Thought of the Day: Why Do We Die?

Today in class, my tutor raised an interesting issue. I'm not sure how it came about, other than we were studying the philosophy of mind. The conversation went like this:

Tutor: "did you know that scientists don't know why we die?"
Boy in class: "well if a truck hits you, that's how you die"
Tutor: "we don't know how we naturally die"

My tutor meant that if a person dies of 'natural causes', we don't know what that means or what that 'cause' was. It's something I had never thought of before, but it was an interesting point, especially coming from a person who doesn't think we have a soul and doesn't think that God exists. He admitted that there's something his 'all-knowing science' couldn't answer.

So why do we die of natural causes? What is that? What does it mean? Why are we mortal?

Well here's the answer, it's because we sin. Romans 6:23 'For the wages of sin is death' tells us that it is our sin that causes us to die. Death is the inevitable punishment for our sin. The second part of the verse gives us hope 'but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord'. Sin is the reason we die and we all sin. Science will never be able to tell us that. Christians still die because Christians still sin, but the difference is, with repentence and faith in the Saviour, Christians inherit everlasting life.

Did you know that Moses lived to be 120? Did you know that Abraham lived to be 175? It is believed Noah lived to be 950. Why? Because these were all righteous men of God. Remove the sin, as God does, and death can be postponed. All things are possible with God. Science would be inclined to disagree with the above statements about the ages of the prophets, but since science cannot find reasons for death, how could science prove these men did not live to be that long?

How great it is that God gives us the answers where science can't. We should always put our trust in Him.

"Why can't I have sex before marriage when I know I'll marry him/her?"

This is a question I was asked recently and a good in-depth answer to this question can be found here at GotQuestions?

I'm going to summarise the answer in 2 parts, starting with why sex before marriage (or outside of marriage e.g. adultery, or if you're divorced and already had sex) is wrong in the first place.

God designed sex to be for a married couple, it is the only safe place where sex can be practiced in the way God intended. It is only a good thing when used in its correct context, like a fire. If you start a fire it can do damage, but a fire in the proper context of a fireplace for example is a good thing. 1 Thessalonians 4:3 says 'For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality'. It is sexually immoral to have sex with more than one person at a time, to have sex with anyone you are not married to, to have sex with someone you are related to and to have sex with someone of the same gender as yourself (see verses in Leviticus).

Why did God intend sex to be only within marriage?

• Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, sex is emotionally bonding as well as physically bonding. The temporary emotional attachment during sex can still cause damage afterwards. Feelings of being used, self-worth only existing when you have intimate involvement with another person, etc. God does not want this emotional damage to occur
• Health issues can arise - your chances of picking up an STD increases with the number of partners you have, but can still be picked up from having sex with only one person and that includes oral sex
• Pregnancy risks - children should not be raised outside of marriage, especially with only one parent or by parents who are not emotionally or financially prepared for a child
• Your body is God's temple, because he created you, this is even more the case if you are already a Christian since the Holy Spirit lives inside you. 1 Corinthians 6:18-19 'Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?'

So now we understand why sex is forbidden outside of marriage, we can address the issue of why it is still wrong to have sex outside of marriage if you intend to marry the person. Again, I'll say that this is explained very well on the website I have mentioned at the start of this post, the link to the page is also there. But here's a short summary:

• You're still not married for a start, so the rules I just explained about why sex outside marriage is wrong, still apply. There's health risks, emotional risks and pregnancy risks. You're also still abusing your body which is a temple of God
• The emotional risks could become even worse if you say you'll get married and break up
• It shows a complete lack of respect for yourself and for the other person. If you love each other enough to get married, it shouldn't be hard to wait until then to have sex. If you can't, you're showing either you don't want to (so you don't respect the other person enough to wait) or you have no self-control over yourself which is a very slippery slope. How will you deal with other sexual temptations such as adultery and pornography?
• Think to yourself, will you actually get married if you're already having sex? Is that what the other person is sticking around for? Would you still be together if you removed sex from the relationship?

Remember that God made these rules with ultimate power and knowledge. He knows how these rules will pan out and work for us, He can see all the other possible options and where they'll lead and he chose these rules. That means He knows it's the best thing for us. We might think we know better, but we don't and God doesn't want us to learn that we don't the hard way. He wants us to trust Him and what He asks. So trust Him. We're not animals, so we should treat ourselves and our partners with dignity and respect.

Unjust War & Pacifism

I would like to write a post on my pacifist beliefs, but since I'm constantly being asked "well what would you have done in World War II?" and I don't have a real answer to that one yet, I'm currently re-evaluating my stance. But I don't believe war solves anything.

I think that fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity. It's completely counter-productive. The best answer I have right now to the aforementioned question is this: killing innocent Germans who have been forced to fight, did not stop Hitler, nor the death camps. Hitler killed himself out of fear. You could argue that was due to our (the Allies) involvement/presence, but my point is even if that were the case, many innocent German lives were taken to achieve that end. Is that justified?

If you're wondering (slightly off-topic) about whether I'm pacifist in the sense of self-defence, the answer is no I'm not. I am anti-war in the sense of: I don't think it's right to police other countries for things such as nuclear weapons, I don't think it's right to pick fights, I don't think it's right to kill/injure innocent people. With breaches of human rights I think we must be careful. We need to know that we can actually have an impact and change something, that the person(s) in question are in definite breach of human rights and won't back down (e.g. policing and censoring internet doesn't count). We can't just storm in willy-nilly and get our people killed. We must also try not to take any life at all, especially innocent lives.

However, if someone comes up to me provoking attack and they will hurt me, they are then guilty and I have the right to defend myself since I am innocent and it is them who have crossed a line by choice. Having said that, I would try not to use overly accessive means.

Going back on topic to my views on war, I most definitely disagree with wars I find bullying and pointless such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq being pointless because we knew full well they did not have WMDs (weapons of mass destruction) but we made some pathetic excuse that they did and we knew, fiddle some papers to make it 'legal' (how you can have 'legal' and 'illegal' war criteria in such a violent and chaotic situation I do not know, who makes these rules? Why should we stick to them? It's war!) and stormed in to the public would think we were cracking down on 'terror' and Al-Qaeda. Afghanistan is pointless because we will never be able to stop the Taliban and even if we did what's to stop another group along the same lines forming?

I hate seeing innocent lives being taken on both sides, I hate seeing the effect it has on people and most of all I hate the propaganda that's spread about how these people are 'heroes' and how shocking it is when they die (deaths are sad but it's war, people will die, why so shocked?), when they signed up of their own accord and really we're picking fights not defending anyone from anything. The worst part is the effect it has on families: wives losing husbands, children losing fathers, wives and children hardly seeing their husbands/fathers, mothers losing sons and worst of all children losing mothers.

At this point I'll stop talking and show you a video that illustrates my point, it makes me cry the whole way through:

Thought of the Day: The Implant

This post is one of my more off-topic posts, a post that isn't an answer to a question that I've been asked, nor is it a thought connected to philosophy or theology. It is however a thought linked to society and the theology of how men and women should be treated within a sexual relationship. It's kinda hard for me to write about in a way that isn't overly offensive and in a way that gets my views across but here it goes.

A few of my friends have had or have the implant and recently it's made me think a lot about my attitudes toward it. An impant (for those who aren't sure) is a small plastic tube that's inserted into a woman's upper arm. It releases a hormone to prevent pregnancy. (For the more technical and detailed explanation, click here). It can last up to 3 years.

