Tag Archive: Faith


How do you lead people to conclude that there’s only one truth, without showing them any real evidence? Answer: you keep them from all dissenting alternatives…

blindfold

I was listening to a BBC radio discussion on the subject of parasitism recently (1), the panel being a gathering of very learned and highly credentialed evolutionary scientists. One of the comments which stood out to me was from Steve Jones, Emeritus Professor of Genetics at University College, London. In the course of the discussion host Melvyn Bragg asked the Prof:

So you’re definitely saying that sometimes parasites can have a positive and good effect?

The answer:

Well the trouble is that words like “positive” and “good” don’t really belong in biology-it turns into “theology” then.

In Nick Fisher-ese, the answer was, Hey, lay off of that filthy religious language, and stay well away from that “God” thing: we’re talking “science” now, and the two things  are and must remain separate…

I disagree: God is the master-scientist. No God-no science. In fact, no God, no universe. Great scientists of the past such as Isaac Newton had no mind to censor their beliefs, and no reason to as they do now.

Don’t forget that according to honest evolutionary philosophy you are just another animal, no more important to the universe than a tape-worm, a tadpole, a tomato, a tree or a tic, and there’s no such thing as “good” or “bad” in any absolute sense.

FISH

Picture Copyright © by Nick Fisher

We’re led to believe that scientists have disproved the existence of God-which is actually impossible-and instead they’ve scientifically shown that everything came into existence by itself and evolved all on its own. The truth is that scientists, including those who may quietly be questioning the politically correct view of origins and evolution, are all but forbidden to even suggest the possibility that there could be the remotest chance that there may just be something to that “God” thing.

Stephen Meyer, a leader in the Intelligent Design movement, with a PhD in the philosophy of science from the University of Cambridge, writes about a principle of evolutionary science in his book, “Darwin’s Doubt” (2). “Methodological naturalism”, aka “methodological materialism” is a presumed rule of science, he says. It asserts that to qualify as scientific, a theory must explain phenomena and events in nature…by reference to strictly material causes only:

“According to this principle, scientists may not invoke the activity of a mind or, as one philosopher of science puts it, any “creative intelligence”.

Evolutionary science intentionally dismisses the remotest suggestion of Creation and possibility of intelligent design. No researcher or professor who wants to keep his job or his funding can factor any hint of divinity or design into his work or his pronouncements. The most polite designation by evolutionists for these two views of science and anything like them, held by many fine scientists and scientifically trained individuals in the Creation and Intelligent Design movements, is that they are “unscientific”.

Evolutionists, who hold the political and legal upper hand in all areas of education and the media, intentionally bar the slightest hint of any evidence, opinion, interpretation or line of inquiry which points towards a designer or a creator. In other words, you-and your children, with the help of your tax money, are purposely kept from considering any alternative interpretation of science to the politically correct one which may lead you to conclude that there is a Designer, unless it’s a controlled exposure designed (!) to ridicule and belittle.

Meyer relates a now famous (or infamous) quote by Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin, laying out his own version of the “ban God” rule:

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs…because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism…for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door”

Over nineteen hundred years ago the apostle Peter described this blinkered attitude by saying that people are “willingly ignorant” (KJV): they “deliberately overlook” (ESV) the facts of creation…and the judgment to come (2 Peter 3:5-7).

NOTES

1: BBC Radio 4 “In Our Time”: “Parasitism”-broadcast January 26th 2017.

2: DARWIN’S DOUBT: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design. See also the follow-up, “Debating Darwin’s Doubt” in which Meyer answers his critics.

As I washed more eggs off the back of my vehicle, one of which almost scored a direct hit on the “Make America Great Again” sticker, I mused the motive of the deliverer of those ovulatory projectiles. Was it tolerance? Was it peace? Was it brotherly love and inclusion? Hmm…

th

Just for the record, the vehicle is twenty-one years old and would cost more to sell than I could get for it. Perhaps I should just scramble it.

