Perhaps you have found yourself on one side or the other of the following conversation I would like to invite you to one of our services. As long as a person obeys the Ten Commandments and doesn't go around looking for trouble. That should be good enough. Keeping the Ten Commandments will not get anyone into Heaven.
Which one is it? Actually the two are inter-related.
God's perfect reflection - rizesyza.gq
Let's start with the Ten Commandments. These were originally given to man in the Old Testament Exodus 20 and they were given for a purpose. This purpose was not to get anyone into Heaven, but rather to show man his need for Jesus Christ. To explain how I'd like to illustrate with an everyday object - a mirror. I've often wondered what it would be like if there were no mirrors. Without one a person couldn't get a purely objective description of what they looked like.
At best they would have to rely on someone else's description; but since "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" , a person asking "Am I attractive? The same thing would happen if there were no absolutes to right and wrong and someone asked "Am I a sinner? They serve as "a mirror" by which man can look at himself and see himself as a sinner before God. Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
Without the law, determining right and wrong would be a matter of personal opinion. However, the law shows us what sin is. At the same time it shows us that we're sinners and guilty before a just and holy God. No one has ever kept the Ten Commandments. Every one has lied at one point or another. People often steal. For example, when they cheat on their income tax or insurance claims.
Most of the time we justify it, but it is still sin by definition. The purpose of the law is not only to show what sin is and that all men have sinned before God, but also to show man that something is inherently wrong with him. Man has a shortcoming when it comes to holiness and righteousness. This image is in a flagrant contradiction with what Jesus said about His Father who is perfect and who loves His enemy. Matthew 5; 48 Something is wrong with the Bible. If the Flood would have done the world better we may doubt the means used to attain this purpose but the Bible says that the world became worse, for example, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah happen after the Flood.
Why God would have killed so many humans and animals through the waters of the Flood if instead of the world becoming better it became much worse? There is an explanation. These kinds of absurdities prevent the Bible to be considered the infallible word of God.
It is very important to cease maintaining that the Bible is the inspired word of God, in all its texts, because if we continue to promote this false presupposition we persist to feed a wrong image of Him. God is not as He is presented by the majority of Christian doctrines and dogmas which are based on a literal interpretation of the Bible but He is how He presents Himself in our consciousness and He is a Father who helps us to become better human beings.
I was hoping that the Bible would be a strong argument for my faith but unfortunately it is not the case. I think that the world cannot be saved with lies, with legends or any kind of mythology. The analysis of the first 11 chapters of the Bible from the present work is such surgical operations on the biblical texts which have transform the Christian faith in something similar to a sick person.
We should always remember that Christianity is not originated from the texts of the Bible but these texts are the product of this incredible spiritual movement with such a long history. First was Christ and after that the N. Likewise the first 11 chapters of the O. I want to express this unequivocally, the present study is not an attack against the Bible or an anti-Christian demarche because the legitimate critics which contains affect, in an equal proportion, all three monotheistic religions which maintain that Adam and Eve existed in reality. If Adam and Eve are only legendary personages, as I think many people will agree until the end of this work, than Judaism, Christianity and Islam base their spiritual offers on mythology and not on facts scientifically proven and this situation diminishes very much their relations with the truth.
The conclusions detached from this study would unavoidably affect not only the individual attitude of each Christian believer but also the dogmatic pillars of the Christian faith and I consider this dynamic to be rather positive regardless of how painful it can be.
A faith which is based on as many facts as possible is a strong and not a weak faith. The foundation of the Christian faith is much stronger than that and the absorbance of such scientific truth allowed the general progress of humankind and in the end big scientific achievements in all domains. Following the scientific and technological progress, travel is eased and distances shortened, medical interventions are much more efficient, communications between all human beings are much better comparing with the past, the average human life on Earth is longer, the general standard of life, at least in some geographical areas, is incomparably better than before, the circulation of information is quicker, and so on.
As shocking as it may look the admission of the truth about the dynamic of sun and earth has been a necessary step toward this entire progress. The continuation of a stubborn adherence and forceful imposition on society of the Ptolemaic conception about the movements of the earth would have made impossible the promotion of sciences. All these achievements have facilitated even the transmission of the Christian message of the good news of the gospel and have permitted it to reach the farthest corners of the earth.