I came to the conclusion that I think it's pretty disgusting. Not just the fact that it looks weird, you're taught it's bad to have foreign objects in your body and then you can have this thing that looks like a straw sewn into your arm. Not to mention how gross it looks to have it put in and taken out. But on top of all that, I think it affects the way guys treat girls.

I know it's a woman's own choice if she has an impant or not (and that has just made me think, I wonder how old you have to be? In the UK they'll do anything to stop teen pregnancies so I'm thinking a 13 year old could get one quite easily without family members needing to know). But it still makes me think of movies and things like 'A.I.', 'The Terminator' and 'I, Robot' where robots are editied, opened up, had bits added and removed to improve them or to stop them being a certain undesirable way. That's pretty much how I see girls with implants.

I realise at this point I may sound pretty offensive to some people, but it's how I honestly feel. Even if you're in a loving, serious, long-term relationship, or even in a marriage, it seems to me like you've been edited to be more desirable or more convenient for a man. You can be used for sexual purposes without the unsatisfactory result of becoming pregant. You've been tailor made for a man's selfish purposes. If you chose to have it because you don't want to get pregant, I still feel like it's the same thing. You may have initially chosen to do that for your reasons, but you've still set yourself up to be more convenient for a man.

I'm not particularly feminist either, I don't care if men want to claim they're stronger, or that they can handle bigger cars, but I do care if men think they can mistreat women purely because they're men. I also have a problem with women who encourage men to do this, either by being hookers, dressing like they're in a porn movie when they're going to class, etc. The implant I feel, inadvertantly encourages men to see women as sex objects, because it's more risk free for them.

The girl is the one who has to go to the doctor, have a minor surgery, have a foreign object in her body, have her hormones messed up for 9 months, have her cycle messed up for 3 years and then have another minor surgery to either change it or have it taken out. Meanwhile the guy can just carry on with life and worry about nothing when it comes to having sex. I don't really think that's fair.

So to conclude, I think the implant is not only disgusting and unnecessary, but I think it enables men to further objectify women. I for one will NEVER be putting one in my body, mark my words ;)

"How can God punish ME for the way HE created me?"

A friend asked me this week why God punishes us for our sins when he created us imperfect, meaning we will always sin even if we choose to follow Him and repent of our sins. The answer to this question can't be summarised too briefly and I will explain further, but to try and summarise: the reason is that in order to make us perfect and able to stop sinning against Him, God would had to have created us without free will. Since we have free will, we aren't perfect and will always sin, but we still have the choice (because of free will) to acknowledge that sin is wrong, turn from it and repent.

If that short version is a sufficient enough explanation, hopefully once I've explained it further it will make more sense. So stay with me!

God's desire for a genuine relationship with us is paramount to His creating of the world. He desires a deep, meaningful relationship with us. Think of it like a relationship you yourself have. You would not want a person (whether it be a parent/child/sibling) to love you and have a relationship with you for the sake of it - because you're there or because you're being forced to by someone. It is exactly the same for God. He doesn't want robots that are forced to love Him or follow Him, he wants a real relationship with children who love Him and follow Him because they choose to. That is why God gave us free will.

The reason He can punish us therefore, is because with this free will we all have the choice to try not to sin, to turn away as much as we can and to say we're sorry when we fail. If we do this, it is perfectly acceptable in God's eyes, we are doing what He has asked of us in the best way we can considering how He made us. To know this and to continue sinning with no remorse and no attempt at changing our ways, is to deny the plan God has created to avoid sin and punishment. That does warrant punishment.

He is not punishing us for the way we have been created, for our imperfection or for the fact we have once sinned, as he knows this to be the case before we are even born. God punishes us for turning away and refusing to adopt His plan of salvation - to wipe us of our sin and imperfection and to in future make us perfect. This way we can enjoy a true relationship with our Father and He with His children.

I leave you with this verse:
"He died for everyone so that those who receive his new life will no longer live for themselves. Instead, they will live for Christ, who died and was raised for them" - 2 Corinthians 5:15

Thought of the Day: Everyday Miracles

Someone asked me recently if God performs miracles today. I believe he does, but not in the same way as he used to. We don't have Jesus on Earth today, so we see less of people being healed on the spot and with medical advances we don't have as many people in need of healing in everyday life, e.g. leprosy. We don't need God to part the Red Sea. However, God is still perfectly capable of healing and he still does, but that is just one type of miracle He performs. I have heard many stories of miracles performed today, including healings.

But consider this: before we complain about God not doing what we want, not saving people, not healing people, not protecting people, think about just how many times in a day God does do these things. For example, a driver loses control of his car momentarily and mounts the curb. Maybe God intervened by stopping pedestrians who would have been walking on that path at that time from going outside. That would be God protecting people, but who would ever know this was the case?

I think situations like this are examples of small miracles from God that could be happening all the time, but unless someone realises it, they go unnoticed, leaving people to assume that God is no longer looking out for us and performing miracles. And that's before we even start to think about bigger miracles God performs ;)

"If God is forgiving, why is there a Hell? Surely I'm forgiven?"

This post is a response to a question I've been asked a couple times recently. I've been asked why some people go to Hell and why does Hell even exist if God forgives? Surely God will forgive everyone and we'll all go to Heaven?


Here is the answer in a nutshell: God forgives those who SEEK his forgiveness, apologise for the sins (wrongdoings) they've committed and try not to do that same bad thing again.

If you're not sorry, God will not forgive you. Imagine your friend has repeatedly lied to you and it's spiraling out of control. Nothing they seem to say to you is the truth anymore. You're getting pretty frustrated. Your friend turns to you and says "so? You're a pretty forgiving person. You forgive me right?" Do you? Your friend then turns to you and says "I'm not sorry. I don't think I've done wrong. Lying isn't a big deal to me". Will you forgive them? What if your friend says sorry and carries on exactly the same? Do you forgive them then? But suppose your friend says "I'm so sorry, I didn't realise how much I hurt you and I'll try not to lie in future". They still do lie from time to time, but much less and they are sincerely trying not to. Now you're much more likely to forgive that person than you were before.


In the same way, if you try to turn from your sin and apologise for when you do wrong, God will forgive you. No man is perfect except Jesus, so you will sin for your whole life. But the point is, you try your hardest not to and if someone were to look at your life on a timescale, they would see improvement. You can't just sin thinking it's fine because you'll be forgiven, since this is the same situation with the friend that I just discussed. It is admitting your sin, apologising and turning from it, that will bring you forgiveness. If you don't put your faith and trust in Jesus Christ and turn from sin, you will be destined for Hell.


Why?

Imagine a court of justice. A man has come before the court accused of theft. This is clearly a violation of the law. He has been found guilty and the judge is about to sentence him. The man says "judge I'm sorry, please don't send me to jail". What will the judge do? The man saying sorry doesn't change the fact he has broken the law. If the judge fails to sentence him, he is corrupt. The judge must seek justice and sentence the man. In the same way, if you have sinned and broken God's law, to achieve justice you must serve your sentence - in Hell.

However, if a second man were to step in and say, "I'll pay the fine so this criminal may walk free" then justice has been served. The man will walk free. Thankfully, Jesus stepped in to pay the fine for our sins, when he gave his life on the cross. That is the reason why God IS forgiving, but only to those who seek his forgiveness. There is a way to avoid spending eternity in Hell, but if you ignore this, your punishment is fixed in order for justice to be served.

