Life / Religion / Philosophy / Science / Polictics

Tag: Theology

  • A Sad Occurance

    I was in a fast food restaurant today and I ordered a hamburger meal (realizing that many in the world today do not have even that simple privilege, and if they do, quite a few do not have the means to act upon it) and I chose a table near the back where I thought I would not be disturbed and sat down to eat.

    There was an older woman and a young girl sitting at the table next to me.  The young girl was white, blonde hair, and appeared to be around the age of first or second grade.  The woman appeared to be of Spanish decent (I could not say which) and I was guessing she was the little girls Grandmother.  In the Philippines my wife’s family would call her Lola.

    The young girl was acting up.  She clearly was not happy being there and she was acting out in every way imaginable.  She told the lady I perceived to be her Grandmother to “shut up”, that she “was not going to eat her meal” and that she “could do whatever pleased her”.  At one point she picked up some food off the table and threw it at the older lady, started to kick her under the table, and when she was threatened with not getting the toy that came with her meal, quickly grabbed it and proclaimed it hers and that no one else could have it.  At one point the older woman, who was clearly displeased with the way the young girl was acting, mentioned that she was drawing attention to herself and that if she did not behave, they would have to leave.  The young girls reaction was fairly predictable at that point as she proclaimed that she could do what she wanted and that no one could make her leave.

    This went on for several minutes until the older woman looked over at me and said to the little girl that “the man sitting at the next table was looking at her wondering why she was being such a bad little girl”,  Of course the little girl did not care.  The little girl continued to carry on her temper tantrum and the older woman looked over at me and told her that I was going to be upset if she did not behave.

    I leaned over at this point and addressed the older lady telling her that the little girl probably was not aware that I was a minister.  The little girl immediately looked annoyed and asked “What’s a minister?”.  To which the older lady said “Why don’t you ask him?”  I told the little girl that a Minister was a Pastor, thinking that she might understand that better.  But she quickly replied “What’s a Pastor?”  I told her a Pastor was someone who manages and teaches at a Church.  The next question surprised me a little (although it shouldn’t have), she looked at me and said “What’s a Church?”.  And I thought ‘How do you describe a Church to a first or second grade child that clearly has no context to draw upon’?  I asked her if she had ever passed a Church on her way to school or the store.  And it was clear she still had no context from which to draw upon.  I turned back to my meal thinking that there was no way to make any headway with the little girl and that any further conversation was a lost cause.

    Now don’t get me wrong, I was no angel when I was her age (and older).  But I did know what a Church was and I did have some sense of when I was not acting rightly or pleasing to my parents.  This little girl was void of any understanding of a Church, or Religion, or the concept of a God in her life.  And I would argue she was void of any social understanding or of good behavior in general.  She was the center of her own universe and only interested in what pleased her or met her own whim at the moment.  She clearly lacked a Theology in her life.

    I have no idea whatsoever of the Theology of the older woman I perceived to be her Grandmother, or her parents, or of any other adult figure in her life.  But I did consider that this is a grave area of failed development in the youth of the world today.  We are literally seeing a generation of children being raised without a concept of God or a Theology all around us in the world today.  And it saddened me.  I left the restaurant despondent at the prospects of where we are headed as a society and as a people trying to make our way in the world today.

    If you are agnostic, I get that.  I understand how you would not consider a Religion (any religion) as something that would be of concern or interest to how you live or govern your life.  But consider this, a child without the concept of a Religion is void of an important aspect in their social development.  They have no basis whatsoever for establishing a morality in their own lives and for understanding their purpose in the world.  Would the social interaction and concepts of a Church or a religion be so damaging to a young child that it would rob them of something important in their lives or social development?  I think not.

    If you are atheistic, I get that also.  I understand how you may struggle, even abhor religions, and in some extreme cases consider them a danger.  But again, consider the results that we see in our children growing up without the social interaction of a Church.  How can a child make any sense of a grounded science, that of Theology, if they have no concept of what it even provides in their life?  What is so damaging, so uncontrollably horrific that they cannot be taught the tenants of what Religions teach and stand for?

    If you are theistic, then there is simply no excuse.  The Jewish and Christian religions teach that you should “Train up a child in the way they should go and when they are older they will not depart from it“.  Other religions at the very least teach one that they should consider the desires of others, trying to make the world a better place.  To be considerate in their actions and to take the path void of conflict unless truly faced with no other choice.

    What about you?  Are you concerned with the youth of today?  Clearly the great social experiments in the world today are failing us, developing a generation that is void of any moral understandings or a foundation of a Theology that may very well provide the basis of that moral understanding.

    Isn’t it time for us to stop and take stock of what we, as a people, are developing as a future path for the world and ask whether or not we are on the right path?  I think so, and hope you would give it serious consideration as well.

  • Whose Science Is It?

