Posts Tagged ‘science’

James 1:19 – Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:
 
Can you imagine what would happen if we all took the time to put a buffer between our anger, and the event that triggered it? If we just slowed down, prayed on it, then reacted? Secular Psychology has been saying that we should take a breath before reacting for a few decades now, but the Bible has been saying it for many Centuries.
 
Most of our anger comes from a point of self control than logic. When we are told that we have to do something, or it doesn’t go the way we want, then we get mad. That’s not Biblical because everything that we do is ordained, and controlled by God. So if we get angry because we lose control, then what we’re really doing is getting mad at God because we don’t think His way is good enough for us. This is why we see so many cases of tragedy throughout the Bible, because people didn’t have faith in God’s way, and got angry.
 
Avoid anger at all costs, it only produces sin. Make sure that you don’t fly off the handle when you feel that urge to react angrily. As soon as you feel it, walk away, pray on it, and by that time, you will give a more Godly response. A Godly response will be much more peaceful.
 
Job 1:20 At this, Job got up and tore his robe(AS) and shaved his head.(AT) Then he fell to the ground in worship(AU) 21 and said:
 
“Naked I came from my mother’s womb,
and naked I will depart.[c](AV)
The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away;(AW)
may the name of the Lord be praised.”(AX)
 
I wish I could be like Job. I’ve gone through a lot in my years, but nothing like him. He had just had various messengers come to him and tell him that all of his livestock was dead, all of his workers, and all 10 of his children had died at once. All within an hour. So what does he do? Job 1:20 tells us that he fell to the ground and worshipped God. That is truly an amazing act of faithfulness!
 
How many times have we gone through just a fraction of what Job did, and yet all we did was complain or feel sorry for ourselves? I know I’ve done both. We need to become more like Jobe and find our ability to worship and love God in ANY circumstances.
 
So how do we become like Job? We take each set of circumstances that bring us a rough patch in life, and praise God that it’s not worse. Every time we do this, it becomes easier to do because we grow stronger. We become worship athletes if you will, and our ability to run the race that we call life much stronger in our faith, and much happier.
What do you give God?
Genesis 4:1 Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man.” 2 Later she gave birth to his brother Abel. Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. 3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. 4 And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions  from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.
Would you get jealous of someone else if they brought a better gift to God than yours? If you would, there’s a way to prevent that, bring the best you have to God.
God doesn’t necessarily judge us on what we bring in terms of money, He just wants the best of what we’re able to give. An example of this is found in Mark 12:43,44
43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”
It’s not how much we give in Dollars, it’s how much we give from our hearts. So what have you given your best of today? Your time? Your devotion? Your attention? All of these things are worth more than gold to God, and you can afford to give them.
Beginning today, wake up in the morning, pray that God shows you what He wants from you, and give it your best. Make it an offering of sacrifice, but make sure it’s the best of what you have. Doing this will bring more blessings than you have ever seen.

Fall is in full swing and I am in the middle of an important cold-case trial. As I sit in court each day, I can’t help but think about the nature of evidence and the objections that many non-believers express related to the case for Christianity:

OBJECTION: God‘s existence cannot be known with evidential certainty. The evidence for God‘s existence is entirely circumstantial and therefore cannot be trusted. There are no items of direct evidence that can be examined today to determine if Christianity‘s claims about God are true.

The answer to this objection lies in our perception of “evidence”. There are two kinds of evidence that are used in criminal and civil trials each and every day across America: ‘direct’ evidence (evidence that proves something ‘directly’ on the basis of someone’s first-hand experience) and ‘circumstantial’ evidence (evidence that proves something ‘indirectly’ on the basis of a reasonable inference). We might determine, for example, that a suspect committed a murder on the basis of an eyewitness who saw the murder directly or a suspect’s later confession (two pieces of direct evidence), or we might determine this on the basis of the suspect’s prior threatening remarks, his bloody appearance minutes after the crime, and his efforts to flee the scene (all examples of circumstantial evidence). Our criminal justice system draws no distinction between these two forms of evidence; both are equally viable and powerful in making a case.

When we decide we can trust a piece of direct evidence (an eyewitness account, for example) this evidence, in and of itself, is sufficient for us to come to a decision about the truth of a matter. This is the nature of direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence, on the other hand, often requires additional support in order to reasonably infer the truth. The more pieces of circumstantial evidence you have that point to the same conclusion (the more cumulative the case), the better your inference and level of certainty. Many of us are under the false assumption that criminal cases cannot be prosecuted without some form of direct evidence, but, as a Cold Case Homicide Detective, I’ve never had the benefit of direct evidence. Murderers are convicted every day with nothing more than circumstantial evidence.

As it turns out, the case for Christianity is both direct (in a limited sense) and circumstantial (in a robust and comprehensive sense). We happen to have three direct eyewitness accounts (the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and John). If these eyewitnesses can be trusted on their own, no more evidence is needed to establish the truth of Christianity. We can establish the trustworthy nature of these eyewitness accounts by examining the external corroboration from those who were hostile to Christianity, the internal consistency between the eyewitness records, and the lives and character of those who claimed to be eyewitnesses. A fair historical analysis in these three areas provides us with sufficient confidence related to the Gospel accounts. But in addition to these eyewitness accounts, there is tremendous circumstantial evidence available from the study of the origin and fine tuning of the universe, the appearance of cosmological and biological design, and the existence of objective morality and transcendent concepts (like logic) to make a strong and thorough cumulative circumstantial case for the existence of God. Belief in God does not need to be a blind leap of faith; Christian Theism is a reasonable inference given the circumstantial evidence. No successfully prosecuted case is evidentially perfect or complete, but all successfully prosecuted cases are evidentially sufficient. While we may not be able to examine direct evidence related to the existence of God, we do have sufficient circumstantial evidence to believe that Christianity’s claims about God are true.

Written by a Christian Attorney named Jim who writes for pleaseconvinceme.com

Pews

Pews (Photo credit: Etsy Ketsy)

A recent poll by the general American Public says that a majority of the people think religion should be kept out of Politics. What do you think after reading the story below?

AFP – Wed, Mar 21, 2012   Fifty-four percent of Americans think churches should steer clear of politics, according to a Pew Research Center poll announced Wednesday during a presidential campaign tinged with faith issues.

Pew said it was the third consecutive poll in four years to reveal that Americans who favor churches speaking out on political and social issues are outnumbered by those who believe they should not.

Of the 1,503 adults it surveyed by telephone on March 7-11, Pew said 40 percent believed churches and other houses of worship “should … express their views on day-to-day social and political questions.”

Sixty percent of Catholic respondents said the church should keep out of political issues, according to Pew’s findings.

Early this month, New York‘s Cardinal Timothy Dolan, leader of the increasingly outspoken US Conference of Catholic Bishops, said the church was called upon to be “very active, very informed and very involved in politics.”

With President Barack Obama up for re-election in November, the Catholic church is fiercely opposing his proposal for all employee health plans — including those at religious-affiliated institutions, such as hospitals — to cover the cost of contraceptives.

The Pew survey also found that 38 percent of Americans say there has been “too much expression of religious faith and prayer by political leaders.” Another 30 percent said there has been too little.

“The percentage saying there is too much expression … has increased across party lines, but this view remains far more widespread among Democrats than Republicans,” said Pew in a summary of its findings.

Pew, which posted full details of its research on its website (www.pewforum.org), said its survey had a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.