There’s some serious hatred of Trump in the US and distrust in some parts of the world. What has he actually done to deserve that? My contention is that he hasn’t done anything: the hatred is the result of a giant smear campaign, funded by wealthy socialists and globalists…

Theresa May lost her desired majority in the UK election. She also lost her opportunity to be a real man (er… woman) and to speak for millions of people who don’t want “fundamental change”: perhaps that’s why she didn’t get that majority. She’s one of the many millions who’ve been silenced by political correctness, who are afraid to say “boo” to a goose (or a chicken) lest-horror of horrors-they be labeled “hatemongers”, “bigots” and “racists”, and their vehicles be pelted with eggs by tolerant, loving, sophisticated world-citizens.

I know something about the Brits, having been one for almost all my life. Traditionally they’re tolerant and polite even when inside they don’t really like someone. And it’s that tolerance and politeness which stands to land them in a whole heap of trouble, rather like Chamberlain’s tolerance and politeness did in the forties. Brits are just so nice that they can’t even imagine that anyone would want to wage something like civilizational jihad against them. If they did know, and as long as those waging civilizational jihad against them did it politely, they really wouldn’t mind. In fact they would help…which is exactly what they are doing. It’s a case of the proverbial frog in the pot slowly coming to a boil without realizing it. Perhaps he’ll make frog tea…

tea

As I’ve said, I agree that the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving and honorable people who just want to get on with their lives like the rest of us. And that’s why Brits are content to accept them into their midst-by the millions. The problem is that a small minority of them take their ideology very seriously, as their founder did and as the Turks who almost succeeded in invading Western Europe did.  And I know from decades of interest in world affairs that in every single Islamic country of the world now there are extremists pushing the nominal on to greater commitment. They push by means of violence if necessary. Even in the more extremely dedicated Islamic nations the majority are forced continually to become more dedicated. The problem is not just a case of ISIS having a temper-tantrum outside their own confines.

Trump has dared to stick his neck out on this issue. But he’s absolutely not “anti-Muslim” as his enemies have attempted to convince us: his recent visit to Saudi Arabia and the Arab League was a roaring success:

However, like it or not, with the millions of law-abiding immigrants come more extremists and their ideology. And what do our other  world “leaders” in the West care? I’ll tell you what: they want us to “get used to it”. And why are those who hold the reigns of power, who have the potential to steer us into a reasonably safe future, choose instead to make platitudinous statements about us all pulling together and not changing our ways, while doing nothing but coming to clean up the mess when there’s a terrorist attack?

360px-8_-_AmStar_7

It’s because many of them now want us all to be “citizens of the world” rather than having our own national identity. Nationalism breeds war, they think, and preserves that awful Christian morality nonsense. They agree with Lennon’s line that if we could just do away with borders, all the people of the world will be kissing each other and blissfully saying goodbye to religion (except Islam, the religion of choice for socialists) forever.

Israel is one of the obstacles to a world-wide utopia, because Israelis persist in being Jewish and in living in their ancient capital. Trump supports the Jewish state, making him a giant obstacle to globalist ideals.

The push for globalism among the elites is gathering momentum and power. President Obama virtually wiped out US borders because of his views on this, and the Democrats were and still are fully behind him. So were their media people-those now doing everything in their power to remove Trump from office, no matter what it takes, and no matter how much they have to lie to do it. I say “elites” intentionally, because a large number of people, especially in the UK, have fallen for the belief that all the rich powerful people are nationalists and “extreme-right-wingers”. All Trump supporters are racist, rich and ignorant, they’ve been told, while all those kind, tolerant, inclusive socialists and liberals are just poor lowly types trying to scrape together a few pennies to help their fellow man get by.

Lower_Manhattan_from_Jersey_City_November_2014_panorama_3

No, it’s the big boys at the top who have all the money and all the power who are driving us on to a one-world, Babylon-esque society, mashing together differing cultures, inventing  man-made climate-change and the ludicrous notion that we can change the climate back by giving them more money, and calling anyone who dares to oppose them “hateful bigots”.

