Re: Importance of Creation Debate

From: <RFaussette@aol.com>
Date: Fri Apr 15 2005 - 12:59:58 EDT

In a message dated 4/15/05 11:12:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
donperrett@genesisproclaimed.org writes:
[Don Perrett]

It's a given that all religions touch on the areas of social sciences,
phylosophy, etc. But if one takes the view that we must "surrender to his
menifestations", then would this not mean we should not pursue unimportant areas of
study?
No.

Why should anyone pursue something which is not attainable.
rich:
It is the nature of man to pursue knowledge and as knowledge increases man
presumes he can continue to increase it until he knows everything and he tries
to know everything because his persistent progress suggests he can.

Spirituality, redemption, and salvation are all achieveable. Understanding
the working of God's creation is not.
rich:
A measure of spirituality is achievable. I don't 'know' that redemption and
salvation are achievable. I hope, I believe they are. As for understanding the
working of God's creation, I think to a degree we do understand the working of
God's creation, and can see God manifest in the workings of his creation. It
is the nature of ultimate origin we cannot determine.

We may gain knowledge of it, bit by bit. But, in the end we will never
achieve ultimate knowledge. So again, why do it? Is this what God would want? Or
for some, WWJD?
rich:
God wants me and my family to live and to enjoy the fruits of the earth.
"You must keep my laws and conform to my institutions without fail: I am the
Lord your God. You shall observe my institutions and my laws: the man who
keeps them shall have life through them." I am the Lord. Lev 18:1-5
I am alive, we all stay alive when we can and there are fruits on the earth.
I can see this with my own eyes. So, I confine my studies to God's laws and
institutions and how they keep us alive and happy.

Society from a religious point has merit, unfortunately, secular society
(based on only social sciences) tends to try to accomodate everyone's needs. We
are not gods and cannot do so. We can only take care of the majority. THis is
of course the difference between forms of socialism and democracy. But I
digress.
rich:
Secular society and ecumenism are being imposed on us. There is only one true
religion, the one that best promotes the survival and happiness of its
practitioners, but I also digress.
Yes there was no "established" form of religion before man. But spirituality
has existed for as long as God has. The idea of doing God's will is, has
been, and will be the formost problem. Free will prevents it but without free
will cannot "choose to do his will". I do NOT agree that man needs religion in
its established form.
rich:
Human communities need religion in some established form. You cannot leave
your ignorant masses to their own devices, lest they abandon their morals and
degenerate. We do have a responsibility to our lesser brothers. As long as there
is one religion that promotes the survival of its own practitioners before
the survival of non-practitioners, there will be a need for human communities to
have an established religion of some form.

Man needs spirituality, and love, respect and fear of God. Salvation is the
tool to fix our misgivings. But if there were no established religion, or
bibilical document, some would still find God. Its for us less blessed or
enlightened that churchs are made. For those of us who cannot love and honor and
praise God without such establishments. This doesn't make those in need any
less a person, but perhaps less "self" enlightened. If one takes a look at the
beginnings of the major religions, you will find someone with "some" prior
religious experience/background but enlightened enough to find fault in the
establishment. Not that there answers are any better.

rich:
I do not say a man needs established religion to find God, but men who are
with God build God fearing families and communities and God comes to be
"established" in the world

I like your last statement. Actually answers my first para above. But with
time and accumulated knowledge man will always find something he can
understand more about the universe.

Personally, in the end science should not serve our own interests and
self-improvement, which is the usual outcome, but God's purpose for us. If our goal
is to make man more "hi-tech" and smart it is sin, in my opinion. We are not
gods. If the purpose is to understand God or to give mankind more time to
serve and praise God then this is good.

Don P
rich:
We serve and praise God by building God fearing communities and keeping them
alive and happy for ever. That is what God said he wanted for us. We should
have life through his laws and separate ourselves from those who do not keep his
laws lest they pollute us and jeopardize our survival.

Thanks for the dialog,
rich
Received on Fri Apr 15 13:01:42 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 15 2005 - 13:01:45 EDT