because while I claim a right to believe in one God, if so my reason tells me, I yield as freely to others that of believing in three. Both religions, I find, make honest men, and that is the only point society has any right to look to. Although this mutual freedom should produce mutual indulgence, yet I wish not to be brought in question before the public on this or any other subject, and I pray you to consider me as writing under that trust. I take no part in controversies, religious or political. At the age of eighty, tranquility is the greatest good of life, and the strongest of our desires that of dying in the good will of all mankind. And with the assurance of all my good will to Unitarian and Trinitarian, to Whig and Tory, accept for yourself that of my entire respect."
----- To W. Short, 1820
The Presbyterian clergy are loudest; the most intolerant of all sects, the most tyrannical and ambitious; ready at the word of the lawgiver, if such a word could be now obtained, to put the torch to the pile, and to rekindle in this virgin hemisphere, the flames in which their oracle Calvin consumed the poor Servetus, because he could not find in his Euclid the proposition which has demonstrated that three are one and one is three, nor subscribe to that of Calvin, that magistrates have a right to exterminate all heretics to Calvinistic Creed. They pant to re-establish, by law that holy inquisition, which they can now only infuse into public opinion. We have most unwisely committed to the hierophants of our particular superstition, the direction of public opinion, that lord of the universe. We have given them stated and privileged days to collect and catechise us, opportunities of delivering their oracles to the people in mass, and of molding their minds as wax in the hollow of their hands. But in despite of their fuminations against endeavors to enlighten the general mind, to improve the reason of the people, and to encourage them in the use of it, the liberality of this State will support this institution [University of Virginia], and give fair play to the cultivation of reason.
Letters from Thomas Jefferson are as follows:
----- To John Adams, 1813
It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one . . . But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests. Sweep away their gossamer fabrics of factitious religion, and they would catch no more flies. We should all then, like the Quakers, live without an order of priests, moralize for ourselves, follow the oracle of conscience, and say nothing about what no man can understand, nor therefore believe.
----- To Dr. Waterhouse, 1815
The priests have so disfigured the simple religion of Jesus that no one who reads the sophistications they have engrafted on it, from the jargon of Plato, of Aristotle and other mystics, would conceive these could have been fathered on the sublime preacher of the Sermon on the Mount. Yet, knowing the importance of names, they have assumed that of Christians, while they are mere Platonists, or anything rather than disciples of Jesus.
----- To Carey, 1816: N. Y. Pub Lib., MS, IV, 409
On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind. Were I to enter on that arena, I should only add an unit to the number of Bedlamites.
----- To Van der Kemp, 1816
Altho' I rarely waste time in reading on theological subjects, as mangled by our Pseudo-Christians, yet I can readily suppose Basanistos may be amusing. Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. If it could be understood it would not answer their purpose. Their security is in their faculty of shedding darkness, like the scuttlefish, thro' the element in which they move, and making it impenetrable to the eye of a pursuing enemy, and there they will skulk.
----- To C. Thompson, 1816
I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call me infidel and themselves Christians and preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw. They have compounded from the heathen mysteries a system beyond the comprehension of man, of which the great reformer of the vicious ethics of deism of the Jews, were he to return on earth, would not recognize one feature.
----- To E. Styles, 1819
I am not [a Calvinist]. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know. I am not a Jew, and therefore do not adopt their theology, which supposes the God of infinite justice to punish the sins of the fathers upon their children, unto the third and fourth generation; and the benevolent and sublime reformer of that religion has told us only that God is good and perfect, but has not defined him. I am, therefore, of his theology, believing that we have neither words nor ideas adequate to that definition. And if we could all, after this example, leave the subject as undefinable, we should all be of one sect, doers of good, and eschewers of evil. No doctrines of his lead to schism. It is the speculations of crazy theologists which have made a Babel of a religion the most moral and sublime ever preached to man, and calculated to heal, and not to create differences. These religious animosities I impute to those who call themselves his ministers, and who engraft their casuistries on the stock of his simple precepts. I am sometimes more angry with them than is authorized by the blessed charities which he preaches.
----- To Van der Kemp, 1820
The genuine and simple religion of Jesus will one day be restored: such as it was preached and practised by himself. Very soon after his death it became muffled up in mysteries, and has been ever since kept in concealment from the vulgar eye. To penetrate and dissipate these clouds of darkness, the general mind must be strengthened by education.