My Thoughts on 'Soul Surfer' the Movie

This post is to share my thoughts on the movie 'Soul Surfer', not my thoughts on the book or a cinematic review of the film, just what I took away from watching it really.

I had already read Bethany Hamilton's book, so I knew what to expect from the film. As a quick summary for those unaware of the story, it's a film (adapted from her autobiography) about the life Bethany Hamilton, a 21 year old pro surfer from Hawaii. When she was 13, Bethany was attacked by a tiger shark whilst she was surfing in Hawaii with her best friend. Bethany made a full recovery but had big decisions to make. Where did this leave her surfing career? Why did this happen to her? How would her life go on with one arm?

What drew me to read her book and watch the film was that Bethany is a Christian. What I was interested in is how a Christian comes to terms with such a devastating life event?

So here's what I took away from watching the film, from a religious perspective:

• I was impressed with how Bethany's Christian life was portrayed and since the Hamilton family checked over the script and were on set during production, I would imagine this portrayal was very true to life. Bethany put God first. When it was time for church on Sunday, she would be in church - not surfing. Something I think defines a Christian. If you can't put God before your favourite sport and instead you work God around your favourite activity, you're not really allowing him to be in the driving seat of your life
• Bethany brought God into every aspect of her life. Her family were seen giving grace before meals and Bethany said she would keep her father in her thoughts and pray for him as he prepared for knee surgery
• Bethany attended youth group at her church, so she was able to study God's Word as well enjoy surfing. She was able to unite the two, rather than make a decision of one or the other
• When she turned down the opportunity for a missions trip in order to receive surfing sponsorship, Bethany felt guilty and sought advice from her mother and youth leader. Showing she didn't really want to put her own interests before God's call
• Bethany did go on a different missions trip with her youth group and found it very rewarding. She also made a big difference in the lives of those she helped
• When the attack happened, Bethany didn't scream or cry, instead she prayed. "Please help me Jesus", her thoughts were immediately to God, but not in anger
• On the way to the hospital, Bethany's mother also prayed. "Please Lord don't take her"
• Whilst waiting for Bethany to wake up, her father sat by her bedside reading the Bible
• The Hamilton family never became angry at God, or blamed him for what happened. Bethany herself thinks the attack strengthened her faith
• When Bethany felt like her life was over, she couldn't adjust to life with one arm and her surfing career was over, her father reminded her that she hadn't lost everything - she was still alive as her and her family had prayed for
• Bethany remembered Philippians 4:13, 'for I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength' during her recovery
• Bethany's youth pastor quoted Jeremiah 29:11, '"for I know the plans I have for you" says the Lord. "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you a hope and a future"
• Bethany did deal with big theological questions however, asking her youth pastor "how can this be God's plan for me?" to which she replied "I don't know why bad things happen. But I have to believe that something good will come from this". It did, as Bethany said if she could change what happened she wouldn't, because now she can reach so many people through her story

Overall I thought this movie was a huge inspiration to Christians. It shows how you can do what you love in life, without having to push your faith to the sidelines or abandon your faith altogether. Bethany is a great testament to how God can bring good out of bad and how even Christians, as written in the Bible, will receive personal struggles, but God is always in control.

Thought of the Day: Keeping Your Focus on God

This is a little bit of a 2-in-1 post. I'm going to write about keeping your focus on God in your day to day life, but also about choosing hobbies and activities that please God. So here goes.

My university's Athletic Union (AU) announced today details on the annual Sports Fair. It reminded me of how much I want to dance regularly. Last year, I wanted to join the dance team in the AU, but one of my lecturers chose not to follow the 'Free Wednesday Afternoons from Classes' policy and I had class during and after dance meets. I saw cheerleading being promoted and thought, 'that seems cool, they add dance with some cheer, I'll do that instead. I can make the training sessions'. So I paid my membership and joined the cheerleading squad.

This is the part where choosing hobbies that please God comes into it. Everyone knows the stereotype of the cheerleader: hot, popular, slutty, fun-loving, you know how it is. I ignored that when I joined. Well, turns out that stereotype was half right in my squad. I spoke to many girls who'd been in the squad for over a year, who loved to tell me about all the nights they got smashed (with the squad), the number of times they woke up naked next to a guy whose name they couldn't remember and warned me that ANYTHING that happened between me and one of the footballers we cheered for, would spread like wild fire between the football team and the squad. That wasn't a great start to the social side.

When I went out on a social with the cheerleaders (it was kinda mandatory after our first dance performance was in a bar) I got quite a shock. Firstly, I was the only one showing no interest in getting hammered. Secondly, it was a mixed social with the football team, who seemed to think (since I was a cheerleader) it wouldn't take much for me to end up going home with them and that I also didn't mind if they tried to touch me. Well I wasn't 'game' for either. I was also one of about 3 cheerleaders who were wearing dressings that did cover out hineys. Even our coach for body conditioning was drunk, stumbling around, falling all over the place, shouting swear words. Great example! That was the first and last cheer social I attended.

People assumed that because I was a cheerleader, I was an easy, retarded, gossipy, slut who enjoyed getting drunk and sleeping around. Well I wasn't, I'm not and I won't be. People wouldn't talk to me as much because I wouldn't go on the socials (for the above reasons). At that point I thought "why am I doing this?" Cheer was very serious business, you had to attend 8 hours training a week (2 gym, 2 dance, 2 cheer and 2 stunt) plus attend games more or less every Sunday. Which involved catching a bus circa 8am, being in the freezing cold for the game for 4 hours (warm up, entertaining the crowd and cheering for the team) and not getting home again until circa 10pm every time.

More effort and more of my time was going into cheerleading than to God and for what? To be considered stupid and promiscuous? To be shunned because I wouldn't do what they did. Even some of my flatmates would ask "if you're a Christian, why are you cheerleading? Is that allowed?"

1 Peter 2:12 - Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.

Ephesians 5:8 - For once you were full of darkness, but now you have light from the Lord. So live as people of light.

If you can cheer without all this negativity, I guess you could do it, but for me personally I felt like it was seriously interfering with my faith. I didn't have enough time for God and I couldn't stand the reputation I was bringing upon myself, even when I knew and so did my friends that it was wrong. After 3 months in the squad, I quit.

Moving more onto keeping your focus on God, by all means have a hobby, an activity that you enjoy. But don't let it consume you. Some girls on the squad would live and breathe cheerleading. If they weren't at a game all day, in class or in their 8 hours training, they were watching football games, practicing even more in their free time, or going to games. Their lives revolved around it and they had no outside interests or any other hobbies. They're focus and happiness came entirely from cheerleading. Our worth and focus should not be completely invested in a hobby, especially one that isn't viewed as something Godly. (I thought cheer gave me a bad rep, but recently one of my 'Christian' classmates decided she would start poledancing classes. I think that's worse).

Colossians 3:1-3 - Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God

My plan this year is to do pure dance. Now I have Wednesday afternoons off, I could join the dance team in the AU. But I don't think I will. I don't want to be forced into making the team my everything. I need to find a balance. This summer I went to dance classes at home that were fun and I learnt new stuff. But there was no obligation to come every single week, no strict competitions and you could come for 1 hour a week or 4. There was no pressure. It was great because it was everything I wanted from dance, but allowed me to keep my focus where it belongs. I will try to find a place to continue this at university, otherwise I will have to surrender dance. God doesn't want you not to have interests and do activities, but He does request that He comes first and I agree.

