Tag Archives: conformity

Abortion and Scripture

abortion

Notre Dame Cathedral of Paris, France. Circa 1345.

Abortion is the act of murdering an infant while it’s still in the womb. Usually it is done for simple birth control, with only a sliver of procedures done due to a threat on the mother’s life, or as a product of incest or rape.

The barbaric procedure is wholly unnecessary in the modern world and, for some reason, is still lorded over women across the nation. Amusingly, those who are against such mistreatment are the ones called, “barbarians.” Supporters of abortion work themselves into a rabid frenzy if anyone objects, yet the act is no better than Dark Age bloodletting or trepanning. It butchers both baby and mother.

One of the most startling trends today is that of Christians who support abortion as a means of simple birth control. It’s always rationalized as “better for the baby,” but what they really say is God is mistaken, and they know better. Despite this life being innocent, we should play God and destroy it.

“Abortion” is not explicitly referred to in scripture because it was not normally used outside primitives. This is more a modern issue, much like homosexuality. The term “homosexual” was not used in scripture because it simply didn’t warrant any real emphasis beyond what was used. Homosexuality was included in the whole spectrum of sexual deviancy in scripture.

Does the bible mention anything against abortion? Actually, it does. Abortion is the killing of offspring, used by prostitutes since the dawn of time. Women gained the legal right to mimic prostitutes in the Twentieth Century, and for some bizarre reason, that’s considered “empowerment” today. There is nothing beneficial or uplifting about abortion. There’s also no such thing as “pro-choice,” if you refuse to allow women decide if they want to be pro-choice or pro-life.

So, does scripture imply life isn’t life prior to birth? Not at all.

Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb? -Job 31:15

Before I formed you in the belly I knew you; and before you came forth out of the womb I sanctified you, and I ordained you a prophet to the nations. -Jeremiah 1:5

It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones. -Luke 17:2

Lo, children [are] an heritage of the LORD: [and] the fruit of the womb [is his] reward. -Psalms 127:3

Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb? -Job 31:15

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart [from her], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished… -Exodus 21:22

There is no scriptural basis for assuming life “doesn’t actually begin” until birth or after, because there’s no delay. It is life upon conception. Here is another example:

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. -Genesis 4:1

Why was “conceived” as important as to warrant mention, as it’s used at many points throughout scripture? Perhaps it’s to emphasize that a “fetus” is indeed the same living human as a newborn, infant, and toddler certainly are.

 

 

 

 

 

Modern Science Fails in the Creation Argument: Stereotypes

stereotypes

The Basilica del Pilar Zaragoza, Aragon, Spain. Built in 1754.

The polarizing argument of creation vs. evolution has divided society for over a century. A discussion with such an extended history deserves more than a single article. It deserves a thorough investigation through a series of relevant works.

One of the most astounding aspects of the creation vs. evolution argument is the extent with which science will go to force its beliefs on the individual, while claiming to have confidence in its beliefs. It’s usually after accusing those with a faith of being the same way. This is truly a time when all religions should unite in supporting creation as a viable theory in the education system, but human differences usually make that a moot point. Instead, more churches, temples, and synagogues embrace the ideology behind what is really an incredibly dubious theory.

Regardless, it is imperative to keep this argument in its place. Science is more to blame to creating the modern-day fervor than religion. Science would have us believe that our opinion on origins defines everything about us. For the majority of individuals, this kind of belief has no influence on any part of life. You will not get a better job by accepting evolution. You will not lose your job, education, status, or financial stability for accepting a creation theory, unless perhaps you are a scientist. Accepting the evolution theory will not magically transform a high school dropout into a neurosurgeon.

Science’s primary weakness is the reliance on ignorant stereotypes. Stereotypes should be beneath any intellectual field, not saturate it. Science likes to pretend that Christianity is synonymous with ignorance, even when they are aware Copernicus, Kepler, Isaac Newton, Galileo, Max Planck, George Washington Carver, Louis Pasteur, Emanuel Swedenborg, René Descartes, Francis Bacon, Boyle, and Nikola Tesla were all Christian. Those are just a few of the greatest minds in history, who also had faith.

The narrow-mindedness of modern science is likely the only reason why we haven’t had a life-changing invention in decades. There has been no equivalent discovery of a miracle drug like penicillin since its inception. The advent of internet and cellular telephones were nothing more than improved technologies developed during World War II. Those concepts were developed by such minds as Tesla and Edison long before that.