----- To Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse, June 26, 1822
Dear Sir,- I have received and read with thankfulness and pleasure your denunciation of the abuses of tobacco and wine. Yet, however sound in its principles, I expect it will be but a sermon to the wind. You will find it as difficult to inculcate these sanative precepts on the sensualities of the present day, as to convince an Athanasian that there is but one God. I wish success to both attempts, and am happy to learn from you that the latter, at least, is making progress, and the more rapidly in proportion as our Platonizing Christians make more stir and noise about it. The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.
1. That there is one only God, and he all perfect.
2. That there is a future state of rewards and punishments.
3. That to love God with all thy heart and thy neighbor as thyself, is the sum of religion.
These are the great points on which he endeavored to reform the religion of the Jews. But compare with these the demoralizing dogmas of Calvin.
1. That there are three Gods.
2. That good works, or the love of our neighbor, are nothing.
3 That faith is every thing, and the more incomprehensible the proposition, the more merit in its faith.
4. That reason in religion is of unlawful use.
5. That God, from the beginning, elected certain individuals to be saved, and certain others to be damned; and that no crimes of the former can damn them; no virtues of the latter save.
Now, which of these is the true and charitable Christian? He who believes and acts on the simple doctrines of Jesus? Or the impious dogmatists, as Athanasius and Calvin? Verily I say these are the false shepherds foretold as to enter not by the door into the sheepfold, but to climb up some other way. They are mere usurpers of the Christian name, teaching a counter-religion made up of the deliria of crazy imaginations, as foreign from Christianity as is that of Mahomet. Their blasphemies have driven thinking men into infidelity, who have too hastily rejected the supposed author himself, with the horrors so falsely imputed to him. Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would now have been Christian. I rejoice that in this blessed country of free inquiry and belief, which has surrendered its creed and conscience to neither kings nor priests, the genuine doctrine of one only God is reviving, and I trust that there is not a young man now living in the United States who will not die an Unitarian.
But much I fear, that when this great truth shall be re-established, its votaries will fall into the fatal error of fabricating formulas of creed and confessions of faith, the engines which so soon destroyed the religion of Jesus, and made of Christendom a mere Aceldama; that they will give up morals for mysteries, and Jesus for Plato. How much wiser are the Quakers, who, agreeing in the fundamental doctrines of the gospel, schismatize about no mysteries, and, keeping within the pale of common sense, suffer no speculative differences of opinion, any more than of feature, to impair the love of their brethren. Be this the wisdom of Unitarians, this the holy mantle which shall cover within its charitable circumference all who believe in one God, and who love their neighbor! I conclude my sermon with sincere assurances of my friendly esteem and respect.
----- An additional letter to theologian James Smith -- December 8, 1822 -- further elaborates Jefferson's views on the subject.
"Sir, -- I have to thank you for your pamphlets on the subject of Unitarianism, and to express my gratification with your efforts for the revival of primitive Christianity in your quarter.
No historical fact is better established, than that the doctrine of one God, pure and uncompounded, was that of the early ages of Christianity; and was among the efficacious doctrines which gave it triumph over the polytheism of the ancients, sickened with the absurdities of their own theology. Nor was the unity of the Supreme Being ousted from the Christian creed by the force of reason, but by the sword of civil government, wielded at the will of the fanatic Athanasius. The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs. And a strong proof of the solidity of the primitive faith, is its restoration, as soon as a nation arises which vindicates to itself the freedom of religious opinion, and its external divorce from the civil authority. The pure and simple unity of the Creator of the universe, is now all but ascendant in the Eastern States; it is dawning in the West, and advancing towards the South; and I confidently expect that the present generation will see Unitarianism become the general religion of the United States. The Eastern presses are giving us many excellent pieces on the subject, and Priestley's learned writings on it are, or should be, in every hand. In fact, the Athanasian paradox that one is three, and three but one, is so incomprehensible to the human mind, that no candid man can say he has any idea of it, and how can he believe what presents no idea? He who thinks he does, only deceives himself. He proves, also, that man, once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without a rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons gullibility which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck."