Anyone can find today material about the Christian faith on the Internet. In other words, everyone, including the Christian faith, benefits more from scientific truth than from promoting ignorance. Many steps have to be made in order to bring together faith and science and I am convinced that improving this relation will strengthen both of them. Only trying to understand the factual truth of the origins of universe and humankind, one can have a healthy base for the understanding of the world.
After a profound transformation, it is possible that many Christian doctrines will be very different than what we know today, but all of us will be closer to the truths we long for. As a matter of fact, the Christian world is already very different than a few hundred years ago and is less fanaticised and therefore much more tolerant and civilized comparing with that period. Many more people believe in God for themselves, for their personal spiritual enlightenment and not for the false ideal of the transformation of their religious faith in a universal religious ideology imposed by force in society.
Trying to enforce a religious belief on someone else, regardless of his or her convictions is a moral crime which disqualifies totally the proponents of that religion from a moral point of view. The human beings are the most important part of His creation on Earth, the only one able to comprehend and to love Him. We should understand deeper and respect the human motives in connection to faith both when individuals accept God and when they reject Him.
Only He can judge the value and the importance of such motives in their lives. As a matter of fact, according to the Bible, the faith in God is a gift from Him and not everyone receives this gift in a comprehensive way. Some people reject this gift for considerations related to the adherence to another vision of the world than the one proposed by the book of Genesis. The care for human beings automatically means also respect for God, because Jesus has taught His disciples that the love for God derives from the treatment of other human beings. The care for other human beings comes from working in the service of their health, wellbeing, security, comfort, information and so on.
Science and technology do that on an important scale every day. They are good deeds similar to what Jesus did on earth because they are done for the general wellbeing of humankind.
God's perfect reflection
In this study, I attempt to present some of the most important inconsistencies coming from the first book of the Bible, Genesis chapters Every such incongruence can be an issue for religious faith related to the reading of the Bible. The reading of the Bible can transform someone into a believer or into an unbeliever and for this reason I consider that the approach in an analytical way of some important themes is extremely important. There is a distance between an occasional reading of the Bible and a professional reading in which every detail of the texts reveals a whole bunch of information from all domains.
For this reason, a professional reading very attentive to the coherence of the texts can help any interested reader to go deeply into different aspects, which otherwise can escape attention. In lack of a thorough reading of the biblical account of the creation many add their imagination to the actual record and see it not as it derives from the texts, but in an amended way. In this manner, many visualise the creation of the universe other than it is said by the texts of the Bible.
It was somewhere, deeply under the waters of an imaginary primeval sea, as a heap of matter and not as a spherical planet. The earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep. Genesis 1; 2. Until the second day of the creation, according to the book of Genesis, the whole material universe had been a formless void. In spite of this, the Bible actually says that in the first day there had been a morning and an evening.
The morning and the evening would have happened without a sky, without sun, and without earthly atmosphere. In the first day of creation, it would have been a morning and an evening under waters, generated by a supposed artificial light, in the depth of the ocean, even if the light travels with great difficulty under water, in full only until m and very little beyond that profoundness.
Many contradictions emerge from a systematic, unbiased analysis of the book of Genesis which is something other than the dogmatic studies which flow from many Christian denominations. I also try to establish in this analysis if God of the Bible is the same as God of the philosophers and theologians, or if the Bible says something different about Him than the image offered to the believer by the history of Christian philosophical thought. How did the philosophers of religion and theologians reach their conclusions that are so widespread amongst the Christians?
Christians see as an undisputable truth, that God is a spiritual Being, that He has no origin, He lives forever, He loves and is All-powerful and that He is Omniscient and Omnipresent. Where in the book of Genesis or in other parts of the Bible is written about all these? Is it possible that God from the book of Genesis is a lesser Being than is currently thought by religion, for example, another civilisation existing in this universe and being technologically superior to us, such as the proponents of the ancient astronauts theories believe?