Thought of the Day: Bad Churches

I recently spoke to a couple of friends about what initially drew me to attending Quaker meeting. The simple reason is, I had been to many different types of churches including Methodist, Evangelical and Anglican and I found many examples of very un-Christian behaviour. To give credit where credit is due, I did not find this in the Methodist church I attended and the Anglican church I attended I have heard has improved since.

Some people don't understand what I mean by this. In the Bible we are warned of those in Church authority who are not actually Godly: "And now I make one more appeal, my dear brothers and sisters. Watch out for people who cause divisions and upset people’s faith by teaching things contrary to what you have been taught. Stay away from them. Such people are not serving Christ our Lord; they are serving their own personal interests. By smooth talk and glowing words they deceive innocent people" - Romans 16:17-18 (NLT)

In my situation, I heard one pastor speak who said "all Christians need to turn away from sin. This means, they stop sinning for good". Well, that would make us perfect and no human (besides Jesus) is, was or will ever be perfect. Hence our need for salvation. Maybe he didn't realise the implications of his words, but if I can pick up on that and I'm not theologically trained, I think he needs to go back to Bible college before his whole congregation get the wrong idea. Another church told me that I had to be baptised in order to receive salvation and holy communion. Um, that isn't taught in the Bible either my friend.

In another church, I saw youth being denied access to the childrens and teens youth group and Bible study classes unless they could pay £2. The leader of these groups was stood in the doorway of the church bouncer-style, accepting the money and moving aside for those who paid and turning away those who couldn't. Since when did church become an elite group for those who can pay their way? I was shocked. Later on this youth leader left the church and his wife and 2 sons, for a younger female from the congregation, whom he confessed to having an affair with for circa 2 years. And this man leads Christian youth?

The Bible did warn us that in some cases these incidents would happen. God is perfect, his followers are not. More recently I have heard of churches lean more towards cult-like teachings. Make no mistake, the Quaker meeting I attend is very Godly, with almost all its members still staying true to the Christian faith. Talking to them, they are there for the same reasons as me. They also have had bad church experiences in places that don't teach the Gospel correctly.

On a side note: these Christian Quaker meetings are sometimes going by the name of 'Friends Church' now to show the reunion between Quakerism and Christianity. This is like Quakerism was back in the days of its foundation, as opposed to more recent times when some Quakers have missed the mark in trying to be accepting and pacifistic, forfeiting somewhat on their Christianity.

So if you have had a bad church experience also, I'm not telling you to run to the nearest Quaker meeting! If they're more post-modern and liberal then that will not help either. I'm encouraging you instead to check out this article by Focus on the Family about how to overcome your bad church experience. I certainly found it very useful. Good luck in finding your new Christian church home!

Some Wise Words from Charles Spurgeon

I found this today from The Evidence Bible's website and it really summarises nicely some of the struggles I face in my walk with the Lord:

“In what an unhappy condition is that person who cannot derive comfort from the salvation of his own child! Yet there are many men and women in such a state. They care nothing for the souls of their own offspring. It would bring no joy to them if they saw all their children walking in the truth nor does it cause them any concern to see them otherwise. To see them sharp in business, or fair in countenance, is their main ambition; but to have them beloved of the Lord is no matter of desire. Poor souls, their own carnality overflows and saturates their family! To some it would even cause anger and wrath to see their children turning to the Lord; they so despise true religion that, if their sons and daughters were converted, they would rather hate them than love them the more. Such is the alienation which sin works in the human mind, that it will in some instances curdle human affection into enmity, at the sight of the grace of God.” - Charles Spurgeon

Why The Theory of Evolution is Wrong - Hands Down

I warn you now that this post is going to be VERY long! On the plus side, I'm referencing where I'm reading the theory of evolution from and directly responding to each section of it. As much as you may think I'm "ignoring the facts", you can see that I'm not :)

So we all know in short, that the theory of evolution is the process by which it is believed humans and other animals 'adapted' to their surroundings and environment via 'natural selection'. This theory is accepted due to apparent 'evidence,' which is what I'll be focusing on. We know the theory, the flaws in the theory that come from the lack of evidence is what I'll be focusing on in this post.

Fossils

So one thing we're told is that fossils show how species 'evolved' from one type to the next. If you go to my first reference from Berkeley University you'll see a page about horse fossil samples. The page explains that these fossils show that the transitional forms predicted by evolution, did indeed exist. I disagree.

This shows similarites between animals that existed years ago and those that exist in modern day. Just because the fossils are very similar, this does not prove in anyway that the first one became the last. Showing a bunch of fossils together and saying they're the same thing doesn't tell me anything other than speculation.

Anatomy

On Berkeley University's page on evolutionary anatomy, you can read about animals and their dewclaws. The page claims that because animals like pigs have 'reduced dewclaws', this conclusively proves they once had more 'digits' that then became reduced. I wonder why they have made this assumption. For some reason it's talked about it as if it's common sense. For all scientists know, these 'reduced dewclaws' could have some purpose that hasn't been discovered yet. There was a time when science thought smoking was harmless, but now we know better. Maybe the same would happen there is scientists put more time, thought and research into it.

There is also a section on how monkeys and humans have similar chest structures. Actually I think that points more toward a creator than to evolution. There's a reason for their chests being similar as the page explains. It's to do with the need for their shoulders and arms to move. I think this shows a creator using the same blueprint, as it were, for both species. He knows what works for each kind of animal.

Comparative Anatomy

Again on my third reference from Berkeley, there is a page comparing the anatomy of a whale with that of a hummingbird. The page says, "Their bodies have been modified and parts have been lost through natural selection, resulting in adaptation to their respective lifestyles over millions of years". I'm thinking, 'Does this person hear themself?!' We're supposed to believed that naturally and accidentally modification occured in these animals? And people think I'm deluded for believing in a Creator? Interesting.

Secondly, just look at these two animals! Just because they both have ribs, skulls and hind limbs, scientists believe they're clearly related. Right.

Snakes with Legs
If you check out my fourth reference you'll read about how scientists think that snakes used to have legs, but evolved/adapted not to have them anymore. (Sounds counterproductive to me, but let's separate logic from opinion). Maybe the 'limb buds' spoken about, that can be observed in the embryo, aren't actually that for a start. We look kinda like sea horses with a long section sticking out our backsides when humans are embryos, so I guess we evolved from seahorses then? Because we look kinda similar as embryos? Plus, it's said "some" species, so where did the other snakes come from? The ones that never had legs? Since we seem to think everything had to come from something else?

Maybe, instead of one becoming the other, there were 2 different species of snake and one died out? But they were so similar to each other that you think one was a snake that evolved into a modern day snake. I'm seeing a continuous pattern here than in science terms, things observed to be similar must basically be the same, or were previously the same.

Whales with Teeth

This is pretty much the same thing as the snakes. A skull was found that looks like a baleen whale but it has teeth, when these whales actually lose the teeth they are born with. Firstly, let's review again that baby baleen whales have teeth that they loose. Maybe this is also a baby whale skull that didn't lose it's teeth yet? It could always have been that way for all they know. Or maybe this was an anomalie? These things happen. Just because you found one, doesn't mean you can say "All whales used to have teeth all the time. They don't know, so they must have adapted/evolved to lose them. For some unknown reason. Fact". Nothing has been proved there in terms of evolution.