THE OTHER SOURCE OF OPPOSITION TO TRUMP

I say “other source”, but really the two are inextricably linked. Western globalists think that once they get everyone in the same boat we’ll all have the same views on morality: liberal views. I think they’ll find out that the Muslims have different plans.

There’s also an undeniable spiritual thread to the whole situation: more on that another time.

It was known early on in Trump’s campaign that he leaned towards Christian belief, and that he largely held to Christian morality in his proposed policies, as did a large number of his followers. He made it clear that he would oppose unnecessary abortion and Obama’s requirements that the rest of us pay for them (he has and is-see note 3) and that he would reverse President Obama’s rulings on transgender bathrooms: he has. Obama issued a decree stating that all public schools must allow kids to use whichever bathroom they wanted to use on any given day, according to which gender they felt like being (note 1). Where’s the respect for women, who overwhelmingly want privacy, in that? Trump reversed the ruling (thank you President Trump). President Obama did all he could to push for gay rights and gay marriage. He ordered the military to take part in gay pride celebrations (note 2).

Trump is an altogether different animal, as is his vice-president. It’s this stand on morality and his respect for established laws and the constitution which brought the full force of the news media, Hollywood, the Democratic Party and all their ultra-rich donors against him and his followers. We Trump supporters are “ignorant” because we don’t see the world their way, and because we didn’t go along with Obama’s and Hillary’s “fundamental change”, but they’re oh so sophisticated and intelligent! Sophisticated people want the rest of us to pay for babies to be aborted.

No, Trump didn’t introduce polarity to America, it was already here. It was here because far more people opposed Obama and Hillary’s “fundamental change” than the elites and their followers had hoped. Trump’s enemies were sure that their propaganda in universities and on TV had done its work.

It’s my opinion that if Obama had just held back on his pronouncements on transgender bathrooms, and if he had not tried so hard to eradicate the “radical Islamic terrorist” label, just enough people would have voted for Hillary to continue that fundamental change: I’m glad he didn’t.

Scrambled eggs, anyone?

NOTES

1 http://abcnews.go.com/US/obama-administration-public-schools-transgender-students-access-bathrooms/story?id=39081956

2 https://patriotpost.us/alexander/13881

3 https://aclj.org/pro-life/shocking-planned-parenthood-annual-report-shows-abortions-taxpayer-funding-and-profits-soar-prenatal-services-and-cancer-screenings-plummet

 

 

 

Suffering is a universal problem: sooner or later, it grips the lives of all of us in one way or another.

460px-Sépulcre_Arc-en-Barrois_111008_12

Welcome to an updated and improved series I first published six years ago…

Why do we suffer? Surely, if there’s a loving God, there should be no suffering, or it should be short-lived and quickly fixed…

The problem of suffering is used by atheists, agnostics and unbelievers as a reason (or excuse) to ignore God or to preach against his existence. If there really were a God, particularly a loving God, they reason, either there would be no suffering, or he would show up at the first sign of any trouble and put things right. We would all be free to live our lives just as we want, without hindrance, trouble or problems of any kind.

Some people, having no answers to the questions we all ask in the middle of trouble, suffer to the point of losing any faith in God that they may have had. Others maintain their faith and even emerge stronger than they were to begin with. It seems that while most churches have some degree of ministry to those who are suffering, not many prepare the flock in advance, even though we all know it’s a universal problem. And we as individuals choose not to consider the prospect of trouble in our own future.

blindfold

 

All religions and philosophies either have an explanation for suffering, or attempt to sidestep it in one way or another (we don’t really exist and any suffering is caused by our own minds: that kind of thing). I intend to tackle the subject from a Biblical viewpoint. It’s my conviction that the Bible contains most (not all) of the answers to why we suffer, and that they are solid, logical, reasonable answers. While I freely confess that I’m no formally-trained expert, and that I’ve not suffered anywhere near as much as some people do-yet-I think I’ve grasped the main causes of suffering in our world-intellectually. I intend to go into some detail on each cause in following installments of my series, but here I will list them.

