Why is leadership such a difficult issue? Many people profess to be leaders, but few, if any, really are. Some lead by charisma, but soon that wears thin, people see them for who they really are, and their popularity wanes. Some who are in leadership really have the skills and knowledge but lack the acceptance of those they lead, and they fail. Why?
It really comes down to a very simple principle. Human beings were not created to rule each other. They were created to be ruled by God. Nothing else works. When humans are ruled by God, they can get along and work together. When they aren't, they can't. Humankind has been proving that for the six thousand years since sin entered into God's creation. Adam and Eve were doing fine until they rebelled against God's leadership, then they lost everything. The entire creation has suffered from that time to this. Men have tried to rule other men and without an exception have failed. Why is there such chaos today? Because humans can't rule other humans successfully.
Fortunately there will be a solution. God will reestablish His rule among mankind. The full redemption and salvation of man will not be realized until He does. That is why Jesus will return and rule upon the earth as the King of kings. God's rule will be reestablished. Will it be a Theocracy? Yes. That is the only thing that works.
14 comments:
The earth is 6000 years old? Whoa! You've been reading that "amazing independent study of 2009 and the tribulation" GOD'S TIME WAVE OF HISTORY. Which means you also know the rapture might take place before Wednesday, October 21 2009.
I'm pretty confident that the majority of Americans enjoy their freedom enough that they would resist any attempt by anyone to impose a theocracy on them.
The accounting of approximately 6,000 years old comes from biblical accounting of the generations, and the two thousand years between Christ's time on earth and the present. There were approximately two thousand years from creation to the flood; two thousand from the flood to Christ, and two thousand years from Christ until now. Simple isn't it. I have been reading one of Dawkins' books attempting to show the validity of evolution. He weaves a tangled and complicated tale, based on his own conjecture and supposition to prove millions of years, when the simplest explanation is exactly what the Bible tells us. "Professing themselves to be wise they became as fools..." The rapture will take place when God says it will take place, and only He knows the day and the hour.
Since you're reading a Dawkins book perhaps you would like to hear what he has said about young earth creationism. The first video is him answering a question from an audience member. The second video is from a National Geographic special.
And here is what the skeptics dictionary says about young earth creationism.
I agree with all of them.
From reading Dawkins book, his reasoning doesn't have much credibility with me. He bases all of his reasoning about evolution, and the dating of the earth on supposed facts that he pulls out of thin air. There are no, I repeat - no, facts or hard evidence to back anything he says. Mostly he just spins a lot of fairy tales based on suppositions he or others have pulled from somewhere, but not from fact or science.
Regarding the video of Dawkins, typical of Dawkins style, he never gave any emperical evidence to disprove the claim of Liberty University, but spent a lot of time making fun of anyone who doesn't believe the way he does, which is a tactic, I am sure that he would claim those pesky creationists would use. So, rather than giving a real answer, he makes jokes. The closest thing to a real answer was in explaining what he thought they would have to do to prove their claim of dinosaures being only 3,000 years old was to use a combination of the geological column and radiological dating, both of which are flawed especially in his use. The geological column dates the stratas of the earth's crust by the fossils found in each, and they date the fossils by the strata of the earth's crust in which they are found, which is circular reasoning. Radiological dating is only accurate out to about 10,000 years, not the millions and billions of years Dawkins misleads his audience to believe. Anything beyond the 10,000 years is an extrapolation based on the prejudice of the one doing the extrapolation. If Dawkins is honest, he has deluded himself. I think he is probably mentally ill, having deluded himself into believing that what he is saying is true.
The second Dawkins video is more of the same. He presents no facts, but he makes statements meant to belittle and mislead. His example of the enormity of what he claims is error is meant to hide the fact that he has no good evidence and he, true to form, presents none. He blames religious upbringing accusing religious people of making faith more important than evidence, yet he does the same thing. He wants us to believe what he is saying is true, not based on any evidence, but because he says it. In other words he wants us to take his words and the theory of evolution upon faith. He claims that to deny a child the knowledge of his supposed origins per evolution is evil, yet I would say it is evil to blaspheme your own Creator and deny children the opportunity to know the true facts of their Creator. When you compare the "richness" of 4 billions of years with the measly facts of Genesis, you find self worth as a child of Almighty God, not a worthless bit of protoplasma that crept out of a primordal swamp. Dawkins is the one who is demonstrating insanity to believe such a baseless absurdity. Those who agree with him are playing into his insanity. I have not seen a even a reasonably logical arguement from Dawkins, yet he wants us to take his evangelistic word as gospel. His arguements are baseless and infalmatory, pure and simple. No sane person should accept them.
I agree with the skeptic's dictionary definition of a young earth creationist, though I would capitalize "God" indicating that He is THE God. I would not call the story Mythology. Also YEers as they are called by the dictionary don't deny valid scientific discoveries, but would maintain that the discoveries are either made up or misinterpretation of the data. They do not oppose valid science as evil, but scientists who are not honest about science. I would believe that those who accept and are adamant about evolution have a way of thinking that is entirely wrong and which carries over into other areas of thinking such as climate change and politics. A secular society must deny God in order to validate their thinking which usually leads to accepting evolution and marxist political leanings.
Scientists have not discovered that life on earth originated "3.9 bya." They just say that. They have no evidence that is based on fact. Most of it is based on speculation and imagination. Scientists who accept evolution are simply not honest with the facts!
After reading your comments, I realized we had been down this road before in the previous incarnation of your blog. Those early posts about evolution disappeared but I managed to track them down using the way back machine over at the internet archive. I'll say one thing, you've been consistent over the years in your denial of rational thought.
Your arguments against evolution have been addressed before by myself and others responding to your various posts. Junk Science January 27, 2005, Evolution, so what is all the fuss? January 21, 2005, Proof for evolution? March 4, 2005, Is evolution really a fact? December 28, 2005, God and science coexisting. February 6, 2006
Looking over those old posts it's easy to see that arguing with you about this subject is a waste of time.
I believe that the irrational thought, as demonstrated by Dawkins, is on the side of the evolutionists. They claim evidence where there is none and they offer none, yet looking at the world there is much evidence for the Creator and His Creation. What you call irrational thought I claim to be the more rational. The truth never changes, but men who deny God are like a ship on the sea being tossed to and fro and driven by the wind. Yes, I will be consistent about rational thought.
After I watched this video of Frank Schaeffer I decided there might be hope for you yet! Schaeffer is a former fundamentalist Christian who wrote a book about growing up in a fundamentalist family and eventually abandoning fundamentalism. Here's another video of him on another show.
Maybe this will help: Evolution in 120 seconds.
Why would I want to believe a lie?
Why indeed?
I am happy you are finally seeing the truth of the absurdity of evolution!
Post a Comment