Molecular Evidence

Berkeley's page on molecular evidence says "Roundworms, for example, share 25% of their genes with humans. These genes are slightly different in each species, but their striking similarites nevertheless reveal their common ancestry". Note there: striking similarities. Scientists are still using things that are similar to argue that said things were once the same. Still not buying it really.

It seems this whole theory of evolution business stems from someone really wanting everything to have come from the same origin. It's reminiscent of why we discredit Freud as a scientist. He had a theory and collected only evidence that would support the theory, rather than the other way around. (Evidence collected leads to a theory). We think Freud's evidence lacks scientific credibility, but not the theory of evolution. Again, very
interesting.

Natural Selection

When talking about dogs descending from wolves, this page says: "These observations demonstrate that selection has profound effects on populations and has the ability to modify forms and behaviors of living things to the point that they look and act very unlike their ancestors". Well isn't that convenient? Science says that some animals have different DNA, look different and act different, but they're still related. I see no logical basis for this argument at all. What science are they going on then to establish this 'relation?'

Ecology
If you'd be so kind as to click here, you'll see a page about sparrows that says: "House sparrows in the north are larger and darker colored than those in the south. Darker colors absorb sunlight better than light colors and larger size allows less surface area per unit volume, thus reducing heat loss—both advantages in a cold climate. This is an example of natural selection".

Here's a thought - maybe they were always like that and 2 different types of sparrow existed for that very reason previously mentioned. Why did the sparrows have to be the same and then change due to their environment? I think this just suggests a clever creator who made them that way. Why would they need to survive, or adapt, or evole, if they were pure accident? Furthermore, how could they?

It was previously mentioned that, "In any ecosystem there are finite opportunities to make a living. Organisms either have the genetic tools to take advantage of those opportunities or they do not". Well surely, everything would just die out? Firstly, for the reasons I just metioned, they surely would have no reason or capability since they were an accident as a result of primordial sludge. But this process we're told took millions of years. They would be dead before they could make those changes.

Consider this: my parents are fairly average height. I have 3 brothers who are all tall - over 6ft. My dad isn't. I'm not. My grandparents weren't tall, my great uncles weren't tall. It goes on. Where did that tall trait come from? Secondly, there is no guarantee that it will pass on to my nieces and nephews and it certainly didn't exist before (if at all) for at least 2 generations. Passing down traits is too sporadic to be "natural selection". A trait that doesn't appear to exist suddenly appears in 3 out of 4 children, yet a trait that is apparenly carried may never be passed on. Secondly, why did my brothers need to 'evolve/adapt' to be taller?

With this logic, We don't need to worry about global warming and carbon dioxide, because we'll all just adapt to breathe that instead of oxygen. We don't need to worry about smoking, drugs and alcohol because we'll all just adapt to deal with that too. No you say? Surely by evolutionary logic that is in fact true. It will just take millions of years. Meanwhile, in case you didn't notice, people are dying of these things before they can develop and pass on that trait!

Finally, these are all environmental factors and it's scientifically accepted that environmental factors can't
actually be passed on. E.g. if I can cope really well in the heat, doesn't mean my kids will. So how would environmental traits ever pass on? Even before we consider the fact that animals would die out beforehand.

Experiments
This page explains why species die out, not how they adapt or evolve, by using an example of fish. Evolution is still not proven by these means either.

Science Strikes Back

So now to conquer this error, scientists have come up with 'punctuated equilibrium'. The suggestion that these environmental changes happened rapidly, e.g. in response to flood or drought. So there you have it, if that's possible then we definitely don't need to worry about how global warming will affect human life! In which case, why did it take millions of years for other species?

Here's the proof: evolution supposedly occurred so quickly that there wasn’t time to leave any fossils as evidence. (AKA, there is none, since the previous sections of the theory relied heavily on fossils). Isn't that convenient? Once again. It seems again that the 'evidence' is being molded to fit the desired theory. The theory of punctuated equilibrium was proposed only as a way to explain the lack of fossil evidence for evolution.

To Summarise

There is no concrete evidence to support the theory of evolution. Thus, I will not support it, believe it, or force students in schools to learn and believe it. But for argument's sake, let's say evolution can be proved. What it will never prove, is that there is no God. If that's your excuse to deny the Lord, you'll have to try harder.

I leave you with this:

In his book 'Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth', Swedish embryologist Soren Lovtrup writes, “I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a great misfortune if an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a false theory. But this is what has happened in biology… I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.”

(This section taken from an article by: The Evidence Bible)

My Take on 'Gossip' Magazines

There are many people, especially girls, who enjoy reading 'gossip' magazines. To clarify before I go on, I'll define what I mean by that: magazines that feature scandalous stories about the personal lives of celebrities.

Examples of these are:

• Heat
• Now
• OK!
• Hello
• People
• Star
• Us Weekly

Many girls think it's harmless fun to read these magazines and have no issue spending upwards of £3 per issue on each one. For some reason, our society has got to a stage where we are so obsessed with celebrities that we want to know their every move. People will spend money, sometimes daily, so that they can track what's happening in the life of their favourite celebrity: what they're wearing, who they're dating, who's marrying, who's divorcing, who's cheating, how they're working out and what they're eating.

Here's why I would never spend a penny on said magazines and why I find them sinful to read even if you didn't buy one and you're feeling bored in a doctor's office:

• Gossip magazines are notoriously known for reporting speculation, rumours, lies and distorted or exaggerated facts. So tell me why you want to read something you know isn't completely, if at all, true?
• Would you want people looking at awful photos of you that have been taken without your awareness or permission? No? Then why do you want to look at such photos of other people?
• You are paying companies for the privilege of reading lies. People can actually make a living from creating fake stories about other people. Would you want someone to profit from selling lies about you? It's hurtful to hear something false said about you, before knowing someone got paid to tell it!
• Paying people to write lies also encourages their bad behaviour. Why would they stop if they know you'll pay for it? Why should they report the truth if you're satisfied with lies? They want to get your money not report what's true. The truth is, if you won't pay for it, they won't write it!
• The Golden Rule: seriously, you can't get upset if someone says something nasty about you if simultaneously you're reading potentially nasty stuff about other people e.g. look how much weight X celebrity has gained! Is Y cheating on her husband?
• The Bible also says that gossip is a sin. Leviticus 19:16 says it's sinful to slander someone (definition: the action of making a false spoken statement about a person that's damaging to their reputation). Psalm 34:13 says, 'Keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking lies'

There you have it, why I despise gossip magazines. So please no more comments about how it's over-exaggerating to refrain from reading them. My beliefs are clear and non-negotiable :)

Reflection on Today's Meeting 14/08/11

This post is just to share some of my thoughts during Meeting today.

Firstly, I was astounded at the contribution during Afterword by a young woman I'll call 'Ella'. Ella was born blind. She looked beautiful today in a pretty purple summer dress with a glittery black shawl. She spoke following on from ministry given by another person in the meeting about suffering.

The ministry was about the sin that can evolve from feeling like you're suffering as a result of not having the material things others have. The wealth others have. But how it's always possible to turn from that feeling and not let it develop into the sin of hating or stealing.

Ella said that she felt the same "material suffering" growing up and that it did make her feel hatred and resentment for people. But she overcame it by realising that she was in control of those feelings. But also, that those feelings will result in just punishment and overcoming them will result in just rewards. I thought it was amazing how she was able to overcome resentment in her situation and that she didn't 'play on' her blindness.