Some causes of suffering are of far more consequence than others: this list is not in any particular order:

  • The Curse. The choices and actions of man have brought a curse on a world which was once perfect. The curse affects our bodies, our minds, and all of nature. Nature is running down.
  • God’s judgment. God is patient with us, but eventually sends judgment and trouble upon a rebellious nation, city or individual.
  • Testing. We’re all tested to assess and reveal the condition of our hearts.
  • The consequences of rejecting God. By consistently rejecting Him, we’re not protected by His providence. This also applies to nations, cities and individuals. By going our own way, we are inviting trouble.
  • We reject God’s guidelines for a healthy, successful life.
  • Satan and the spirit beings who have sided with him are against us. We all have an enemy who hates God, his children, humanity in general, and His creation.
  • Free will. God chose to give humans the capacity to choose between right and wrong, rather than create a race of robots who were incapable of true love. Free will necessitates wrong choices and consequential suffering.
  • Discipline. God ‘disciplines those he loves’ in order to make us more like Him.
  • Humbling. Sometimes only suffering breaks our pride.
  • A wake up call. Sometimes only suffering gets our attention. Our refinement is more important than our comfort and ease.
  • Suffering may be allowed to teach dependence on God
  • We harm ourselves with bad choices. For example, we’re too eager to get romantically involved with a person we don’t really know, or we throw our money into a dishonest or suspect business deal;
  •  We harm others with our actions. We may be violent, selfish or greedy.  If we drive while intoxicated we’re risking lives. When we steal, we’re taking what belongs to other people and what they may have worked hard for.
  • We harm ourselves with bad attitudes. For example, we may wallow in destructive self pity rather than looking to God and being thankful.
  • We harm others with our words. The old ‘sticks and stones’ rhyme is not valid: words can be very destructive.
  • We harm others when we fail to love them. Children in particular are in great need of expressed love and kindness.
  • We harm others when we keep them from the truth, and when we teach them the inventions of man, such as evolution.
  • Suffering may be allowed to bring glory to God, in the long or short term. We are His servants-not the other way around.
  • Murphy’s Law/ Sod’s Law/ Fate/ Determinism/ Bad luck. (See my post on Murphy’s Law).

How do Biblical adjectives which describe God as “a consuming fire” and as being “dreadful” square with John’s declarations that:

“God is Love” (1 John 4:8)

and:

“God is light; in him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5 NIV)?

white

There’s no getting away from the fact that the Biblical God, while being loving, and caring for his people, and providing for all our needs, can also be a God of terror. Of course I’m not talking about the kind of terror we see in the news in which some vicious coward wreaks misery on innocent, unarmed people in order to simply frighten the population into seeing things his way.

The only way around the fact that God can be a God of terror is to deny half of the Bible, which doesn’t work, as I explained in the first part of this article. Against all the wishes of mankind, God is not all sweetness and smiles at all times, willing us to do whatever we want and providing everything we need to do it. He is both Love and Terror. How can this be: isn’t it illogical?

puzzle

This can be because God is both perfectly holy, and perfectly merciful: a paradox, perhaps, but not illogical. Look at it this way. God, in order to be what he is-eternal, faithful, unchanging, omni-present-must remain true to himself. In fact he has no choice-he can’t and won’t weaken his own standards. If he allows imperfection or rebellion without responding to it, he is no longer a perfect God.

This could be seen as something of a problem for a God who also loves his creation. He didn’t create the world and mankind in order to provide himself people to pick on. In fact, when he created the world in its original perfect condition, along with mankind, as only a perfect God can do, we’re told that:

“…God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good” (Genesis 2:31).

Earth

 

So what could a perfect God do when his creation began to be imperfect and to rebel against him and to betray each other? The answer is that he provided for himself ways of forgiving that imperfection and rebellion. And such provision is seen repeatedly throughout the Bible in many characters.

An early and clear example found in the Old Testament is Moses. Moses was chosen by God to deliver his people from slavery. But it wasn’t just physical deliverance from Egypt that God had in mind for Moses, it was deliverance for the people from his own perfect standards and his wrath against those who would break them. God chose a man who he knew would stand between his holiness and man’s fallen nature.

God’s desire and compulsion was to punish and destroy those who were rebellious, and sometimes he did. But there were also times when Moses stepped in, particularly when God planned to destroy the entire nation:

I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people. Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them, in order that I may make a great nation of you”

705px-Operation_Upshot-Knothole_-_Badger_001

But Moses implored the Lord his God and said, “O Lord, why does your wrath burn hot against your people…?  Turn from your burning anger and relent from this disaster against your people… And the Lord relented from the disaster… (Exodus 32:9-14).

God provided Moses to protect the Israelites from himself. Many examples of people who stood between God’s wrath and man can be found in the Bible, but the greatest, and the most important one, is Jesus Christ. The gospel, or the “good news” about Jesus Christ is that he, being the only son of God, was sent by the Father to pay the price of our own rebellion and imperfection, which is God’s wrath:

Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed…and the Lord has laid upon him the iniquity of us all… (Isaiah 53:4-6).

7038016-jesus-on-the-cross

Remember the prayer of Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane, when he knew what was about to happen to him, and yet he surrendered to the will of the Father:

My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless , not as I will, but as you will… (Matthew 26:39).

Jesus Christ suffered God’s wrath in our place when he was crucified and left to die. This was the Father’s, and the Son’s, ultimate expression of love and mercy to his creation:

In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only son into the world, so that we might live through him…he loved us and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins… (1 John 4:9-10).

 

 

 

THE TERROR OF GOD

Sometimes God really is “terrible”. In fact, in some ways He’s the ultimate terrorist…

The_Sun_by_the_Atmospheric_Imaging_Assembly_of_NASA's_Solar_Dynamics_Observatory_-_20100819

Don’t worry, fellow believer, I’m not about to intentionally engage in any kind of blasphemy. I’m sure it’s true that, God is light; in him there is no darkness at all (1 John 1:5 NIV).

However, in contrast the Bible warns us that:

It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God (Hebrews 10 : 31 KJV).

How can God be said in his own book to be all “light” and yet at the same time cause fear? We have in the Scriptures what is either a serious contradiction, or a strange paradox which we need to come to terms with. In the latter case, which I’ll demonstrate is the correct alternative, the fact that God is “light” doesn’t exclude the reality of his fearful attributes: the terrible, fearful side of God’s nature does not equate to “darkness”.

puzzle

I noted in a recent post* that Richard Dawkins stated in his book, “THE GOD DELUSION” a number of extremely derogatory and insulting terms to describe the God of the Bible. I commented that none of his assertions were valid. However, in some fairness to the God-hating professor, I must say that anyone who’s done any serious thinking about life, the universe and everything, and anyone who’s lived for any length of time, and anyone who’s honest, will have questioned the goodness of God at some point in their life. If there is a God (and I’m convinced there is) and if he’s good and loving as the Bible claims he is, then why do so many terrible things happen in our lives and in our world?

More than that, anyone who’s read a sizable portion of the Old Testament couldn’t fail to notice some very heavy-handed dealings by God with his people and those around them. As an example, consider the punishment of Korah, his family and all who rebelled against Moses with him:

“…the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up, with their households and all who belonged to Korah…and the earth closed over them…And all Israel who were around them fled at their cry, for they said, “Lest the earth swallow us up”. And fire came out from the Lord and consumed the 250 men offering the insense…” (Numbers 17:31-35 ESV).

800px-MARTIN_John_Great_Day_of_His_Wrath

Now, that’s terrorism in its purest form. If we only had a very shallow knowledge of the God of the Bible, we might read that passage and conclude that God is a mean, terrifying ogre. But I’d like to here reiterate a regular theme of mine, which is that if God is God-our creator and our sustainer-he has every right to do what he wants with his creation just as surely as a potter has every right to remake a buckled vessel on his wheel. Were he really a mean ogre, he would have every right to be so. We in contrast and in comparison have no rights and no way of enforcing any claims to rights.