Science has reduced itself from a field that focused on developing knowledge of our natural and biological world, to a field of intolerance and bigotry. It is a world of “flat-earthers” who seek more to accuse others of the same, than to improve itself. Apparently, whether you believe in creation or evolution takes precedence over curing cancer, finding new water sources, improving the world’s food stores, or any other positive contribution.

There was never previously a competition between science and religion, because science was not a religion. The two usually complemented one another. A seemingly “magic” transformation occurred during the Twentieth Century that destroyed this previous harmony. Suddenly, there’s a competition between two subjects, which should be nothing alike.

Science once said, “Question everything.” Perhaps the better question for today would be, “Question only what we question.”

The Human Animal… Without the Animal

animal

St. Mary’s Abbey, York, England. Circa 1055 AD.

One of the most common realms of misinformation today deals with human relationships. Primarily, society’s willful and hilarious idea that humans are naturally promiscuous. It would be amusing were it centuries ago, but this is something currently in popular culture. What’s even worse, this has even permeated the ranks of our academia. What does it say about our modern, sophisticated society? Not what we would like, and certainly nothing modern or sophisticated.

 

Natural Truths

We know tobacco is hazardous to our health. It has been blamed with respiratory and cardiovascular afflictions for over a century. Even chewing tobacco has been linked with a variety of oral cancers and gum diseases. As a result, we discourage and often prohibit tobacco use.

We are aware that obesity is a direct result of overeating or a poor diet. Obesity leads to high blood pressure, diabetes, and even some forms of cancer. We encourage one another to eat wholesome foods and consume fatty or rich foods in moderation. We know exercise is also necessary to maintain health. As a result, we have an entire subculture focused on healthy lifestyles.

We have no problem discussing the health risks associated with alcohol. It impairs judgment and is commonly fatal when combined with driving or heavy machinery. Alcohol usage leads to liver disease, cancer, and cardiovascular disease.

Nature has also equipped the human body with immediate, natural deterrents against excess in these areas. Overeating results in lethargy, nausea, or even vomiting. Excessive tobacco use results in persistent coughing and dry throat. Alcohol abuse results in a “hangover” or the feelings of extreme sickness the morning after the indulgence. Our culture has no problem in agreeing with nature on these issues, and scripture does as well.

Our issue is that the society willfully and ignorantly ignores logic and reason when it comes to sex. We want the human body to be promiscuous even when nature repeatedly proves no such capacity exists. We have ignored social data, statistics, crime rates, health rates, and all manner of scientific evidence to the contrary. Of course, popular culture blames “religious constructs” or “social tradition” for what is just natural: monogamy.

 

Truth of Modern Myth

We can’t consume foods like animals without severe illness or death. Dogs can devour decomposing carcasses without harm. Pigs can live in their own fecal material and never become ill, whereas humans can contract a variety of horrific diseases like cholera and typhoid with even microscopic contact. Humans are not able to walk around without some kind of covering, as we don’t have fur, hide, or an exoskeleton. Yet, we are supposed to have sexual relationships like animals, which is completely unsupported outside the human mind.

It should be no more controversial or provocative than the health statements listed above, yet it is. It is uncertain if the ignorance is deliberate or genuine. Nature throws terminal, incurable STDs at us every time we find a cure for the last. For example, syphilis struck fear into the hearts of humanity for centuries, and with good reason. Just a couple of decades after we found a cure for syphilis, humanity suffered with the emergence of HIV/AIDS. Animals do not have that worry.

Humans require eighteen years to raise their offspring. In the animal world, that’s several lifetimes over for the majority of animals. Animal offspring seldom need two parents, yet our science has proven children flourish best with two parents. Likewise, animal offspring aren’t permanently damaged from a traumatic childhood. Millions of adults across the world are currently dealing with damage inflicted upon them in childhood. This doesn’t even take into consideration the psychological damage bad relationships have on fellow adults or the struggle men and women experience in the course of one marriage, involving only two adults.

It begs the question as to why our society is so enslaved to one of the human body’s basic functions. That is the extent of the act. Alone, sex is no more educational or meaningful than any other basic body function. A meaningful experience must involve love, and to be morally acceptable, it must be within the bonds of marriage.