She highlighted that material suffering isn't the only suffering we face, but it is often the one most talked about. But even the suffering she faces by being blind and the difficulty it brings, doesn't make her resentful. That would cause her to sin and damage her character. She avoids it. But she admitted that she does slip, but agian faces the jst consequences of that. I thought it was powerful what she said. I wish I could have written that down word for word.

The second thing that happened today, was the shared lunch. I thought it was lovely that as Quakers we can bring different foods, homemade and purchased and share them all together. It was so nice to eat with each other and talk about various different topics. But at the same time, we remembered those in less fortunate circumstances. We pause for silence before we eat and when we're done. Giving a moment of thanks and appreciation without diving in to fill up as quickly as possible. At the same time, we thought about the famine in Africa and donated money on a plate that would be sent to help that cause.

To Those Who Play the Blame Game

I was having a conversation in Meeting today about people that play the blame game. When things don't go right in our life, like when we don't have the things we want, the money we want, the things everyone else seems to have. Or when something goes wrong, like a child being born with a condition, a diagnosis of something terminal, etc, we look for someone to blame.

Why do people blame God? Why do we think He does this to people? That He is the cause of these things?

I follow the Evidence Bible on Twitter and the other day this wonderful article was posted: click here to read it

I encourage you to check it out, because it explains why people like to blame God for what goes wrong in their life and why it's wrong to do so. Many people won't like the answer, it's not what they want to hear. They would prefer to run and hide. But it's the truth

How I Practice Simplicity

As I've mentioned in previous posts, I have chosen to live in a simple manner, as is the Quaker way.

For those who have asked, these are the ways I practice simplicity in my life:

• I don't buy things I don't need: I do not need an iPad for example because I have a laptop, an MP3 player, a phone, etc, ergo an iPad is an unnecessary expense. It's indulgent to buy things you don't need for the sake of having it or because it makes you cool, whatever
• I don't allow myself to become addicted to products/commit idolatry by becoming devoted to material things: this might sound silly, but if you have to have every Apple product no questions asked, you're addicted to technology. If you find yourself buying products you don't need or hardly use because Apple made it and you pour money into their products, you are effectively worshipping Apple because your hard earned cash will go to them without reason
• If I need something, I buy it on a budget: I hate to admit that I'm dependent on my phone, but I am. I feel unsafe if I leave the house without it. What happens if I break down? Get lost? Need an ambulance? So owning a phone is essential. But that doesn't mean I need to spend £500 on an iPhone and update it every time a new model is released. That's extravagant. My last phone cost £30, it was a touchscreen, it made calls and texts. Sorted
• I try to avoid excess: I don't need to buy 15 tops if I only need 5. So I don't. If I get bored of my clothes or they are too worn, I donate them to charity if possible or throw them out. Then I buy more. There is no need to buy more clothes than you need, nor is there any need to dump your clothes because they're out of season. Does it really matter at the end of the day?
• I try to make my money go further: I would never buy an item of clothing for some extortionate amount, £200 is definitely too much, but even £40 if you could buy the same thing for £15 I find is a waste. If I can buy 4 dresses for £20 instead of 1 dress for the same price, I do
• If I wear designers, I don't pay designer prices: this overlaps with other points, but basically I grab designer labels like Ralph Lauren, Aeropostale and Vans when they have sales. If shoes from supermarkets cost £10 and you can get designer shoes for £10 in a sale then go for the label if you like it. It costs the same as unbranded shoes
• I try to spend money productively: I don't spend stupid amounts of money on things like alcohol and partying. I drink sometimes and I go out to clubs etc. But I'm not one of those people that spends £40 in a night out on drinks or £40 a week to get into clubs

I think that's everything for now on how I practice simplicity :)

God Works in Quaker Meeting

I just wanted to share quickly today one of the ways we can see that God works regularly in Quaker Meetings.

Today in Meeting, a man stood up to give ministry (for those that don't know, ministry is when a person feels moved by God to stand and speak about something. It's what they feel God is telling them to say, not what they just want to stand up and talk about. A lot of people say they don't even know what came out of their mouth during ministry). He read a section from Advices and Queries in 'Quaker Faith and Practice' on simplicity.

It was interesting because this ministry spoke to me. Often ministry will reach at least one person in the room, occasionally everyone will relate directly to the ministry given. It just shows that it is God using the people in the room to say what he wants to say and what needs to be said. What the people gathered there are feeling and thinking is often responded to by God via ministry.

A friend of mine told me a story today of when she was feeling depressed over a long period of time. One day in Meeting, every ministry given was about helping those in need, comforting those suffering with depression. It confirmed to her that God knew how she was feeling and the ministry helped others reach out to her for the support she needed. Amazing!

Today's ministry spoke to me because this week I have been thinking about simplicity. How I live simply in the Quaker way. (I will do a separate post soon on how simplicity is in my life). But I was thinking about it this week because I was shopping for new clothes and trying to decided what was an appropriate amount to spend on an item of clothing and how much I should spend overall.

Is there any difference in spending £100 on 10 items of clothing or spending £100 on 1 item of clothing? This ministry spoke directly to me because it said 'do not be led into buying things you do not need nor things you cannot afford'. It answered some of my questions. If you don't need it, you shouldn't spend a penny on it. If you do need it but you can't afford it, drop it.

It just goes to show that God knows what's going on in your life and he does find ways to communicate! My God is there with me every week in Meeting.

My Take on Abortion

Recently this has been a topic of conversation among me and a friend. I will summarise my view and then explain why I hold this view. I do not agree with abortion under any circumstance, at any time during pregnancy.

Why?

1. Because there is no such thing as an 'accidental' pregnancy. If your condom breaks, you could have been taking the pill at the same time, or even have the implant. It's called 'double dutch', using 2 methods of contraception at once to prevent pregnancy. If you use the condom properly and take your pill properly in the first place, they're unlikely to fail anyway. If you're still worried. DON'T HAVE SEX! There's no excuse for abortion.
2. It could damage the woman permanently. Both physically - you may find it hard to conceive in future, if at all, your chance of miscarriages increase and emotionally - you don't know how you will react to what you're doing. Guilt, regret, sadness, depression can all set in at any time and stay there.
3. It's the biggest kick in the teeth you could ever give someone who is unable to have children for a legitimate reason (e.g. not someone who had an abortion before). While others are desperate for a child to care and love on, others stupidly get pregnant and terminate it. How nice.
4. You are taking a life, abortion is murder even if you'd like to live in ignorance and pretend it's not

"But what if you get pregnant from rape? That's harsh" my answer to this is: the woman's been raped, she's unlucky, if she's pregnant she's even more unlucky. Do you really think giving her an abortion will help anything? You might physically damage her, which will remind her forever more of her ordeal. You might emotionally damager her, do you want her to feel sad or depressed even further because she aborted? She wouldn't have to keep the child. There's always adoption.

"But what if the child has a disability?" Firstly, it's not always certain that the baby does. I know people who were told their baby would be born with down's syndrome. He wasn't. What if he was aborted? I know another couple who were told their baby would be born club-footed. Around 64 babies a year (I read in The Times circa 2009) are aborted due to club foot. That isn't even serious. This baby was born club footed and by the age of 2 this had been corrected via physiotherapy and corrective footwear. He is now 20 years old, walks fine in normal shoes and you can't tell by looking at him or his feet that he was ever club-footed. If we try to wean out 'disabilities' and imperfections before children are born, we might get it wrong and we do for a start, but how will that make those who are born with disabilities feel? And lastly, if you can't deal with your child having an issue, are you really ready to be a parent?

