Recent Speculation III

Matthew (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

Matthew 4

Jesus Heals the Sick

23Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in

their synagogues, preaching the good news of the

kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness

among the people. 24News about him spread all

over Syria, and people brought to him all who

were ill with various diseases, those suffering

severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having

seizures, and the paralyzed, and he healed them.

25Large crowds from Galilee, the Decapolis,[f]

Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan

followed him.


Matthew 5

The Beatitudes

1Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a

mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to

him, 2and he began to teach them saying:
3"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for
righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see G-d.
9Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called sons of G-d.
10Blessed are those who are persecuted because
of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

11"Blessed are you when people insult you,

persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil

against you because of me. 12Rejoice and be glad,

because great is your reward in heaven, for in

the same way they persecuted the prophets who

were before you.


While thinking over yesterday's post, I began to

imagine that there needs to be clarification of a

couple points. All my blog entries are rough

draft, with the intent that at some point in

time, I'll go over everything again and do

another rewrite once I have down all the main

ideas, and there is a more or less complete

collection of ideas. That could be a couple

years from now, but for today, I'd like to take

another stab at some of yesterday's comments.


Here's a quote from yesterday:

'Throughout scripture is the explicit warning

that time is fleeting. See verse seven. '...the

end of all things is near...' It is clearly at

odds with the doctrine of evolution, where there

needs to be long periods of time to accomodate

genetic rates of change. It's either one or the

other. These two doctrines cannot co-exist. One

is true, the other is not. But look at the quote

below. Either the fellow doesn't know anything

about evolution, or he doesn't know anything

about scripture. And he has the job of setting

state education policy. ( Was there ever a time

when you saw a highly ranked public official on

TV and it gave you the urge to flee the country?

But where to? )'


Either '...the end of all things is near...' or

it isn't. It hinges on what the Apostle meant by

the word 'near'. In any reasonable estimate,

'near' would NOT mean millions of years, which is

the implied context of evolutionary doctrine.

Evolutionistas would have us believe that man has

been here for millions of years and will be here

for millions of years. Scripture provides

another time frame, that reaches back only

thousands of years, to the week of creation. And

that's the time frame that's supported by the

evidence of the geometric growth rate of

population. Remember that geometric growth of

population is not speculation on my part, it

is an empirical ( scientific ) fact. As we look

at the census numbers over the years, and the

growth of world population over recorded history,

we find geometric growth rates. That's what got

Malthus all excited over a hundred years ago. He

was able to recognize the geometric growth of

population and was not able to imagine the

geometric growth of agriculture and industry to

support the growth in population. The hubris over

population growth is still with us. I've been

hearing it all of my life. Based on my

observations, I'd expect that G-d's green earth

still has alot of room for population growth.

But it might be that some people will have to

give up their SUV's and super-sized houses due to

competition for natural resources. In any case,

there is a conflict between the two doctrines of

origin based on a disagreement over time frames.

It can't be brushed aside.


Then there's this:

"Some recent quotes from the newspaper. Here's

the first:

'religious belief is not science. Science and

religious belief are reconcilable but they are

not the same thing.'"


This statement was made in the context of the

position taken by a public education official

from the Texas Higher Education Coordination

Board to reject an approval requested by the

Institute for Creation Research. Since the quote

is taken from a newspaper, there's no telling

whether it's accurate, either in content or

context. Still, the quote tells me that there

isn't a comprehension of the facts surrounding

the irreconcilable differences of creation vs.

evolution. These are doctrinal differences, not

scientific differences. The article goes on the

say that '...science advocates launched vigorous

protests...' Not true again. It would be more

accurate to say that doctrinal advocates launched

vigorous protests. The disagreement isn't

about how to do science, it's about the doctrine

of evolution vs. the doctrine of creation. The

public official doesn't seem to comprehend the

distinction between religious doctrine and

science, nor the fact that there is no way to

reconcile creation with evolution, since they are

competing theories/doctrines. In this context,

what he means by 'science' is 'evolution', and it

appears that he is mistaken in the way that he

has characterized science and religion.


Look, here's what it comes down to. Truth.

What's the truth? Either we want the truth, or

we don't want the truth. I'm of the opinion that

you can believe whatever you want. But belief is

not the best proof of truth.


I hope that will clarify yesterday's post. Some

may find the whole discussion of creation vs.

evolution to be tiring. My dissatisfaction with

public education goes back a long way, I have to

admit. From my earliest days, I've not had a

positive impression of the public education

system. Why? Because it's always been about

indoctrination, as much as education. As time

passes it degenerates ( evolves ) further and

further along the path of indoctrination. I've

just never been able to see the appeal. I keep

thinking that the time spent could be used to

learn something more useful.


When it comes to doctrine, I would rather that

there is, at the very least, an even-handed

presentation of the facts, and an examination of

their relative merits. As it is, that's not what

the establishment provides. My guess is that the

larger part of the problem is the lack of

appreciation for the advantages of scientific

debate. They are content to settle for bad

doctrine, and leave it at that. A better course

of action would be to dismiss a doctrinal bias

altogether and focus on basic science, learning

the rules and techniques of science in the

absence of indoctrination.


Under the circumstances, you have to ask the

question, Why would anyone be afraid of

discussing the relative merits of competing

theories of origin. Is there a little more to it

than just being dogmatic? At first glance, it

would make you suspect that there is something to

hide. The conclusion that I come to is that

there is every effort to avoid a confrontation

with morality. The objection isn't a rational

objection, it's based on an emotional avoidance

of the very real possibility that there is a G-d

in heaven to whom we must give account. In other

words, it's not the theory itself that is a

threat. It's no more or less scientific than the

theory of evolution. It's the implications of

creation that some want to avoid at all cost.

It's just too bad that the christian church is

too willing to capitulate in the face of

confrontation. We've pretty much given it all

away.


In the passage above, Jesus begins his years of

ministry with a display of his authority over

sickness. There is a significance to this, such

that it represents his ability to restore not

just physical well being, but also spiritual well

being. The acts of healing are more than random

displays of power. They represent his authority

over creation, in the same way that the

resurrection did. It's the sort of thing that

attracts people's attention. It says that,

'Large crowds...followed him.' But in the

next passage, he led his disciples away from the

crowd in order to teach them in private.


From the very beginning, he spent his time

teaching them about 'the kingdom of heaven'. He

had to let his disciples know that there is more

out there than meets the eye. He wanted them to

know that what they couldn't see was every bit as

real as what they could see around them. And

more importantly, they had to learn that the

guiding principles of heaven are quite a bit

different than the guiding principles of earth.

In The Beatitudes, Jesus lets his disciples in on

the simple truth that if they will live by the

principles of heaven, then they will enjoy the

rewards of heaven, for eternity.


Each day we are faced with the same challenge

that the disciples faced when they were here. We

can live by the rules of earth, or we can live by

the rules of heaven. It's implied that the rules

we live by, will have their greater reward in

either context that we choose. It's the life of

faith, on the part of the christian, to be

mindful of the fact that there may not be much of

a reward for living according to the principles

of heaven, while here on earth. In fact, right

after telling them of the blessings of heaven, he

immediately let them know that they were going to

face opposition while here on earth. He was

right about that. Personally, I was never much

interested in what people thought about me. It

just doesn't matter that much to me. I'd guess

that when Jesus selected his disciples, he wanted

to find people who were so inclined. He wasn't

looking for show-offs and phonys. His disciples

were an ordinary lot, from Galilee. It's much

easier to face the prospect of rewards in heaven

when you live in a place here, that offers little

or no hope of reward. There's less to give up.

But I'd guess that the biggest challenge is just

to give up self will. Instead of doing as we

please, we choose to do as Jesus taught us to.

In the christian world, it's called obedience or

surrender. The disciples still had to surrender

themselves, just as we do, to the cause of

Christ.