The fact is our society is hypersexed to the point of dysfunction. No amount of flesh is enough. Television and movies need to reveal more and more of the actors’ bodies than plot. We’ve convinced ourselves that humans need to sexually experiment to “grow,” despite overwhelming evidence of how careless sexual activity causes irreparable damage in many ways. We fabricate countless myths, misconceptions, and outright lies to justify the insatiable hunger. Promiscuity is “natural” because some man did it 1,000 years ago, yet we omit the fact that many women of those times were forced via arranged marriages and slavery. Sadly, many adults today look to those purveyors of perversity to support their current lifestyle.

When doctors are recommending parents vaccinate their children against an STD (Human papillomavirus), there is something amiss. Promiscuity is linked to a variety of cancers in men and women, HIV/AIDS, unwanted pregnancy, psychological problems, sexual dysfunction, and non-fatal STDs (although some remain incurable). In extreme situations, people have sexually abused their bodies to the point that they no longer have a normal libido and require external sources just to become excited.

 

In Scripture

So, didn’t the men referenced in the Old Testament have many wives? Yes, they did. This crutch is often utilized by many in an attempt to morally justify their own appetites. We also see the horrible lives and horrific events suffered by those in Old Testament days because of disobedience. This is what scripture states:

“And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, ‘Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?’ He answered, ‘Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”-Matthew 19:3–6

It is important to note the numeric terms used: one husband and one wife. Not one husband and four or five wives, or vice versa.

“However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.” -Ephesians 5:33

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. You shall not set your desire on your neighbor’s house or land, his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.” -Deuteronomy 5:21

A man can’t love two women, or a woman two men, without compromising what scripture supports. It does not say four or five shall become one flesh, just two.

Women were property across the globe during Old Testament days. They were things to accumulate, like cars or houses. They were status symbols to validate a man’s wealth. It is astounding that we call ourselves “sophisticated” or even “intelligent” and attempt to promote the same dehumanizing beliefs used millennia ago.

 

Conviction

conviction

Glastonbury Abbey in Somerset, England. The old structure was founded in the 7th Century.

This term is most common for its legal ramifications. In simple terms, a conviction is a successful prosecution in a court of law. When you are convicted, the court has decided you are indeed guilty for the crime you’ve been accused of committing.

In spiritual terms, “conviction” carries much of the same meaning. This is used to describe an innate sense of guilt or culpability. Both non-believers, and former believers, can endure these feelings of guilt or negativity when reminded of their current spiritual state.

Many seemingly intelligent people go into irrational fits of rage when faced with anything religious, be it a message or simply a religious icon. One thing is certain, any glimpse or hint of the spiritual sends them into an outright panic. Many of these same individuals can develop what appears to be outright hysteria just from glimpsing a plaque of the Ten Commandments.

One recent example of this is the irrational and unwarranted backlash is regarding a film titled God’s Not Dead.

Note: This is not a film review and does not contain spoilers (but many of the reviews do). Likewise, it is not an endorsement for the film which none at the Scholar of Christ has viewed. It is cited exclusively because of the tone and animosity in the reviews at the IMDB website.

The reviews are perfect examples of rampant spiritual conviction.

First and foremost, the title is God’s Not Dead, which alone implies the film will be about the belief in God. This also implies it is written by those who believe in God. We can read such a title, and know with relative certainty it will be a spiritual movie related to Christianity, as the title does not use Allah, Vishnu, or Buddha. We do not assume it is a film about terrorists, natural disasters, secret agents, fraternity exploits, ghosts, vampires, or the drama surrounding lost loves. Evidently, the title said something altogether different for many of those viewers.

The irate reviews are typical, citing everything from, “they’re using a straw man argument,” to “it’s religious propaganda!” It is no surprise at all because desperate people (who’ve taken Debate 101) usually try to throw around miscellaneous logical fallacy accusations to the point that any opposition is unable to reply in any way. This is, in essence, a “cheating” technique used to silence opposition.

This is to be expected when people face a “God” who is not the modern, celebrity version. Those in the secular world today want God to be a politically correct conformist.  Religion is a hobby, not practiced for any other reason than to make one feel good about oneself. They don’t want to acknowledge any faith that might have commandments or guidelines. Many people today don’t even like to read God’s word, instead they envision a god who bends and bows to their arbitrary whims.

Christians have been portrayed as everything from stupid, to downright evil, for decades, and yet when a movie emerges that reverses the roles, many go ballistic for no other reason than the production has broken the status quo. They were convicted by watching the film, and their often-bizarre reaction is proof. In most of the reviews, the usual movie qualities aren’t reviewed at all. Not the acting, writing, script, effects, setting, or production, it was simply the message that went against the grain of what is typical.