"I write with freedom, because while I claim a right to believe in one God, if so my reason tells me, I yield as freely to others that of believing in three. Both religions, I find, make honest men, and that is the only point society has any right to look to. Although this mutual freedom should produce mutual indulgence, yet I wish not to be brought in question before the public on this or any other subject, and I pray you to consider me as writing under that trust. I take no part in controversies, religious or political. At the age of eighty, tranquility is the greatest good of life, and the strongest of our desires that of dying in the good will of all mankind. And with the assurance of all my good will to Unitarian and Trinitarian, to Whig and Tory, accept for yourself that of my entire respect."
----- To W. Short, 1820
The Presbyterian clergy are loudest; the most intolerant of all sects, the most tyrannical and ambitious; ready at the word of the lawgiver, if such a word could be now obtained, to put the torch to the pile, and to rekindle in this virgin hemisphere, the flames in which their oracle Calvin consumed the poor Servetus, because he could not find in his Euclid the proposition which has demonstrated that three are one and one is three, nor subscribe to that of Calvin, that magistrates have a right to exterminate all heretics to Calvinistic Creed. They pant to re-establish, by law that holy inquisition, which they can now only infuse into public opinion. We have most unwisely committed to the hierophants of our particular superstition, the direction of public opinion, that lord of the universe. We have given them stated and privileged days to collect and catechise us, opportunities of delivering their oracles to the people in mass, and of molding their minds as wax in the hollow of their hands. But in despite of their fuminations against endeavors to enlighten the general mind, to improve the reason of the people, and to encourage them in the use of it, the liberality of this State will support this institution [University of Virginia], and give fair play to the cultivation of reason.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
The Bias of Perspective
Do you sometimes ever wonder how two people with different hearts can look at the same thing and arrive at two totally divergent conclusions. Some say that our worldview affect creates our bias, and others biases create their worldview. Or that we bring preconditions to our arguments and views before we articulate them.
Consider what two imperfect men said of the same perfect man.
Luke 23
39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.
Is Christ to you the one you yell at and try to coerce to act on your behalf to prove Himself to you, or do you accept that he was a sinless man, God in the Flesh, and is an instrument of Love, self-sacrifice, and reconciliation.
When you consider the cross itself and what Jesus did on behalf of mankind. Do you see a judge or a vengeful God? Or do you see Mercy and Long Suffering, and a road to peace.
Did Christ come to the world to condemn it? Or did he come to save it?
Does he have power or does he not?
Can you know Him, or can't you?
Must he prove Himself to you? Or has he already done enough to prove Himself?
Was Christ a man evolved from an ape? Or is Christ the perfect Created man who has power over Nature itself?
Is God condemnation? Or is God Love?
If you were on a cross next to Jesus, being crucified...
Which thief would you be?
Consider what two imperfect men said of the same perfect man.
Luke 23
39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.
Is Christ to you the one you yell at and try to coerce to act on your behalf to prove Himself to you, or do you accept that he was a sinless man, God in the Flesh, and is an instrument of Love, self-sacrifice, and reconciliation.
When you consider the cross itself and what Jesus did on behalf of mankind. Do you see a judge or a vengeful God? Or do you see Mercy and Long Suffering, and a road to peace.
Did Christ come to the world to condemn it? Or did he come to save it?
Does he have power or does he not?
Can you know Him, or can't you?
Must he prove Himself to you? Or has he already done enough to prove Himself?
Was Christ a man evolved from an ape? Or is Christ the perfect Created man who has power over Nature itself?
Is God condemnation? Or is God Love?
If you were on a cross next to Jesus, being crucified...
Which thief would you be?
Saturday, November 22, 2008
What Does Gender Have to do With it? (Updated!)
What Does Gender Have to do With it?
If evolution is true, then how did gender and reproduction arise?
Single cell mitosis/meiosis or asexual reproduction is the basic form of microbial or monoclete reproduction, however how can the evolutionist explain the rise of gender and of sexual reproduction? There is no advantage biolgically for a simple organism, which depends on its own genetics to recapitulate, to suddenly produce a like organism that only carries half of the genetic codes required. It would be mathematically self defeating and would result in the extinction of the life form.
Let's ask evolutionism why is reproduction even a facet of life at all?
The evolutionist cannot explain death and the purpose of reproduction in species preservation despite death. Once an early organism would have died, its existence would cease. Thereby that newly "mutated and evolved organism", if it could not reproduce, would never fully exist again.
For the existence of life to re-emerge, the same unlikely probability of spontaneous life generation would have to recur thousands and millions of times for there to be enough probability of there to be another single cell bacteria or monoclete who could "evolve" into either a multi-celled organism or one that reproduces sexually reflecting gender.
There would have been NO more life were it not for the possibility of continual spontaneous generation of life from the fabled "primordial soup" proposed by Stanley Miller. And if that were true, what force maintained that generation?
Primordial Soup?
Stanley Miller proved quite successfully that attempts to artificially create life or even ONE protein building block is not possible. That is, not without the right conditions and a highly intelligent designer. Certainly one more intelligent than Darwin, Miller, De Vries, Leakey, Sagan, Einstein...all combined. For, in the history of intelligence in the human race, none has been able to create life from inorganic matter.
The entirety of all of the collective genius of all mankind has YET to produce or even understand the processes at work in a single living cell.
We can look at the inorganic and understand it down to the atomic and sub-atomic level, yet living and functioning organisms are perpetually complex and without explanation.
Another problem evolution faces is that when gender variations "start to exist" in the biological timescale no explanation is given for the sudden rise in the new structures necessary to facilitate the exchange of DNA between gendered organisms?
Mutation does not solve this puzzle because in the lifetime of the gendered organism, once the first halving of DNA begins and is divided between the sexes and without the instant presence of delivery structures, BOTH newly gendered organisms would die and the end of the biological strain would be certain.
Wikipedia even asks the question:
"A major question is why sexual reproduction persists when parthenogenesis appears in some ways to be a superior form of reproduction."
Parthenogenesis? Here's a very interesting word. From the Greek Parthenos + Genesis It literally means "virgin creation" (Jesus' birth is another topic). Basically a fancy term for asexual reproduction meaning self-reproduction.
It all fits together.
With sexual reproduction there necessitates the presence of the complimentary developed reproductive organs for the recapitulation of that species to occur. The problem is that once one organism "evolves" a sexual organ that contains only 1/2 of the genetic material, there must be another existant organism that will concurrently "evolve" a complimentary sexual organ with PRECISELY the other half.
Probable Cause?
Applying probability to this equation ensures the death of all species who "mutate" to become sexually dimorphic relative to reproductive structures.
"An Object at Rest..."
Also, applying the Second Law of Thermodynamics ( which IS a proven fact) with all matter having a tendency toward entropy, there is no reason or mechanism for a successful monocyte that can reproduce by budding or asexual reproduction/self cloning would in fact become more organized into a sexually dimorphic organism.
Because to assume this is to imply that cells have information, that they have code, & they can become increasingly ordered rather then entropic. And if cells have code, order, information...there must be a source to that order. Darwinian evolution is completely diminished by the mere presence of gender.
Halfsies?
Once gender "evolves", and the genetic code is halved and assigned to one gender-based individual, it kills the species because it forces that there must be an analagous formation to compliment. Again, in the precise order that matches the other half. This probability which not only virtualy ends the recapitulation of that organism, also forces that the origin of life must begin all over again to re-create those individuals who could "mutate" all over again.
Again, all of this implies code, design, intelligence.
Intelligent design.
Trumped Again.
Even in the face of this, secular humanist scientists, hold fast although they cannot prove the origin of life, the successful mutations of individuals, or the mechanism for living organisms' violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, the overcoming of probability and causation, etc
STAGGERINGLY IMPROBABLE! click here to watch
Speaking of Recapitulation:
In the Darwinian progression of species there is the assumption that single celled organisms (whose existential causation is unknown) which reproduce asexually, have evolved via mutation or other causation into organized multi-cellular organisms with the capability for sexual reproduction.
It is materially impossible to substantiate the existence of gender based on evolutionist theory in light of the proliferation of species biodiversity and genderization.
It all goes back to the discussion of the chicken and the egg. Which came first?
The Creationist says the Chicken. This can be substantiated by observed science.
The Evolutionist says the Bacteria. This cannot.
Even if the egg came first, the protein information had to be organized into DNA in order to form the chicken and then that chicken would have grown up into either a rooster or a hen.
So, if you have one gender arising from an egg or DNA strand, that that necessitates another gender arising spontaneously from another egg or DNA strand. The likelyhood that these would occur independantly, let alone in the same timeframe in the geological time scale for them to reach parallel maturity to mate would be so astronomically and infinitesimally small that the only way that science could explain it actually happening would be to refer to it as what Christians call, "a miracle".
It would be far more likely that an asexual chicken would arise. that could simply lay an egg and clone itself.
Evolutionary theory is in essence a mathematical proponent of automatic self cloning rather than gender-based sexual reproduction. This however, would lead to lack of variation and susceptibility to mutation, disease, and more leading to the demise of life.
The very fact that there is rich biodiversity, gender, and sustained reproduction is a testament NOT to evolution, but to intelligent design.
Evolution has no answers for these questions. One cannot substantiate untruth with truth. If a theory cannot be tested, verified, and reproduced... it remains a theory. Not a fact.
Declaration of Independance: Jefferson got it right!
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
God is the Creator of Gender.
The fact is, that GOD our Creator created gender. He created it to preserve species, to create variation and strength in the genetics, and to insure against disease, mutation, and extinction.
These things that did not exist before the fall (the curse). Notice that Adam and Eve did not actually have children until after the fall. That is another discussion entirely, but one to mull over.
The Bible has this to say about gender:
Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Genesis 5:2
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Genesis 6:
19And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.
Matthew 19:
4And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Mark 10:
6But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
The concept of "apparent maturity"
As with rocks, God made Adam and the earth with "apparant maturity". Meaning that he instantly created a mature structure. Adam was not a baby devoid of speech and function. He was made as a Man that was fully aware, sentient, communication, working, walking, speaking, breathing. He had hands, ribs, lungs, eyes, mouth, everything that a man has today.
So why the female gender?
Man was created as a complete genetic structure, but God saw it was not good for him to be alone. This is not because he needed help doing the dishes as chauvanists may have it. The Bible calls the woman a helpmate or "help meet for him" meaning both a mate and an appropriate physical partner.
The genetics for woman were taken from Adam's DNA and from it God made woman. Adam himself called her Eve "the mother of all living". But why?
Because without Eve, Adam would not have multiplied being created inherently gendered as male. He would either have had to live forever as male, or if he were to die in order for his race to continue he needed a conduit of genetic recapitulation. Since he was a highly developed complex organic multi-cellular, multi-systemic creature with a highly functioning brain..asexual budding or self cloning was not a possibility.
1 Timothy 2:13
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
Adam, as made in the image of God (Christ) would not be able to produce Christ throughout time were it not for Eve. God, looking down through time saw that if Adam were to fall, or die, he would utterly die and that would make God's Creation of none effect and imperfect. Since God by definition is Absolute and Perfect, he created the answer for Adam's possible future in death by making Eve a conduit of life.
Thereby, God intervened in the biology of men and species to create males and females.
This is a theory that we can verify, reproduce, and test today. That is why it is called a fact.
Creationism is a scientific fact.
1 Timothy 6
20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings,
and oppositions of science falsely so called:
21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.
Darwinian Evolution is not Fact. It is not even theory.
It is Willfully Ignorant Secular Materialism.
If evolution is true, then how did gender and reproduction arise?
Single cell mitosis/meiosis or asexual reproduction is the basic form of microbial or monoclete reproduction, however how can the evolutionist explain the rise of gender and of sexual reproduction? There is no advantage biolgically for a simple organism, which depends on its own genetics to recapitulate, to suddenly produce a like organism that only carries half of the genetic codes required. It would be mathematically self defeating and would result in the extinction of the life form.
Let's ask evolutionism why is reproduction even a facet of life at all?
The evolutionist cannot explain death and the purpose of reproduction in species preservation despite death. Once an early organism would have died, its existence would cease. Thereby that newly "mutated and evolved organism", if it could not reproduce, would never fully exist again.
For the existence of life to re-emerge, the same unlikely probability of spontaneous life generation would have to recur thousands and millions of times for there to be enough probability of there to be another single cell bacteria or monoclete who could "evolve" into either a multi-celled organism or one that reproduces sexually reflecting gender.
There would have been NO more life were it not for the possibility of continual spontaneous generation of life from the fabled "primordial soup" proposed by Stanley Miller. And if that were true, what force maintained that generation?
Primordial Soup?
Stanley Miller proved quite successfully that attempts to artificially create life or even ONE protein building block is not possible. That is, not without the right conditions and a highly intelligent designer. Certainly one more intelligent than Darwin, Miller, De Vries, Leakey, Sagan, Einstein...all combined. For, in the history of intelligence in the human race, none has been able to create life from inorganic matter.
The entirety of all of the collective genius of all mankind has YET to produce or even understand the processes at work in a single living cell.
We can look at the inorganic and understand it down to the atomic and sub-atomic level, yet living and functioning organisms are perpetually complex and without explanation.
Another problem evolution faces is that when gender variations "start to exist" in the biological timescale no explanation is given for the sudden rise in the new structures necessary to facilitate the exchange of DNA between gendered organisms?
Mutation does not solve this puzzle because in the lifetime of the gendered organism, once the first halving of DNA begins and is divided between the sexes and without the instant presence of delivery structures, BOTH newly gendered organisms would die and the end of the biological strain would be certain.
Wikipedia even asks the question:
"A major question is why sexual reproduction persists when parthenogenesis appears in some ways to be a superior form of reproduction."
Parthenogenesis? Here's a very interesting word. From the Greek Parthenos + Genesis It literally means "virgin creation" (Jesus' birth is another topic). Basically a fancy term for asexual reproduction meaning self-reproduction.
It all fits together.
With sexual reproduction there necessitates the presence of the complimentary developed reproductive organs for the recapitulation of that species to occur. The problem is that once one organism "evolves" a sexual organ that contains only 1/2 of the genetic material, there must be another existant organism that will concurrently "evolve" a complimentary sexual organ with PRECISELY the other half.
Probable Cause?
Applying probability to this equation ensures the death of all species who "mutate" to become sexually dimorphic relative to reproductive structures.
"An Object at Rest..."
Also, applying the Second Law of Thermodynamics ( which IS a proven fact) with all matter having a tendency toward entropy, there is no reason or mechanism for a successful monocyte that can reproduce by budding or asexual reproduction/self cloning would in fact become more organized into a sexually dimorphic organism.
Because to assume this is to imply that cells have information, that they have code, & they can become increasingly ordered rather then entropic. And if cells have code, order, information...there must be a source to that order. Darwinian evolution is completely diminished by the mere presence of gender.
Halfsies?
Once gender "evolves", and the genetic code is halved and assigned to one gender-based individual, it kills the species because it forces that there must be an analagous formation to compliment. Again, in the precise order that matches the other half. This probability which not only virtualy ends the recapitulation of that organism, also forces that the origin of life must begin all over again to re-create those individuals who could "mutate" all over again.
Again, all of this implies code, design, intelligence.
Intelligent design.
Trumped Again.
Even in the face of this, secular humanist scientists, hold fast although they cannot prove the origin of life, the successful mutations of individuals, or the mechanism for living organisms' violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, the overcoming of probability and causation, etc
STAGGERINGLY IMPROBABLE! click here to watch
Speaking of Recapitulation:
In the Darwinian progression of species there is the assumption that single celled organisms (whose existential causation is unknown) which reproduce asexually, have evolved via mutation or other causation into organized multi-cellular organisms with the capability for sexual reproduction.
It is materially impossible to substantiate the existence of gender based on evolutionist theory in light of the proliferation of species biodiversity and genderization.
It all goes back to the discussion of the chicken and the egg. Which came first?
The Creationist says the Chicken. This can be substantiated by observed science.
The Evolutionist says the Bacteria. This cannot.
Even if the egg came first, the protein information had to be organized into DNA in order to form the chicken and then that chicken would have grown up into either a rooster or a hen.
So, if you have one gender arising from an egg or DNA strand, that that necessitates another gender arising spontaneously from another egg or DNA strand. The likelyhood that these would occur independantly, let alone in the same timeframe in the geological time scale for them to reach parallel maturity to mate would be so astronomically and infinitesimally small that the only way that science could explain it actually happening would be to refer to it as what Christians call, "a miracle".
It would be far more likely that an asexual chicken would arise. that could simply lay an egg and clone itself.
Evolutionary theory is in essence a mathematical proponent of automatic self cloning rather than gender-based sexual reproduction. This however, would lead to lack of variation and susceptibility to mutation, disease, and more leading to the demise of life.
The very fact that there is rich biodiversity, gender, and sustained reproduction is a testament NOT to evolution, but to intelligent design.
Evolution has no answers for these questions. One cannot substantiate untruth with truth. If a theory cannot be tested, verified, and reproduced... it remains a theory. Not a fact.
Declaration of Independance: Jefferson got it right!
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
God is the Creator of Gender.
The fact is, that GOD our Creator created gender. He created it to preserve species, to create variation and strength in the genetics, and to insure against disease, mutation, and extinction.
These things that did not exist before the fall (the curse). Notice that Adam and Eve did not actually have children until after the fall. That is another discussion entirely, but one to mull over.
The Bible has this to say about gender:
Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Genesis 5:2
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Genesis 6:
19And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.
Matthew 19:
4And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Mark 10:
6But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
The concept of "apparent maturity"
As with rocks, God made Adam and the earth with "apparant maturity". Meaning that he instantly created a mature structure. Adam was not a baby devoid of speech and function. He was made as a Man that was fully aware, sentient, communication, working, walking, speaking, breathing. He had hands, ribs, lungs, eyes, mouth, everything that a man has today.
So why the female gender?
Man was created as a complete genetic structure, but God saw it was not good for him to be alone. This is not because he needed help doing the dishes as chauvanists may have it. The Bible calls the woman a helpmate or "help meet for him" meaning both a mate and an appropriate physical partner.
The genetics for woman were taken from Adam's DNA and from it God made woman. Adam himself called her Eve "the mother of all living". But why?
Because without Eve, Adam would not have multiplied being created inherently gendered as male. He would either have had to live forever as male, or if he were to die in order for his race to continue he needed a conduit of genetic recapitulation. Since he was a highly developed complex organic multi-cellular, multi-systemic creature with a highly functioning brain..asexual budding or self cloning was not a possibility.
1 Timothy 2:13
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
Adam, as made in the image of God (Christ) would not be able to produce Christ throughout time were it not for Eve. God, looking down through time saw that if Adam were to fall, or die, he would utterly die and that would make God's Creation of none effect and imperfect. Since God by definition is Absolute and Perfect, he created the answer for Adam's possible future in death by making Eve a conduit of life.
Thereby, God intervened in the biology of men and species to create males and females.
This is a theory that we can verify, reproduce, and test today. That is why it is called a fact.
Creationism is a scientific fact.
1 Timothy 6
20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings,
and oppositions of science falsely so called:
21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.
Darwinian Evolution is not Fact. It is not even theory.
It is Willfully Ignorant Secular Materialism.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
The Myth of Eternal Security...20 Rhetorical Questions answered by Scripture
Many modern evangelicals believe in eternal security, a doctrine
that they derive from the scripture in Romans 8:
However, in so doing they assume that "the love of Christ" (v35, 39) is the same thing as "Salvation"
Remembering that:
The overall question remains...
Though the Love of God for man does not cease, and though he is not willing that any should perish, is the fact that God loves us and desires us tantamount to Salvation itself? Or is Romans 8 referring to those who are already abiding in Christ and who are being challenged in their faith toward their destruction? Does Romans 8 mean that one is Eternally Secure once professing Jesus Christ? Or does it mean that for one who is born again, that they cannot be ripped away from God against their will no matter what comes against them?
I thought to answer this question that I would begin by writing an essay, but I decided that it was best to actually pose rhetorical questions and let the scriptures speak for themselves.
----------------------------------------------------
1. Why Endure if you are Eternally Secure?
2. How can the Eternally Secure who know God and willfully walk away from Him denying Christ, not escape his wrath?
3. Why should the Eternally Secure "patiently continue in well-doing"?
4. Are the Eternally Secure continuously obedient?
5. Why should the Eternally Secure remain diligent in God's Word at all?
6. Can the Eternally Secure neglect their salvation and escape the wrath of God?
7. Why must the Eternally Secure person "take up his cross daily"? Shouldn't it be enough that person picked it up once to be saved? After all, why should the Eternally Secure person need to go back to the cross at all, having gone once?
8. Can the Eternally Secure person sin and not die?
9. Can the Eternally Secure person or church have their minds so deceived by Satan as to lose their salvation?
10. Can the church, the collective of Eternally Secure people, be conquered in this world?
11. Can someone rob a Christian of their salvation?
12. Peter Denied Christ. Was he Eternally Secure?
13. Can we deny Christ and maintain that we are Eternally Secure, having once professed Him?
14. Can one know God, exhibit no fruit, and yet be Eternally Secure by their profession of Faith?
15. Is one "Once Saved, Always Saved?"
16. Can one be saved from the world and still partake of it without risk to salvation?
17. What happens if "We" (the elect) deny Christ or refuse to suffer for his Name?
18. Can we continue to sin and expect that our Eternal Security will keep us saved?
19. Can people who have been sanctified for salvation lose their salvation? Can they be totally lost? Or are those who have partaken of salvation and who deny Christ still Eternally Secure?
20. Will all professing Christians make it to heaven?
Matthew 25
1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
2And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.
3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them:
4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.
7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out.
9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.
10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.
11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.
13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Endnote:
Of the Father of the Eternal Security Doctrine, John Calvin, was he Eternally Secure after burning people alive in condemnaton for disagreeing with him?
Does our faith not exceed the Devils?
that they derive from the scripture in Romans 8:
Romans 8
35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
However, in so doing they assume that "the love of Christ" (v35, 39) is the same thing as "Salvation"
Remembering that:
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
The overall question remains...
Though the Love of God for man does not cease, and though he is not willing that any should perish, is the fact that God loves us and desires us tantamount to Salvation itself? Or is Romans 8 referring to those who are already abiding in Christ and who are being challenged in their faith toward their destruction? Does Romans 8 mean that one is Eternally Secure once professing Jesus Christ? Or does it mean that for one who is born again, that they cannot be ripped away from God against their will no matter what comes against them?
I thought to answer this question that I would begin by writing an essay, but I decided that it was best to actually pose rhetorical questions and let the scriptures speak for themselves.
----------------------------------------------------
1. Why Endure if you are Eternally Secure?
Matthew 10
22And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.
2. How can the Eternally Secure who know God and willfully walk away from Him denying Christ, not escape his wrath?
Romans 1
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
3. Why should the Eternally Secure "patiently continue in well-doing"?
Romans 2
7To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
4. Are the Eternally Secure continuously obedient?
John 15
14Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.
5. Why should the Eternally Secure remain diligent in God's Word at all?
Hebrews 2
1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.
2 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;
6. Can the Eternally Secure neglect their salvation and escape the wrath of God?
Hebrews 2
3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
7. Why must the Eternally Secure person "take up his cross daily"? Shouldn't it be enough that person picked it up once to be saved? After all, why should the Eternally Secure person need to go back to the cross at all, having gone once?
Luke 9:23
23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
8. Can the Eternally Secure person sin and not die?
Genesis 3
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
9. Can the Eternally Secure person or church have their minds so deceived by Satan as to lose their salvation?
2 Corinthians 11
3But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
10. Can the church, the collective of Eternally Secure people, be conquered in this world?
Matthew 11
12And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
11. Can someone rob a Christian of their salvation?
Revelation 3
11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.
12. Peter Denied Christ. Was he Eternally Secure?
Matthew 10:33
But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
13. Can we deny Christ and maintain that we are Eternally Secure, having once professed Him?
2 Timothy 2:12
If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
14. Can one know God, exhibit no fruit, and yet be Eternally Secure by their profession of Faith?
Luke 9
16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
15. Is one "Once Saved, Always Saved?"
2 Peter 2
20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
16. Can one be saved from the world and still partake of it without risk to salvation?
Luke 9
62And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.
17. What happens if "We" (the elect) deny Christ or refuse to suffer for his Name?
1 Timothy 2
12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
18. Can we continue to sin and expect that our Eternal Security will keep us saved?
Hebrews 10
26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
19. Can people who have been sanctified for salvation lose their salvation? Can they be totally lost? Or are those who have partaken of salvation and who deny Christ still Eternally Secure?
Hebrews 6
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
20. Will all professing Christians make it to heaven?
Matthew 25
1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
2And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.
3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them:
4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.
7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out.
9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.
10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.
11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.
13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Endnote:
Of the Father of the Eternal Security Doctrine, John Calvin, was he Eternally Secure after burning people alive in condemnaton for disagreeing with him?
1 John 4:1
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world
Matthew 7
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:9
As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Does our faith not exceed the Devils?
James 2:19
19Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
