John 3: 16

Consistency in Court

The US supreme court has chosen to interpret the section of the constitution dealing with freedom of religion as freedom from religion and that is their job. I don't have any problem with the court refusing to allow schools to teach Creation or any other religious stories of the beginning. However, they are entirely inconsistent when they allow Evolution to be taught in schools. This is, after all, as pseudo science based on articles of faith that are not universally accepted. If the court wishes to retain the appearance of consistency and integrity they should ban the teaching of every religion in schools.

No communication

There is a kind of person with whom communication is impossible; the emotional bully.

When you try to to inform them they make one of two assumptions:

You are asking them for permission so they immediately say “No”.

You are inviting them to debate the issue so they immediately tell you what is wrong with your idea.

Hence: no communication.

Christian Psychology

The term Christian Psychology is an oxymoron. Psychology is a religion of self indulgence while Christianity is religion of self denial. The intersection of these two sets is null. When people try to synchretise these two religions self indulgence will always wins out. People who go the self denial pathway are able to eat each day from God's abundance and enjoy His goodness without restriction. People who seek self indulgence will always feel empty because who can control the times and the future but God?

Proselytising

What is proselytisation? Is it the person who has a religious bent trying to persuade people to change their belief to follow his? What about the person who joins a group that is satisfied with their beliefs and then tries to enlighten them? Is that kind of person proselytising? Yes they are! The enlightened are just as strong on proselytising as the fundamentalist, except the enlightened despise the fundamentalist as ignorant.

Who is allowed to think?

It is time for us to have integrity about what other people think, if they don't come up with the same conclusions as we do. At least we have to allow them the benefit of logic. Different people will come up with different conclusions depending on their different experiences but we should respect the fact that they can think.

See what we think

There was a time, spoken about in john 6, when the Lord found that some of His followers were leaving Him. He asked the disciples if they wanted to leave Him too but Peter said "where else can we go? you have the words of eternal life." The pressure of the enlightenment today is to force the church to abandon the words of eternal life for their broken vessels. They say that Christians are bigoted and narrow minded but they don't want to let anyone make conclusions other than the ones they have made. We all have to look at the evidence ourselves and make decisions ourselves. Do we want these "enlightened" people to tell us what to think or do we want to look at the words of eternal life ourselves and see what we think?

Spiritual children of the enlightenment

Everybody has the ability to choose what they think. In fact, that is one of the only true rights that we have. However, the spiritual children of the enlightenment seem to think that unless we think the same way as they do and we come up with the same conclusions as they do then we are wrong. They are the intellectual nazis who want to keep control of everyone's minds.