    One of the more amusing aspects of the whole God debate to me is the exclusive territory of science.  As if certain crowds have a lock on particular disciplines.

    When studying the world around us, there are many different facets that can be taken into account.  And there are different theories and interpretations of the data.  But just because one world view doesn’t line up with your world view does not automatically mean that you have a lock on the interpretation of the data.

    There actually is a science of Theology – Theo, of the Greek Theos or God, and ology, primarily of Latin origin for the study of.  Hence, the study of (or the Science of) God.

    Theology is not Religion and not all religions have Theology at their base.  In the strictest sense of the term, Atheism is a religion.  Atheism is, in fact, a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.  And those beliefs hold that there is no existence of a God.

    What is interesting then is that atheism (for the most part) tends to claim ownership of all of the realm of science.  The claim is that you cannot mix religion and science (particularly data and facts).  But that is the very thing that Atheism then tends to do.  To my amazement, it tends to do it to exclusion.

    But Atheism, by its very definition has no Theology.  How can it?  It prescribes that there is no God.  And having no Theology, how can it then, evaluate any premises it may form, correctly concerning the existence of God?  In reality, it purports to establish fact based upon evidence it cannot support.

    I do not need to prove the existence of God in order for him to exist.  God either exists or he does not.  But that does not mean that I cannot take a preponderance of the evidence and draw some conclusions one way or the other.

    To say that I cannot infer the existence of God based upon science is preposterous.  My Theology is perfectly capable of forming hypotheses and theories based upon the observable universe around me.  And I should be able to determine which model the evidence better supports.

    The Atheist may determine that the model better supports their particular world view, but that in no way gives them a lock on Science.  Science has neither conclusively proven nor dis-proven the existence of God.  Theists simply believe that the preponderance of the evidence more conclusively supports the existence of a God than not.

    Typically (not always, but in most cases – at least in my experience), people want to argue Religion and not Theology.  But before you can argue Religion, you must first agree upon which Religion you are going to debate.  And there are many of them to debate, and not all equal at that.  Satanism is a Religion.  One might suppose that Satanist at least accept the existence of God since the very concept of Satan comes from God centered religions.  Perhaps not though.  There may be some Satanist that believe there is no other God other than Satan himself, in which case they still accept the existence of a God (albeit, in my world view, the wrong one).

    Atheism is, in and of itself, a religion.  And if one is to undertake a religious debate, one must argue the merits of Atheism compared to other world religions.  However, if one wants to argue the existence of God, one should argue from a Theological standpoint.  Does the evidence better support a model for a God or for no God?  In my world view, the evidence is greatly in favor of a God.

    Once one has determined in his or her own mind as to the existence of God, then the debate as to who or what that God may (or may not) be can take place.  At this point there are many religions that purport to have that answer.  I am satisfied with my aligned Religion (Christianity), but even within that there is a myriad of disparate thought.  I’ve drawn my own conclusions, and at times I am given to deep contemplation over a perceived belief.  But those have never altered my Theology.

    At times I wonder why Atheists even want to debate their position.  Why would it matter?  If there is indeed no God, then where is the derived meaning in Life?  Apparently the Founding Fathers of the United States of America could find no other recourse for the inherent basic truths of life other than that of a Creator (God).  Their preponderance of the evidence led them to believe that a Creator endowed mankind (Human race) with inalienable rights.  If further evidence purports that there is no God, then it fails to establish any rights, liberties, or happiness other than cosmic chaos.  Indeed, even Dr. Richard Dawkins has stated that the appearance of Intelligent Design is actually an illusion of whatever naturally occurs in nature.  Meaning, that there is no meaning behind it all.

    Actually, in my experience, what Atheists really want to debate is not Theology, they have none, since their minds are made up on that point, but rather religions.  Atheists want to have a religious debate because their own religion does not prescribe to what other world religions assert as a basis.

    But even here, I do not believe it fair to lay exclusive hold to the realm of Science.  It is disingenuous to begin with, as if their religion is the only religion that could ever interpret scientific data.  But it also shuts down creativity and growth of the human race.  Exactly what they claim other religions do.

    May I use Science (other Scientific Disciplines) to support my Theology?  Of course I may.  And if my interpretation of the data is different than yours, it does not mean that a differing world view owns the Science and therefore cannot consider my conclusions.  Neither does it mean that my conclusions are wrong or have necessarily been disproven.  It simply means that there are multiple interpretations of that data.

    So whose Science is it anyway?  It is all of our Science.  We are all free to explore and discover and derive our own set of conclusions and beliefs as we learn and grow in life.  So don’t tell me I cannot mix Religion and Science, because at the point of my Theology I can.  Just the same as the Atheists already do.  The only difference is I actually encourage them to use Science to explore and to learn the mysteries of Life and the Universe.  Because I find that data supports my Theology.