"But it's the woman's body, she should get to choose what happens" sorry, but you are in control of your body. If you don't want to be pregnant, take precautions, it isn't rocket science. It's not as if you walk along minding your own business and all of a sudden "oh crap, I'm pregnant". If you can't take precautions, don't have sex. And ignoring the instructions on pill packets for example (like taking them when you feel like it rather than at a required set time each day) then wondering why it didn't work is an example of a precaution missed. I've heard that excuse from someone trying to prove she did use protection.
If you're now wondering why it's such a big deal to abort babies, or fetuses if you prefer, I will now explain that.

Dictionary.com defines life as "The condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death". So, by definition, a fetus is still a life because it has the capacity for growth, it will be capable of reproduction, it does function, it does change and it can die.

Here's a summary of the stages of growth while the baby is in the womb:

• 3 weeks: The heart begins to beat, the brain begins to develop into sections
• 4 weeks: The central nervous system (CNS) begins to develop
• 5 weeks: By this time the nose and ears are externally formed, the kidneys also begin to develop
• 6 weeks: The brain emits measurable impulses, bodily movements can be observed and the baby can start to feel pain and respond to stimuli
• 7 weeks: The 4 chambered heart is completely formed, fingers and toes are completely separated
• 8 weeks: Every organ is now present and in place
• 9 weeks: The eyelids close at this point and the fetus is able to suck its thumb
• 10 weeks: Fingernails and toenails appear and the fetus will have a unique fingerprint
• 16 weeks: The mother can start to feel kicking, fine hairs begin to cover the whole body
• 22 weeks: The fetus is now viable

(Source: Abort73.com)

And FYI, in the UK an abortion can be carried out up to 24 weeks into the gestation. In which case the baby will have been viable for 2 weeks. If the fetus is thought to have a severe abnormality, there is no limit to when it can be aborted. Most women are granted an abortion on the grounds that it will damage their mental health to continue with the pregnancy if they don't want it. (Y'know, cause it's not like she could have thought about that before she got pregnant?)

And a few last words: if a pregnant woman is killed, the killer will be charged for murder (for the woman) and manslaughter of the fetus in the US and the UK. Why is this the case if the fetus isn't alive or a person? If you stop someone from living, because a fetus is living and will become viable, isn't that killing? If a diabetic requires insulin and you take it from them, they will die, you have caused their death. Isn't that the same if you kill a fetus dependant temporarily on the mother?

The Answer to My Struggles

In my last post I wrote about how I was struggling with faith. What I thought I knew solidly, my faith in Jesus and Christian belief, I realised I understood far less.

To try and summarise, my struggle was in understanding why we should be Christians and not Jews. To break that down further: why was a human sacrifice suddenly needed to atone sin? Why was a new covenant needed? What's original sin and where did it come from? Should we still keep the laws of Moses?

Well finally I have the answers that I need. If you're interested, ask me questions and I'll go into greater depth. But I will try to be brief so you can see where I started in this struggle and where I ended up, as going deeper is probably of no interest seeing as these weren't your thoughts. Or maybe you're thinking the same thing?

God says in Leviticus (Vyikra) that blood sacrifices are needed in chapter 17. In Judaism, this was done by animal sacrifice. When the temple was destroyed, animal sacrifices could no longer be made at the alter. It is argued that at this point, the sacrifices stopped and thus blood isn't really needed for forgiveness. But historically, this was the time at which Jesus came, giving an alternative for ever more to animal blood sacrifices by providing a new blood sacrifice to atone sin.

So if God hates human sacrifice and forbids it in Deuteronomy (Devarim) 12:31, why did he send Jesus as a sacrifice? The answer is because he wasn't a human, reason number 1. He was a God in human form, allowing him to die temporarily because a God can't die. Therefore, it wasn't a human sacrifice and could simultaneously save all of humanity. Secondly, God chose to sacrifice himself in the form of Jesus to save others. It wasn't the kind of forced sacrifice for a non-existant god or other trivial cause that God says he detests.

Finally, a new covenant is mentioned throughout the Bible (e.g. Jeremiah 31:31) and from reading again Isaiah 53 I struggled to see how that could be about anyone other than Jesus. Lastly, I discovered that there is a whole book in the Bible on this topic (see God thinks of everything!) the book of Hebrews. It's all about how Jews were doubting their switch to Christianity, wondering if they should still keep the Jewish laws or return to Judaism entirely.

You can also check out http://www.gotquestions.org/ if you're still confused or have questions. There's over 20,000 I think so there's a good chance you'll find your answer to many theological issues.

A Moment of Struggle

As I've already explained, this is mostly a question/answer blog. Friends, classmates, co-workers, family, ask me various questions (sometimes repeatitively) and I write my answers up on here for them to read. Recently, people have continued to ask me questions but for some reason I haven't had the motivation to write my answers.

So instead, here is a slightly different type of post. I'll share with you what's going on in my head right now. I'm going through a moment of struggle. For the last 2 weeks I haven't wanted to attend Meeting. I felt tired and really like I couldn't face it, so I didn't go. Can you believe it? I spend a whole year at university wishing I could go to Meeting, I finally get the opportunity and I don't want to. On top of that, I've had difficulty feeling secure in my faith recently. I spent some time with some Muslim friends of friends who asked me about what I believe. I am interested in understanding Islam, but let me say now that I have no intention or desire to convert. My point is, that through speaking to them and hearing about what they believe, they know what that is and where they're going.

To explain that more clearly, they know what they believe about God, about angels, about the prophets, about salvation, about prayer. They asked me about Jesus, why he came to 'pay the price for our sins'. That made me realise that I have no idea why. It sounds fantastic that Jesus paid the price for our sins, died so we don't have to. But we still die. So what did that achieve? Why is the shedding of blood and death required for salvation and forgiveness? That wasn't the case in the Old Testament. If we still die, how come we aren't paying for our own sins at that point? It made me realise I don't understand this enough.

The Muslims I spent time with also knew what it was to be a Muslim. It wasn't just about believing, which they did, but also about praying, giving to charity, reading the Qur'an. I have no idea what a Christian should do in everyday life. That might sound stupid, but what I mean is in comparison to Jews and Muslims, what should a Christian do day to day? Read the Bible, ok. Pray... pray how? For what? When? How often? What else? Say you're sorry, ok. Then what? Be compassionate, give to charity, ok and what else? Christianity looks like a bit of a cop-out in comparison to other religions. Try to help out others, give to charity, volunteer, pray for your sins, forgive others and you are a Christian going to Heaven. Seems like you don't really do anything and you've got an easy way out compared to other religions. Christianity teaches that it isn't about works whether or not you are saved. But after you're saved, then what?

So right now, I'm a little confused. Unintentionally, these kind, friendly people have shaken my world. What I thought I understood and had complete faith in, isn't currently making enough sense to me. I need to know why there is a Trinity, why a human/blood sacrifice is needed to atone for sin, why we need a saviour when "the wages for sin is death" and we still die. Where 'original sin' came from and why these New Testament teachings don't seem to comply with Old Testament teachings. Until I do, I feel like a hypocrite. Trying to explain why Christianity is true when all of a sudden I don't understand it myself. And I hope the path I find to be true isn't influenced by the embarrassment of having to hold my hands up and say I was wrong.

My Issues with Organised Religion

I find that once religion becomes organised on a large scale, has its own building, own staff, official recognition, etc, it can often stray from its original purpose. I would like to say that not all forms of organised religion (e.g. churches, mosques, synagogues, etc) stray drastically from their truth, but from my experience most have to some degree. Even if they don't, religious establishments surely should be a place that people come to willingly and continue to be involved with WILLINGLY. These establishments should not be unnecessarily guilt tripping people or trying to force people into things. If these things happen, I feel it's extremely dangerous.

I'm going to expand on what I mean by that. In the Torah, which I think I have mentioned before that I have read multiple times in the original Hebrew and in English because I have my own copy, says that converts are welcome to the religion. People can be converted. The Jews were chosen because they were the first to accept the Torah, but so can others at any time. Jews should accept converts and Rabbis can convert gentiles to become as Jewish as if they were born Jewish. However, I am aware of some synagogues that won't convert people. They think for some reason no one can change to be Jewish because it's an ethnicity. If you're not born African you can't become African no matter what you do. The same goes for Judaism. Well, read your Torah folks because THAT'S WRONG. But but a Rabbi up on the bimah and get him saying that and before you know it, a whole congregation is holding incorrect views because the head honcho says so. In my opinion that's extremely dangerous. What if he decides all blond people should be excluded from services, are you gonna go along with that too cause he said so? Even though you know better?

You might think that's a bit trivial, but that's just one example of how something so plain and clear in the Torah can be changed by those in authority via organised religion. (If you want the specifics of where to find that info, please leave a comment). Another more serious thing in Judaism is that women ARE allowed to read from the Torah in public. However the Orthodox don't think so, so women are kinda pushed to the side in my opinion by being denied this honour.

In Christianity, eugh, where do I start. Like I said in my last post, I am a Christian. But there are many ways in which I've seen this religion improperly practiced. From my own experience, I was almost forced into baptism when I was about 16. Why? Because the church connected to my youth group (that's right, I never attended this church, just went to a youth group run by the church) seemed to have a hang up on how many new converts and members they could brag about. They didn't care about parental permission, or how long I'd been a Christian, or that I wasn't an adult by UK law, they just wanted me baptised after 1 class about it. From people that are supposed to be loving, caring and genuine, I was shocked at the guil-tripping and force tactics they used.

I also heard a preacher say in a service that "if you're a true Christian, you never sin anymore. If you're still sinning you have not turned from your old life". Again, the congregation go along with it because the minister says so. Well, if you read your Bible, you'll realise that if you NEVER sin then you are perfect. No one is or was perfect except Jesus himself. So now this minister's got  a whole congregation scared that they don't have salvation because he's the one in charge, so he must be right, when in fact he is clearly wrong. The most shocking thing I have heard recently of churches straying from the truth, was when a boy with cerebral palsy was escorted out of church for making "distracting noises". Did Jesus ever shun anyone with a disability? NO. I'm sure people who are there to listen to the Word were listening to the Word. I think people were probably more distracted by an innocent child being removed and excluded than by anything else. Appauling, that is not Christian behaviour.

But even if your church isn't doing things like that, tell me, is your church practising infant baptism? Because most seem to and that is completely unbiblical. Jesus and his disciples never baptised babies. The Bible says 'believe and be baptised' (Mark 16:16), a baby can't do that. You BELIEVE first and then you baptise. Does your church teach that you're not saved if you're not baptised? If so then they're wrong. They're trying to flaunt their members because if you recall, Jesus said to the prisoner beside him on the cross "I assure you, today you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). Was he baptised? No.

These are the common teachings in churches that are taught wrong, that people accept without question because of who the person teaching this stuff is. Many clever theologians, pastors, ministers, deserve respect for their knowledge but they are not always right. Some are misguided but some are deliberately doing wrong. We must be wary of this within organised religion. I don't think I even need to mention the many ways in which religion has been hijacked and used as a tool for political and other dangerous motives.

To try and summarise, people in organised religion can become power hungry and twist the religion for their own personal gain. Maybe to put their individual views across and get followers, maybe to get money through certain 'charitable causes', maybe to get a merry band of obedient followers, the reasons vary. So don't let them prey on your obedience if you're trying to do good.

My answer is, stick to people you know are believing what you believe, read your holy book so you go direct to the source. Don't take instruction and guidance from any one individual. Question everything. If those around you have nothing to hide they will gladly accept your questions and help you answer them. If they try to distract you or cover up the truth then you know you have hit a dead end, that they are after something else from you than your truth faith.

Why Are You Christian?

People ask me this all the time, often it goes something like "but you're smart, why do you follow a religion? It's a bit of an outdated waste of time isn't it?" Well, we can start then by why I believe in God. In short, I believe in God because I look at nature, I look at animals, insects, humans and see complexity and beauty in them. Similar to Paley's Watch (wiki it if you don't know what I'm talking about), I think they are all far too complex to have been an accident. I don't think life can come from no life. How can complex organs have developed from bacteria even over millions or even billions of years? Why would it even need to? How did humans get to such a high intelligence over animals? Why aren't they building skyscrapers?

You can prattle on all you want to me about evolution and adaptation but to be frank I think it's just as far-fetched as you think my idea of God is. But my hatred for evolution and adaptation is a whole other story that I will not go into right now. The second reason I believe in God is that I can feel God, not all the time, but it's happened before and it will happen again. It is called the 'numinous' by philosophers. (Again, wiki it for more info). The final in short reason is because I believe I have had a religious experience, not a silly near death experience kinda thing, just a supernatural God had my back kinda thing. Twice.

So that's why I believe in God. I think science can tell us a lot of things but it will never have all the answers, especially in regard to God because science is just what we know at the time to be correct. Why I believe in Christianity started with me believing in Judaism. I am trying to cut this down because it is a long story and I'm sure no one wants to read it. I have read the Torah in English and in Hebrew and it just felt true and I couldn't stop reading it. In my daily life I came across ways in which it was true. Prophecies in the Old Testament were proved true by accounts in Latin writings I studied in school. I learnt in science that at 8 days old a baby going through a circumcision is the perfect age, any sooner and it's dangerous, the later you leave it the more likely a complication occurs and the pain increases. God said 8 days old was the time for babies to be circumcised - no sooner, no later. Wanna tell me that's a coincidence being written over 5600 years ago? The Torah has not been changed either, which is why I learnt Hebrew, to see for myself. The Torah in my room right now reads exactly the same in Hebrew as the Dead Sea Scrolls. So don't try to bullshit me about it being edited later.

So after believing the Torah I researched why Jews believe we are waiting for Moshiach (the Messiah) and Christians believe he's been. This lead me to read Old and New Testament prophecies. (In the original Hebrew if you were wondering, to combat the "it's all been edited" issue). I found the prohecies to add up and if you're really interested, leave a comment that you are and I'll do another post on that. That lead me to be a Christian. Because I can see from reading the Bible and Torah alongside actual historical documents that Christianity is true, Judaism is true and Jesus is the Messiah, Yeshua haMoshiach.

On top of all that, I can feel it. When I pray, I feel like someone is listening. Things I've prayed for have panned out. No, asking to be rich or asking for a Tag Heuer watch doesn't count. I have experienced God, by following the Bible and believing in Jesus. I feel the Holy Spirit guiding me. I feel sure and at peace with what I have chosen.