God in the Old Testament was aware of his potential to inflict terror even on his own people, and made a habit of passing out warnings in advance, against any behavior which would lead to his anger flaring up. Think of the warning He gave to the people of Israel at Mt. Sinai, telling them not to set foot on the mountain:

And the Lord said to Moses, “Go down and warn the people, lest they break through to the Lord to look and many of them perish…” (Exodus 19:21)

It’s as though God was telling the people, “Please don’t come too close to me, because I won’t be able to help myself, and I don’t want to make you suffer or to destroy you…”

Our problem in this age is that we’ve forgotten about the holiness of God. He is perfect, he is infinite, he is mighty, and he must be multi-dimensional-if dimensions can be applied at all to an eternal, omnipresent being. We in contrast are imperfect, flawed, weak and very limited in our capacities, particularly our spiritual capacity. We can no more stand next to God and chat with him-in our natural state-than we can stand next to the sun: it’s impossible. And we can no more ignore and neglect the characteristics of God than we can ignore the properties of the sun: travelling at night to land a space ship on the sun to avoid the heat would be a futile, foolish operation.

th

We believers tend to metaphorically brush under the carpets of our minds the numerous “B.C.” events such as the crushing of Korah’s rebellion, choosing instead to focus on the God of the New Testament and his loving, merciful attributes. My own dad, an otherwise godly man in every way, could not accept much of what was written in the Old Testament, and made the decision that God had been misrepresented by its authors, because God clearly wouldn’t condone the killing of anyone let alone thousands of men, women and children. It was the New Testament, in his eyes and the eyes of many others, which is the inspired Word of God: not the Old.

10865319-close-up-of-old-holy-bible-book

The problem with that approach is that by dismissing the OT you are also bringing into question the entire New Testament. You can’t read any one of the gospels without finding numerous examples of Jesus Christ quoting the Old Testament as though he believed it were true, and the letters are similarly packed with references to it. In fact, putting the Pharisees on the spot as he loved to do, Jesus said:

For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me (John 5:46 NASB).

You can’t have one without the other, said Jesus: the Old Testament and his words go together.

The two disciples on the road to Emmaus who were talking to Jesus without knowing it were given a Bible study (Luke 24:13-35). He demonstrated from what we call the Old Testament-there was no written New Testament at that time- that the prophesied Christ had to suffer and be raised. Why would he have reasoned from the Old Testament if it’s not to be accepted or believed?

So what about my outrageous assertion-coming as it does from a believer-that God is terrible? Am I now attempting to insult the Lord Almighty in a similar vein to the renowned and exalted prof.? Am I sowing seeds of dissent and rebellion? No. I’m using the word “terrible” in the context of being “dreadful”, “unspeakable” and “awesome”. I’m simply facing up to the reality of God’s nature.

393px-Gojira_1954_poster_3

“But…” you may protest…”God is different in the New Testament!”

Is he really? I agree that Jesus Christ was and is “meek and mild”, and merciful, though a time is coming when the other side of his nature will be seen. Leaving that aside for the moment, I want to stress that God is “the same yesterday, today and forever…” Consider the words of New Testament writers, who spoke not only of God’s mercy but of his fearful side:

…let us have grace, by which we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear. For our God is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:28 KJV).

It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God… (Hebrews 10:31 NIV)

Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off (Romans 11:22 ESV)

If this were not enough evidence of the disciples’ awareness of the terrible nature of God we can read in the Revelation and the words of Jesus himself about how the entire world is going to be judged-by his holy standards and not ours-the same kind of holy standards that we see in the Old Testament. Paul wrote:

This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might (2 Thessalonians 1:6-9 NIV). 

The terror of God will fall on imperfect mankind. But there is hope. Part two of my article will offer you the good news: the way of escape from the terror of God.

Thanks for reading this far!

This post in both its parts serves as an introduction to my forthcoming series on the subject of suffering as it relates to the God of the Bible, titled “Why Do We Suffer?”

* https://nickyfisher.com/2017/04/29/wrath-and-mercy/

%d bloggers like this: