Atheist vs Christian

One of the most recent debates between atheist Christopher Hitchens was with the former PM of Britain, Tony Blair. Mr. Blair has been vocal in his profound Christian faith, even going so far as to declaring himself a Christian while he was in Office. The debate with Mr. Hitchens was not about Christianity but about the efficacy of religion to be a source of good in the world.

 Mr Hitchens is a vocal proponent of the evolution/atheistic worldview and Mr Blair is a politician, not a Christian/religion apologist. The debate was not about Christianity but about the value of religion in society. This is the basic problem with some of these debates, it seems crafted in a way to confuse the issues by having debaters that are not qualified to debate the question. Neither of them are especially qualified in this area of expertise.

The debate was set up to fail but it seems from the results that Mr. Blair lost the debate because he was not sufficiently infromed about the efficacy of religion to the well being of society in general and the negative consequences of atheism. The case in point was when Mr Hitchens discussed the history of oppression done by the Catholic church through the Crusades, the witch trials, the various trials, persecutions and scourgings of apostates and the religious wars of the middle ages. Mr Blair countered with many examples of atheist regimes that were justifying murder as tool to promote their governemental systems like the communist and facist governments of Germany, Russian and China.

The results of the debate, according to the co-ordinators, was, people were not convinced of Mr. Blair's point of view and felt that religion had a negative effect on society. This did not help anyone to convert to Christianity and did not promote the Christian world view. My thought is this, is it valuable to debate or argue with people that are totally against Christianity or religion in general? Should we bring these ideas to the marketplace if we are not totally prepared with cogent arguments for Christianity. Just saying the "The Bible says" is not going to dissuade or inform or change anyone's mind, if they don't believe the bible is God's word anyway.

What's the answer then? Should we debate? Should we argue? Should we become more knowledgeable of their tactics/arguements/facts? The bible says we should know what we believe and be ready to give an answer to those who ask. So I think it is a good thing to be prepared but to be aware of the devil's tactics. He can seem so reasonable and even friendly, but it is still the enemy in disguise. When you read C.S. Lewis and the "Screwtape Letters," you see the development and disguise the enemy uses to try and weaken our faith.

I am still going to watch these things but I'm not sure they are good or useful for everyone because they do have some valid points and arguments to defend their points. I'm going to be careful of what I watch and as the scripture says, "Be as cunning as a serpent and harmless as a dove." The argument might be that to be aware I need to subject myself to their arguments. I think listening to what is good and pure and lovely and of good report is good advice to any Christian, knowing that exposing young or immature Christians to some of these debates, may not be a good idea until they are established by their faith.

Christmas- So Be It.

Everyone knows that the original date for the birth of Christ was not necessarily December 25th on the year 0 of the common era (CE) or before Christ (BC). Everyone keeps changing the dates of things to conform to the secular effort to change the discussion from religious to secular. Even now as I write e-mails to some of the clients of a company that I help, I am cognizant of the issue of saying Merry Christmas instead of Happy holidays or seasons greetings or some other drivel. We have holidays because of the birth of Jesus Christ some time early in the Roman Era of ancient history. Personally, I don't care what the exact date was, as long as I celebrate the birth of Christ.

Most of us will say that Christmas has been co-opted by Santa Claus, Frosty, the twelve days of Christmas, Charles Dickens and a Christmas Carol, Bob Hope and a White Christmas or the eternal angel, Clarence, who got his wings in the movie with Jimmy Stewart in "It's a wonderful life." By the way, did you know that Jimmy really did serve in the miltary in WW2, in spite of what you saw in the movie. He was a bomber pilot and flew over 20 missions as a bomber pilot.

The date, December 25th, has a long history of religious connections from the pre Roman civilizations to the Roman winter celebrations to the druids to the catholics. All of these people tried to use the previous user's date, by inserting their own uses for the date. The Catholic church was famous for co-opting other religious practices and using them for their own purposes. it's kind of like the current crop of evangelists using television to reach the urban masses. We can't blame them for using something that works. We used to think that television was an evil from the devil, foisted on us to lure us into evil fantasy. Well now we use it to save the souls of the damned. How dare we use the devil's tools to preach the gospel.

Surely I jest. We can't disregard the use of T.V. if that works. Even God can make something good out of something bad- think of the cross. If we can preach the gospel using the internet so be it. If we can use December 25th to remember the birth of Jesus Christ, then so be it. If we have to give presents to unsuspecting heathens, then so be it. God works in mysterious ways, His wonders to perform. So Be It. Amen.

Jews in WW2

I came across the most inconsistent, unbelievable, unthinkable, indecent piece of historic anomaly. A jewish Rabbi visited the Japanese homeland and studied the amazing similarities of the Shinto religion and the ancient religion of the hebrews in the land of Israeil after the 10 tribes were removed the land of their ancestors (They were exiled to Babylon and subsequently were never returned to their land).

The interesting part of all of this, if it is true, is that the Americans were fighting the Japanese (the 10 lost tribes of Israel) and were trying to save the Jews in Europe. This dichotomy surely wasn't apparent to any one at the time, but how strange that they would fight one and save the other. The bombing of Hiroshima was another holocaust or sacrifice. If you've ever seen or read how a nuclear bomb destroys people and buildings, it is through a virtual firestorm- which is what a holocaust really is. It is a sacrifice by totally engulfing the sacrifice in fire.

This is just a coincidence and I am in no way suggesting that this was done intentionally or with full knowledge of the particulars or historical significance; however, the truth is, God had a plan for the nation of Israel, and no matter where they go, they seem to get themselves in trouble. If you read scripture, especially the Old Testament, there are a lot of indicators that God has his eyes on the tribes for His purposes. The near total destruction of Israel is a sign that something is either very wrong with the nation or that God has some sort of plan for the nation that prevents total annihilation, even from atomic bombs or Hitler or the Arab nations after ww2.

Nobody can deny that there is any other nation with such a storied past, present or future. I read scripture and I find that the story of Israel is our story. God has not left us, no matter what destruction or petty difficulties we have. God is with us. That's His name. That's who He is. He is the I Am. We are with Him. He is with us.

How can the story be any better, or worse. Can the God of the universe be in a story like this and not have second thoughts or even regrets? This is the God we serve. The One that  sees us  nearly wiped out but still holds us in the palms of His hands. The enemy might have been the one trying to destroy us, but the truth is we have a God that cares for us in every circumstance and somehow watches over us in spite of all the dirt and crap and corruption the world dishes out to us.

God is with us.

This is just a beginning for me in the blog world. I guess this is a good place to discuss my own experience, since this is the one I know the best.

Just so you know, I have been a Christian for over 30 years. I wasn't raised in a Christian home but found faith in Christ as a teenager. This may sound weird in the present post modern society we live in because most people are raised in a certain faith and then keep it come hell or high water. This was not my experience.

I understand a lot of Catholics  take on the faith of their family and culture, just the same way many Muslims do. They are born into their faith and then continue in it till death or marriage. Most families encourage their children to marry within their faith so that they can propagate their faith through their children- this happens in every religion.

As I said, this wasn't my experience, I didn't come to faith through my family. As a matter of fact my parents didn't encourage me to continue. As a matter of fact they thought I was insane because I spent a lot of time taking part in church life to the detriment of everything else. Is this normal? Probably for people new to a particular faith. I think many people don't study what is normative for believers in any religion but if you studied the actions and stages of any faith, I think you'll find that believers go through various stages of deepening of faith and crisis of faith.

I'm sure there's a good reason to do a psychological study of people belonging to certain types of groups, but I can tell you, over time, my faith is now deeper and more satisfying than when I first believed. The faith I have in Christ has gone through many crises, but because I've been through them, my faith is stronger. I kind of believe the maxim - what doesn't kill me - makes me stronger.