Is it not reasonable to understand God as the representative of a civilisation which is interested in us and probably wants to control us? This study can help us to come closer to an answer. There is also another possibility, which can be contemplated. The Bible could speak about two different realities. On one side an infinite and loving divine Reality, and on the other side, an extra-terrestrial civilisation interested in the evolution of humankind and them both being in conflict with one another. Some answers to these questions, sometimes at the most fundamental level, can be contained in a critical study of the narratives of the book of Genesis chapters What the texts of the book of Genesis are trying to tell us, what are their inbuilt messages?
Are all the messages, contained by different texts, in harmony with one another? Of course, this type of analysis was done before, but what I try to achieve here is a more complex evaluation, in which theology, sciences, and philosophy are involved. I will try to reconsider all arguments, which were used before, but also, more importantly, new argumentation, detached from any engagement to a certain religious stance or to another.
Personally, I am a faithful man, but also I am an admirer of sciences and of their practical results and I fully consider that both religion and science are two facets of the same coin, as a matter of fact, of the same reality. Separation of the sciences and religion, to me, is an effect of a huge manipulation, practiced during a long period of time. Some elements, of the reality, can be easily accessed and understood by the sciences and other elements, and mostly the infinite dimension of it, still remains open for access, only via revelation if this revelation is real knowledge and not only classified as such by religion.
This is a critical look, on the Christian religion and particularly on the texts of the first 11 chapters of the book of Genesis. This critical and analytical approach is not made by an agnostic or an atheist but by a practicing Christian.
Nevertheless, it could be that the amount and the level of the criticism of this present study surpass the criticism usually made by most agnostics or atheists to the Bible. From my point of view, the first 11 chapters of the book of Genesis must either stand or drop, from the standards of authentic knowledge. If they contain a hidden spiritual message when they are read as parables this message has to be a congruent one and not a bunch of contradictions.
At the same time, to me, a valid religious belief must be based also on factual truth when it claims the knowledge of reality in a certain area. If on the basis of the book of Genesis one says that he or she knows exactly how the universe came to be, he or she has to bring rational arguments to that, not only faith. Our scientific understanding of the universe and the development of theology changed greatly since the book of Genesis was written.
Ignoring the progress of knowledge in the areas of astrophysics and other scientific domains and clinging to the texts contained by the first 11 chapters of the book of Genesis, it is not only about personal faith in God but also about a religious stance promoted by the organised religion. Are we endowed with the capacity to know the reality or not?
The history of humankind proves that we are. Even the book of Genesis says that we are able to acquire knowledge of good and evil, moral knowledge, which is inseparable from knowledge of reality in general. After all, for the people who believe literally the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve would have eaten from the tree of knowledge and that would have given them certain abilities in the area of knowledge, hence humankind is able to develop sciences, according to the Bible.
If the biblical texts recognise the human capability to know reality that means that they implicitly admit that we can know the origin of the universe and of humankind. If this were not so, why would Adam and Eve have been punished for wanting to extend their knowledge? If knowledge was not within their reach, what danger could their attitude have posed? The human race has chosen a dignifying path; the path of knowledge is a human choice through which a human being can reach his or her dignity. Our present civilisation is the result of the path of knowledge, and the path itself has transformed humankind to be what it is today, a much-evolved civilization.
Scientific knowledge is real and is present in all domains. According to the Bible, God would have offered us, through our ancestors, a kind of shortcut to happiness akin to ignorance but they have chosen the hard way, the way of knowledge, a much longer and complex way but much more fulfilling. A comeback to the initial innocence, from which Adam and Eve wanted to escape, by turning our face from knowledge and from science, is not possible anymore.
We have to go onward and not backward. We must know and confront reality and make other choices, this time well informed by the knowledge of what the world really is, and how it came to be. In this way humankind can know God in depth by the choices that each of us makes, based on the knowledge of facts and not only on religious dogma. We are called to know the universe and also to know God using our reason and also our faith. Another problem that I try to solve in this study is the relationship between a personal view on the accuracy of the Bible and the strength of a Christian faith based on personal revelation and personal experience with God rather than on the biblical texts.
God is a Reality but not necessarily in the way that the book of Genesis presents Him. What foundation can have a personal faith which accepts that the universe was created through the Big Bang about If we separate the creation stories from the whole corpus of the Bible what still remains as a reliable source of information in the rest of the Bible? Can someone know that God exists only because he or she met Him in a personal spiritual experience without any relation with the texts of the book of Genesis? What comes first, the personal spiritual experience or the reading of the Bible?
Not everyone who reads the Bible believes that they represent accurate realities because there are many inconsistencies in it. In the process I have come upon some fundamental contradictions and this prevented me maintaining the same stance about Bible inspiration.
Of course, God could have released, if He so wished, contradictory accounts about an issue, but when reaching such a conclusion, one must know what the admission of such an improbable situation can tell us about Him and what impact that has at a theological level. Nevertheless, reason is the only criteria or the standard unit for the measurement of the consistency of any belief being it religious or otherwise.
In other words, a text which is contradictory in its internal structure cannot be valid, no matter from where it comes. If I start to contradict myself in what I maintain this is an important issue and strong enough to make my position unacceptable, including in the spiritual domain. A so-called revelation which is in contradiction with the laws of logic cannot come from God who is Logos, a term also meaning rationality.
Beside this subjective side, one must consider a more objective one; there are the results of the scientific observations of the outside world, which by no means can be neglected or discarded. In the same time, it is not irrational, I would say, to admit that there is a sort of mystical or esoteric relation between some individual human minds and a universal rationality or even with an unseen universal Consciousness, which manifests itself inside human beings through a certain type of lucidity, clear vision and revelation.
Nevertheless, it is one thing to integrate oneself into a bigger picture by his or her own spiritual mechanisms and it is another thing to be submitted socially to certain religious doctrines or dogmas foisted on individual consciousness in the name of some illusory ideals manipulated by a religious but also quasi-political force. Is Christianity the only way to become a more spiritual human being, or indeed can one better oneself and ascend to the spiritual ladder in more than one way?
Are other religions such as Buddhism or Islam or others as spiritual as the Christian religion? Is there any measurement unit for spirituality? What is the relationship between a spirituality inspired by religion and one induced by the sciences? I consider that sciences can also inspire someone to have spiritual experiences such as contemplative, meditative, revelatory intuitions and thoughts.
At the same time, Christianity promises not only a spiritual evolution or a certain moral improvement but much more than that, it offers a new nature to human beings. God and man, a new being, a man who has Godlike features and, even more, a man with a Godlike nature is something which can be seen as an unending path towards human spiritual development. Religion professes to bring the deification of man but what does this really mean? Do we assist at the rising of a new dignity for man or of a new race spiritually motivated? And yet the whole idea of Christianity is concentrated in the deification of the human beings.
In the N. Can there be a Godlike man and woman wiser, more intelligent, more generous, more efficient and more powerful? Can this come only through spirituality and revelation or a continuous evolution in scientific knowledge is also needed? There is a long competition between human self-achieved knowledge and messages which are considered to have come from divine revelation and this phenomenon could affect negatively the reputation of religion as a transformative force.
Many religious people seem very suspicious of human acquired knowledge, and in this way the old legendary dispute between God, Adam and Eve and also Satan about knowledge extends until our days. According to the Bible this debate would have started in the Garden of Eden or even earlier in the Kingdom of God. As a matter of fact, it is a conflict between the attitude of someone waiting to get everything from above and someone who researches in order to find out for himself or herself how the world was made.
Is there any scientific value in the biblical narratives from the first 11 chapters of the book of Genesis or have they only a theological, metaphorical, symbolical and spiritual value? When considering the real scientific value of the biblical narratives one should not be mesmerised by the high spiritual offer of Christianity or of other religions. The profound resonances of a spiritual offer can hinder a demarche for a critical analysis of the biblical texts, and therefore such an endeavour must detach itself completely from any spiritual biases.
- Looking Back and Going Forward in IT.
- THE B.O.A.T (Book of Apocryphal Truth) Mysteries of the Kingdom.
- Advances in Heat Transfer: 43.
Is such a thing as spiritual neutrality possible?
Related Mirrors, Gods and Believing !
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved