Like-Minded

The other day my dad made a post on his blog that was then reposted by an opponent on an atheistic forum. One of the comments on that forum, and one I’ve heard many times over, is that the blog post was just Christians affirming each other that atheists are wrong. They talk like it is wrong for people of like minds to come together and agree with each other…oh wait, the entire purpose of that forum is for like minds to agree with each other. My question is, why is alright for one party to slap each other on the back and say good job, but another party is wrong, ignorant, stupid, hateful to do the same? Not a single one of the forum poster’s asked for the address of the blog so that they could go there and talk directly to the blogger, they all just agreed with each other how horrible this Christian is.

Anyone that doesn’t regularly confer with like-minded individuals is a fool. 

Homosexuality - Bad For Males

I was watching an older movie the other day that portrayed two men who were extremely close. I mean really, really close. So close, that if they had been seen on the streets today everyone would assume they were gay. It got me thinking, homosexuality is alienating men. Granted, the symptoms began earlier, but homosexuality has closed the deal. Guys today cannot be as close to each other as women can. They even make jokes about it in sitcoms. Two guys that are as close to each other as their girlfriends/wives are assumed to be gay. And through our new lens of “close guys are gay” beloved heroes have been tainted. Growing up, I enjoyed reading my Hardy Boys. I have since heard it suggested that they were gay. The Bible speaks of the love David and Jonathan had for each other…gay.

This is a detriment to men. We are losing out on an important relationship. Being intimate with our spouse is an excellent thing, but there is something a male “brother” can provide that no wife can. Nobody can deny that men and women think differently, and men need that male input, that camaraderie, that support. While it is still possible to get some of that, the intensity of it is dampened by the new view that intimate men are gay. Now I see older movies with two guys as close as brothers and think, “That would be a nice thing to have”, and then, “If this were made today, those two would be gay” and I shake my head.

I bet you, if Jesus and His disciples were to walk down the street today, they’d be assumed to be gay. I know that the male relationship took its turn over time as it became unmanly to express emotions, but homosexuality has pushed in an even larger wedge between the bonding of men. 

Open Mind

I recently had a debate with someone that said something to me that has been said before, “You just don’t get it because you don’t have an open mind” and that, “You are only questioning this because you don’t have an open mind.” What I didn’t get doesn’t matter at this point. My concern is about the “open mind” bit. Apparently, being unwilling to change my worldview because someone else said I was wrong means I have a closed mind. Apparently, questioning something in opposition to your beliefs is a sign of a closed mind.

I submit, if you were to truly have an open mind as some would like you to have, then you would follow anything anyone says and would not be capable of self-expression or able to contribute anything to society.

I will admit, I am pretty staunchly grounded in my beliefs. It takes a lot of hard work to make me change them. However, there is a difference between a closed mind and a guarded mind. I don’t believe what I believe because my mommy and daddy told me so. I grew up wanting to know why. I still want to know why. Why does this happen? How does this work? I believe understanding the why and how make for a firmer foundation than “X” said so.

You can believe what you want, but just because I don’t agree doesn’t mean my mind is closed. I honestly cannot see how having an open mind is in any way beneficial.

Compelling Arguments

Recently, one of the blogs I follow wrote about “compelling arguments”. The gist of the post was that one person or party would make an argument using facts, ration, and logic, and the opposing person or party would just say “No” and not present any meaningful opposition. At the end he stated, “You know, I really begin to wonder exactly what a ‘compelling argument’ really looks like.” I sarcastically left the comment that we see “compelling arguments” all the time, in the form of emotionally driven arguments. He then proceeded to contradict me (just go read the post and you’ll get it).

Originally I thought his response was serious, and so it got me thinking. How do you define a compelling argument? From one point of view, a compelling argument would appear one way, and from the opposite point of view, it would appear a different way. From the point of view of a person wanting an argument (as opposed to just automatic gainsaying), the most compelling argument would be factual, logical, reasonable, and consistent. As long as both sides are using reason and truth to debate, they should both have compelling arguments. On the other hand, if you view the argument from the result, rather than the content, then a compelling argument is merely the argument that causes change. The former is harder to see and is not often thought of because when we think of “compelling” we often think of the outcome, not the substance. The latter may not be based on logic, reason, or truth, but because it was the more emotional, it compelled people to side with it. Both lead to a change, ideally, but one looks at the content, and one looks at the result.

My suggestion would to not define a compelling argument based on its result. Emotions are fickle beasts, swaying with the tide. Truth, reason, and consistency will hold out in the long haul. That is why Christianity has survived as long as it has and remained true to its origins. 

Eternality

Eternality is a difficult concept to truly wrap one’s head around. We are bound by time. We have a beginning, we travel along the course of time, and we have an end, sort of. Biblically we are everlasting, we have a beginning, but no end, but we are still bound by time. After Christ’s return time will have less significance, but we will still travel through it.

But God is eternal. He had no beginning, has no end, and is not bound by time. As time-locked beings, this is truly difficult to really understand. We can grasp the concept, but we must continually remind ourselves that it is beyond us. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit have always existed. Jesus was there in eternity with the Father. So, to ask when Jesus came on the scene, I mean, He didn’t need a body before creation…and that’s where we see our understanding of eternal break down. For Him, there was no “before creation”. God wasn’t floating along through nothingness and decided to come up with this idea of creation. There was no time for Him. As beings that can only understand time, we often get confused by “no time”.

His eternality is just one of the many attributes that are just so foreign to us that we can’t fully comprehend. We can kind of grasp everlasting, it still has a time component, but eternal is like trying to explain the vastness of the universe to an ant. Don’t let yourself get fooled when someone asks what Jesus and the Holy Spirit did before creation; for them, there was no before creation.

Innovation?

What has happened to innovation? We seem to have hit a plateau when it comes to innovation. Sure, we still have new inventions coming around, but those tend to be rehashings of what we already have. In 1903, fixed-wing, self-propelled flight was obtained. Sixty-six years later we were able to put men on the moon. The imagination of those times thought we’d all be in flying cars, or have jetpacks, or be exploring space with manned missions by now. Forty-four years after the moon, and we have faster planes and faster cars, but we’re still burning fossil fuels, NASA is all but shut down, and computers are more sophisticated. We’ve basically been working on improving the wheel all this time.

Are we merely in a lull, or is this it? Scientists and science fictionists tell us that one day we’ll explore the stars, colonize other planets, and leave our solar system. They tell us we need to do this before we exhaust the Earth. Honestly, I don’t see us reaching beyond the moon in my lifetime. It is going to take innovators like the men and women of 150 years ago. We need people that are going to dream big and make it happen. Personally I see us going the way of the movie Idiocracy. People seem to be becoming dumbed down. Entertainment seems to be the driving force behind people’s actions. Even a cursory glance at Twitter or Facebook will show how rampant stupidity is. Common knowledge, history, grammar, and even current events seem to be a mystery.

I unfortunately didn’t figure out until after high school that I enjoy learning. History has become interesting to me. Higher math could be of more use at times. Science is fascinating. Where was that eagerness when my only responsibility was to learn? I look around and see kids not caring about learning, but about hanging out with their friends or just doing nothing.

They say we’ll make it to the stars, but we’ll be lucky to make it another 50 years unless something changes. 

A Revelation In Revelation

I am currently making my way through Revelation. I was reticent because of all the imagery and prophecy, but according to John, it is just as important as the rest of Scripture. After working through the letters to the churches, John is shown a vision of the throne room. Aside from the 24 elders, it is quite similar to the account in Ezekiel except that it seems to be from a different perspective. In Ezekiel it seems to be looking up toward the throne, while John seems to be level with the throne.

There are two things that struck me while reading the two accounts. One is that there is a separation between the four angels and God, but the elders are around God. This seems to indicate a place of authority of believers over even the angels. The second realization was what the four angels represent. They appear as a man, lion, ox, and eagle, and they worship God for all eternity. The notes in my Bible indicate they represent the “kings” of their field, lions over the wild animals, oxen over the domesticated animals, and eagles over the birds, and of course man over creation. I was trying to understand, “Why four animals as angels?” Then it hit me; all of creation glorifies God. Not just Man, but all the animals as well. All of creation is the manifestation of His glory, and all of it must worship Him.

A sub-note that I realized while writing this, believers will have a position not only above angels, but also above non-believers. However, even believers will bow before God and praise Him, acknowledging that even their righteousness comes from Him. It seems that when the Bible says that, “…every knee will bow and every tongue confess…”, it is not only in reference to human knees and tongues, but all creation.