Blog Archive

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

The 3 Answers: Does God exist?

     This question has been the bane of philosophers, scientists, and theologians alike since the dawn of time.  Descartes tried to prove the existence of God by playing the absolute cynic in his proof:  "I think therefore I am".  Unfortunately when he tried to go much further beyond that he got caught in a line of circular reasoning which ended up proving nothing in the end but the certainty of his own existence.  In this post I will not attempt to undeniably prove the existence of God one way or another.  My only hope is to successfully break down, analyze, and present the logic behind the possible answers to this question... From the perspective of my own worldview of course.  In the end, the choice of what to believe is always yours.

     When faced with this question most people see it as two choices between yes or no.  There is however, a third response that is actually the default or null position which is: "I have no flipping clue".  So thus we have 3 potential responses to choose from:

Atheism: The "no" position originating from the Greek word "Aethos" which means "without god(s)".  I apologize if I offend anyone at "The Atheist Experience" by this statement, but logically Atheism isn't really the "null state" as some of you have claimed.  By the definition of the word alone, this "no god(s)" response implies the very same kind of conviction that any religious fundamentalist might claim when they say they "know without any doubt that their god(s) exist".  Both responses beg the question: "Oh yeah?  Well prove it!"

Agnosticism: The true logical null state that says "I just don't know".  This originates from the Greek word "Agnosis" which means "without knowledge".  This can range from "I believe that there is some sort of god but I just don't know what kind of god he/she/it is" to "I have no idea one way or the other whether a god or gods exist" or even "Ya know... I really don't care..."

Theism:  The "yes" position which opens up the door to so many more possibilities and "isms": Monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, deism...  The realm of possibility is only limited by human imagination and its perception of the unseen things that may exist beyond the physical world.  Once you say "yes" it becomes an incredibly convoluted and confusing mess of religions to sort through.  It is absolutely no surprise to me when apathy sets in for most people and they just flip back to the default "null" position.

    So can we sort through this mess and prove the answer to this question one way or another?  Lets assume for simplicity sake that one single god/creator of this universe does exist.  To give this universe the consistency it needs to function, wouldn't he/she/it need to be absolute, infinite, eternal, unchanging, and unwavering with respect to an evolving, and ever changing physical universe?  With a universe that is in a constant state of flux wouldn't there need to be a firm and resolute set of rules to lay the foundation for any amount of order to form out of that flux? If there wasn't one and this entity wasn't all of those things, what would that mean for the fundamental laws and structure on which such a universe would be built?  What if there were multiple entities vying for control?  Would consistency even be possible if there wasn't one infinite and absolute author of these laws?  Likewise, if an infinite and eternal entity did exist, would it even be possible for it exist or "fully" manifest itself to finite beings within the scope of a transient universe?  So many confusing questions!  My own personal opinion would point to a definite no on that last one.  Not to say it wouldn't be able manifest at all, it just wouldn't be able to "fully" manifest and demonstrate what infinity means to the satisfaction of our tiny little finite minds.  And without being able to observe infinity with our own eyes, any such partial manifestation would always beg the question: "Was that really the infinite god of the universe?"  So I ask:  How can science (which aims at observing, understanding, and defining the nature of our physical universe) observe, understand, and define something that exists outside the context of this universe as well as outside the capacity of our finite minds?  I believe the truth of the matter is that, within the confines of science and the scientific method, you will never be able to definitively prove it.  Therefore to swallow this pill you need a little of something that science won't be able to give you, ie: faith; because in a universe where one infinite God does exist, science is a never-ending chase down the rabbit hole of infinity... which is why we get mad scientists...

    Now lets examine the alternate view and assume there is no creator god.  As science observes, interprets, and defines the nature of our universe we hypothesize, theorize, and continually revise as more and more is uncovered and discovered.  (Sorry, I wasn't trying to sound like Dr. Seuss there... it just sort of happened)  However, just because science discovers some new rule that governs the mechanics of our world, does that mean this specific mechanism only popped into existence once it was discovered?  I say no.  For example: the mechanics behind gravity functioned consistently before and after Issac Newton irregardless of humanity's ability to accurately define it.  Humans observed the consistent results and effects of gravity long before the apple fell on Newton's head.  They just didn't understand what they were seeing. Therefore, I put forth this statement:  Nothing can exist in the physical universe without some sort of consistent mechanism in place to bring forth its existence.  Accept, reject, or challenge that statement as you will.  Here is one simplistic example: A house does not build itself.  You need an architect, you need a blueprint, you need materials, you need construction workers to assemble it, and maybe a supervisor to interpret the design and bark orders.  I believe it is a fundamental constant of this universe that things DO NOT spontaneously generate without a cause; even when it seems they do because we as imperfect humans could not observe the mechanism that caused its generation.  I believe anything can be traced back to a definable mechanism that exists behind its generation.  I also believe it is this precept which allows for science to even exist in the first place.  Otherwise nothing would make any sense and we would just be standing around all the time scratching our heads wondering how the heck THAT just happened. (Which typically happens anyway in science until some genius has an epiphany)

     In a universe where even the slightest possibility of spontaneous generation is possible then anything is possible.  There are no rules or solid foundation, and nothing is truly constant or consistent because even the so called laws in such a universe would be subject to the possibility of being spontaneously rewritten.  It is the epitome of human ego and delusion to infer that just because no human has been able to discover or observe the mechanism behind something, then that must mean there is not any mechanism at all.  Call it "magic" or "illusory" or "spontaneous" if you will but that does not change the fact that there is most likely a cause that you are missing.  Until sufficient evidence is found to define that mechanism we are stuck in the null state of "Something caused that...I just don't know what".  It is the nature of cause and effect and you can not escape it.

     But wait! ...some of you may say.  If you say nothing is spontaneous and everything has a cause, when you trace every cause back to one root cause and find an infinite god... well, what then caused god?  Was this god spontaneously created?  Wouldn't that make your whole house of cards tumble down?  My response to that is how do you cause or create infinity?  What can give birth to infinity?  More infinity?!  Infinity just is.  Try and wrap your finite mind around that one... every time I do I get a headache.

     The evidence that underlying mechanisms and constants such as gravity are observable, consistent, and definable gives sufficient proof (for me at least) that there is an underlying blueprint which defines all of the aspects within which this universe functions.  If there wasn't such a blueprint then I believe our universe would be inconsistent, incoherent, chaotic and virtually impossible for life to even exist in.  So the existence of an underlying blueprint begs the question: Where did this blueprint originate from?  Can you have a design without a designer?  Can you have a book without an author?  Can you have a law without a...well lets just forget about that example.  We really don't need to get into law or politics here yet.  Lets say for simplicity sake that there is an underlying blueprint that governs the dynamics of our universe but that it just spontaneously sprung into existence.  How could that blueprint have any consistency or constant form.  If it spontaneously popped into existence, couldn't it also spontaneously change and rewrite itself, thus changing the underlying foundation and fabric of our universe?  Introduce even the slightest possibility of causeless spontaneous generation into an ordered and structured universe and the entire foundation of it breaks down.

      Unfortunately those questions can't be sufficiently answered and proven one way or another when applying them to a possible creator that most likely does not exist within the context of our physical and observable universe.  With something like a book we can point to the author and say "Look!  There she is!"...unless she is dead.  But then we could visit her grave...and dig her up if we have to... although in either case, alive or dead, could we truly prove she wrote the book without having witnessed the transcription of it ourselves?  We may be able to find witnesses to testify to it but how do we know they aren't lying?  In a universe where pure causeless spontaneousness is supposedly possible, how do we know the book didn't spontaneously write itself?  When does the burden of evidence become proof?  And therein lies the crux, because for either decision you make, you must to rely on some small amount of faith to prove what you believe.  You can present the best case possible for your belief but in the end you can't force it on anyone because to get there yourself you had to take a little leap of faith.  And faith is a personal choice that no one else can make for you.

     Now the only question you need to ask in this case of "Athe" vs "The" is which is the easier pill to swallow?  Is it easier to have faith that consistency is an illusion, a grand design doesn't exist, and therefore neither does the designer?  Or is it more logical to have faith that the observations of science can be consistent and are not illusory, that the very existence of science and its ability to do what it does points to a grand design, and that such a design would by nature require a designer?


*cricket cricket

What are you looking at me for?  I know what I believe.  That is a decision only you can make for yourself.

     But wait... what about the third choice?  The null state!  In computer programing a null value is neither a 1 or a 0 it is simply a void of nothingness absent of any knowledge or information... Which, when I really contemplate the concept of nothingness, it seems just about as incomprehensible to my finite mind as the concept of infinity.  "Nothing" is a paradox because isn't nothing really something but if it's something how can it then be nothing... I really don't get the concept, just like I don't get how someone can be content to wallow in "I just don't know" when the answers are out there.  To me the null state is the lazy mind's scapegoat.

    So those are the three answers and the three choices broken down to their core... at least the core that my own imperfect and finite mind sees.  I think both sides of the argument will agree that when you travel down the path that leads to a Godless universe you will find absolutely Nothing exists at the end of it.  Meditate on the multiple meanings of that one for a while. *wink wink

To the Atheist I say:  Have fun frolicking in a universe of illusion defined by chaos, where nothing is constant, and where in any instant, anything could happen.  Let's all hope and pray to Nothing that the Earth doesn't spontaneously implode for no apparent reason tomorrow.  And let me know how living in constant fear of the endless possibilities of the unknown works out for you.  In all seriousness though, I salute you for your faith.  It is much greater than my own.  I just would not be able to stomach the pill you swallow.

To the Agnostic:  Get your mind up off the couch, read something, talk to someone, search for the answers that are out there, and make a decision already!  Are you a 1 or a 0?  Quit wallowing in indecisiveness and fear of faith.  Because nothing but Nothing exists for you in your current state!

To the Theist:  I ask this one question... How do you know your god(s) is(are) king(s)/queen(s)?

It's a complicated question, I know... which sounds to me like something to explore in a future post and/or posts...

Lastly, to answer my earlier question as to how we sort through the mess and undeniably determine the answer to this question one way or another.  I have already said it once or twice but I'll say it again just to be clear.  Regardless of the choice you make the "how" is the same in both instances...

Drum roll please!....


Monday, September 23, 2013

The Twin Lies of The Serpent

     The one thing to note about the "new age" movement is that there is absolutely nothing "new" about it.  Its ideology has been prevalent in many cultures throughout the ages but has gained much more visibility and popularity with the dawn of the information age...and of course the 60's and 70's certainly helped too.  It is not one unified doctrine or belief system least not yet.  However its core elements can be found across a wide array of religions, movements, ideologies, and political agendas.  At its heart however you will find a common interlocking theme that can be traced back to Luciferian Theosophy which pits itself in direct opposition to the one true God and Creator.  The origin of these ideas can be traced back to the story of Eden and the twin lies told by the serpent.

Gen 3:1-5
     The serpent was the shrewdest of all the wild animals the Lord God had made. One day he asked the woman, “Did God really say you must not eat the fruit from any of the trees in the garden?”
“Of course we may eat fruit from the trees in the garden,” the woman replied. “It’s only the fruit from the tree in the middle of the garden that we are not allowed to eat. God said, ‘You must not eat it or even touch it; if you do, you will die.’”
You won’t die!” the serpent replied to the woman. “God knows that your eyes will be opened as soon as you eat it, and you will be like God, knowing both good and evil.”

      Lets examine what the serpent is implying here:
1- You won't die
    God told Adam and Eve that if they ate of the tree of knowledge they would die.  The serpent claimed the opposite.  Lo and behold when they ate the fruit they did not fall dead on the spot as they probably expected and just like the serpent said, their eyes were opened.  So it would seem at the time that the serpent was right and God was lying.  Unfortunately that was not the case.  Through eating the fruit, Adam and Eve's eyes were opened to the nature of good and evil, and therefore sin.  But why would such knowledge be such a bad thing and how could it cause them to die?  Well to understand this let us first examine and define sin and then look at the original state in which God created man and woman.

     What is sin?  Sin is defined as "An immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law".  So who defines divine law?  Well the answer should be obvious; an all powerful, all perfect creator of course.  So sin in essence is any act that that goes against the will and perfect nature of God.  Just as there are fundamental constants like gravity in the physical universe so are there fundamental moral constants of right and wrong.  Gravity is not a subjective thing and has absolutely no care or concern for my own desire or intent.  No matter how much I want to fly... I know that every time I try to jump from a cliff or a building... the same thing happens.  Both the physical laws and constants of this universe as well as the moral ones come from God alone and they are unwavering and unchanging.  In fact they must be for there to be any sort of consistency and stability for the formation of life.  For us the only difference between the physical laws of this world and the moral ones is the power of choice.  On the moral front, we can choose to disobey.  We just have to be prepared to face the consequences when we do.  But oh how I wish I could disobey gravity HA!

    What about the original state of the first humans? Let's take a look at these two passages:

Just after God creates man and woman:
Gen 2:25
     25 Now the man and his wife were both naked, but they felt no shame.

After they eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge:
Gen 3:8-10
     When the cool evening breezes were blowing, the man and his wife heard the Lord God walking about in the garden. So they hid from the Lord God among the trees. Then the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?”
10 He replied, “I heard you walking in the garden, so I hid. I was afraid because I was naked.”

   Adam and Eve's nakedness is used here to highlight their ignorance of right and wrong.  These passages imply that before the fall, man and woman were pure, innocent, and completely ignorant of the nature of good and evil.  They also walked regularly with God in His garden and knew only love and fellowship with Him.  For them life was very simple and easy.  God only had one commandment for them to follow and thus they only had one possible way for them to sin:

Gen 2:15-17
15 The Lord God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to tend and watch over it. 16 But the Lord God warned him, “You may freely eat the fruit of every tree in the garden— 17 except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die"

     Eat what you will but DON'T TOUCH THIS ONE TREE!  Disobeying that command from God was the very first act that went against His will.  It was the very first sin and unfortunately it was also the catalyst that opened the eyes of humanity to a multitude of new possibilities and potential ways to go against God's will.  Unlike the physical laws of our universe which hold true whether we are ignorant of them or not; when you are ignorant of a moral law how can you be held accountable or be punished for it?  Once your eyes are opened to it you then become bound by it and completely accountable for the choices you make within the framework of that knowledge.  This is exactly what happened to humanity once they ate of the fruit of knowledge.  Adam and Eve's lives became SO much more complicated in that instant.  Ignorance is no longer an excuse for anyone.

     In the previous passage where Adam and Eve hid from God, we also see the first sign of fear, and rightly so.  Where as before the had known and only experienced love with Him, they had now just betrayed and defied their all powerful Creator.  They also fundamentally understood just how complicated and difficult their lives had just become with the revelation of this knowledge.  The entirety and infinite scope of God's will is an impossible thing for a finite being to fully comprehend.  And the potential of making a mistake and disappointing such an all powerful God is absolutely terrifying.  He could snuff them out with just a thought or a snap of His fingers and start over from scratch.  This introduction of fear and the battle that ensues in the hearts of humans between fear and love is a very complex thing though that I will explore in future posts.

Now let's look at God's response to this act of defiance:

Gen 3:22-23
22 Then the Lord God said, “Look, the human beings have become like us, knowing both good and evil. What if they reach out, take fruit from the tree of life, and eat it? Then they will live forever!” 23 So the Lord God banished them from the Garden of Eden, and he sent Adam out to cultivate the ground from which he had been made.

     No more fellowship with God in His garden and no more access to the tree of eternal life.  Hence humanity is now subject to death and eternal separation from God all thanks to the knowledge that the serpent enticed Eve with.  But why such a harsh punishment for such a seemingly small act of disobedience?
     Let's examine this by exploring the nature of God.  Could an all powerful and all perfect creator accept disobedience to His word and the law of His will?  Now remember the very nature, existence, and will of such a Creator would define the fabric of this universe as well as what is considered good and evil.

John 1:1-5 
In the beginning the Word already existed.
    The Word was with God,
    and the Word was God.
He existed in the beginning with God.
God created everything through him,
    and nothing was created except through him.
The Word gave life to everything that was created,
    and his life brought light to everyone.
The light shines in the darkness,
    and the darkness can never extinguish it.

   What implications would it have if God went against his own word?  How can He go against His word without going against Himself?  As a result of His infinite and absolute nature, to accept and excuse any sin would be a contradiction and a denial of Himself.  It is an impossible paradox because how can God deny Himself?  A universe eating black hole comes to mind if such a paradox were to occur.  What we are talking about here is perfect and unwavering integrity of a God who's very nature defines what is good and evil.  I'm sorry but it is sad to say that almost good enough isn't good enough if you look at things through God's perspective.  God doesn't grade sin on a scale, we humans created that scale to make ourselves feel a better about the little slip ups.  We can always point to someone else and say, "Well at least I'm not THAT bad!"  But in God's eyes and through the lens of His perfect integrity, the person who tells a little white lie is no different than a serial killer.  There is no exception to an absolute moral law.

     A friend of mine once told me a very apt analogy:  Heaven and fellowship with God is like being in a clean room and sin is the virus.  Not even the slightest trace of the virus can be allowed in the clean room lest it infect and corrupt everyone in it.  Therefore to enter the clean room you must first be disinfected and cured completely of the virus.

Now in contrast, what is the Luciferian ideology that was born from the serpent's lies?  How does it all relate to the "new age agenda"?
1- You will not die.
     God says you will be eternally separated from me and by extension, eternal life, and therefore will be subject to death because of your sin.
     Lucifer says you won't die because there is no sin because God is not absolute or doesn't even exist in the first place.
2-  You will be like God.
     God says by his very name, Yahweh, that "I Am".  He is the beginning and the end of all things.  He is absolute and no one can be Him but Him.  Could you even imagine multiple all powerful gods or creators within one universe?  Could you imagine the chaos and confusion that would ensue from having just two gods with different wills and different ideas of right and wrong?  How could a universe like that even have any sort of consistency?  One day gravity would go up... the next sideways.  One day the sun would set in the west and the next it would rise in the north...  I don't think I would want to live in a universe like that.
     Lucifer on the other hand, by the very claim of being able to be "like God" contradicts his first statement which in essence is a denial of God and His absolute power.  Yet he boldly claims and implies in this statement that by eating from the tree of knowledge, humans can achieve godhood by their own power.  Now could you imagine a universe with 7 billion different gods?  

    Lucifer is probably sitting back and laughing as he watches us take those words and run with them.  He's rolling on the floor clutching his stomach as he watches us scramble all over each other vying for more power and the hope of becoming "The One".  And herein lies the great deception.  He never said we could become God... he just said we would have knowledge of good and evil like God.  He never said anything about our limited and finite minds being able to handle that knowledge with the perfect integrity of an infinite God.  He knew we wouldn't drop dead instantly from eating the fruit of that knowledge but he also knew that our inability to handle that knowledge with perfect integrity would cause us to be eternally separated from the one true, absolute, infinite, and perfect God.  Lucifer was referring to physical death but when God said you would die, He was referring to eternal spiritual death that would result.

    This is the core of the Luciferian ideology.  To those who follow it, they believe Lucifer was an angel of light who freed humanity from an unjust and oppressive God who was holding us back from our true godlike potential.  They believe that God, His will, and His law is irrelevant and unnecessary.  They diminish the power and even the existence of God and instead lift up and glorify human power and achievement.  They seek to claim what they believe is humanity's destiny to become gods themselves.  The evidence for this can be found in the writings of Helena Blavatsky who was the founder of the Theosophical Society.  Helena writes:

"One of the most hidden secrets involves the so-called fall of Angels. Satan and his rebellious host will thus prove to have become the direct Saviors and Creators of divine man. Thus Satan, once he ceases to be viewed in the superstitious spirit of the church, grows into the grandiose image. It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God. Satan (or Lucifer) represents the Centrifugal Energy of the Universe, this ever-living symbol of self-sacrifice for the intellectual independence of humanity. "---- H.P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine  Pages 215, 216, 220, 245, 255, 533

     So tell me, where do you see these themes in our world?  Where can you find the denial of moral law and the excuse of sin?  Where can you find the glorification of human power, intellect, and achievement?  Where can you find an ideology that centers around human ascension and godhood?  Whether you realize it or not, the lies of Luciferian Theosophy can be found everywhere.  These concepts live at the very heart and core of this world.  It is so ingrained the very substance of our being that it now feels completely natural.  The words and teachings of Jesus Christ seem so alien, unnatural, and sometimes downright crazy when viewed from the context of this world.  For example:

Luke 9:23-24
23 Then he said to the crowd, “If any of you wants to be my follower, you must turn from your selfish ways, take up your cross daily, and follow me. 24 If you try to hang on to your life, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for my sake, you will save it.

    So to be saved I must crucify myself?!?  Why?  Because the pursuit of "self" has but one goal and aim and one inevitable result; continuous conflict with all of the other "selves" out there vying for more power, more control, more <insert any worldly thing here>.  The famous quote: "Too many chiefs and not enough Indians" comes to mind.  In fact with the birth of the twin lies from the serpent and the revealing of all the knowledge of good and evil we also see the birth of what Darwin discovered with "survival of the fittest".  Those lies and the corruption of sin changed the very natural order of this world.  When you pursue and glorify yourself above all else, that leaves no room for God to enter in and fill you with His Spirit, His will, and His intent.  This is the lie of the instinct of survival and the "one life to live" mentality that so many hold to: when you pursue this one physical life above all else you reject the hope and possibility of an eternal one.  That is why Jesus and His disciples always preached that we, as believers in Christ, live in this world but are not "of" it:

John 15:19
19 The world would love you as one of its own if you belonged to it, but you are no longer part of the world. I chose you to come out of the world, so it hates you.

    For most, myself included, the concept of complete surrender of "self" and to let go of the instinct of survival is terrifying.  In fact the very core of my being screams against it, especially after reading something like that last verse.  We find it hard to trust such a great, powerful, and mysterious God.  What reassurance do we have of God's intentions?  This is just one verse but there are many many more and as you go through the bible you will find that the entirety of it is a story about how God continually works for the greater good, through the lives of those who love Him.

Romans 8:28
28 And we know that God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them.

    Under Luciferian Theosophy, they would have you believe that Lucifer opened the door for human achievement and growth.  But did he really?  And does that mean human achievement is bad?  The truth of the matter is really that human achievement is also a lie and fallacy.

Hebrews 11:3
"By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible." 
John 1:3
"Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made."

Ecclesiastes 1:9 
"History merely repeats itself. It has all been done before. Nothing under the sun is truly new."

    God is the creator and origin of all things.  He is the source from which any sort of achievement is even possible in the first place.  So in essence when we glorify own selves and achievements we are forgetting who made it possible in the first place.  It also opens the door to pursue our own will and step outside God's will when we seek progress and achievement.  The result being the creation of powerful weapons of destruction like the atom bomb.  Every time we pursue achievement for the sake of ourselves and the sake of achievement it is kind of like disobeying Him and eating the fruit that He told us not to eat.  Why is it such a bad thing though?  Because God is God and He said no...and also:

Ecclesiastes 3:1
"There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens"
     If only we would just have a little faith, trust, and patience to wait for God's purpose and plan to be slowly revealed.

Isaiah 40:31

31 but they who wait for the Lord shall renew their strength;
    they shall mount up with wings like eagles;
they shall run and not be weary;
    they shall walk and not faint.

     So all of this begs the question was God truly holding us back from knowledge, power, and godhood?  Or was He acting as any good parent would, protecting us from knowing too much too soon?  Given the chance would He have nurtured and mentored us and slowly revealed His mysteries to us over time as we grew and matured as the children of His creation made in His image?  Was it really Lucifer who provided the potential for "enlightenment" in the first place?  He didn't plant the tree of knowledge or the tree of life in the garden, God did.  God withheld nothing from us.  He gave us complete access to it as well as the freedom to choose for ourselves.  He also gave us the truth and warning about what would happen if we went against His will and sought it out on our own.

     When viewed from this perspective, the Luciferian claims have absolutely NO validity and the lies of the serpent look to me like the most disgusting corruption imagninable; exposing us to things that we were not meant for yet.  Lucifer no longer becomes an angel of illumination and enlightenment, he becomes a destroyer and corrupter of all that was once good and pure.  After all, would you teach your 2 year old son or daughter all about sex, violence, guns, drugs or any other number of "adult" topics because it existed and you could and you didn't want to hold back his or her development?  How could a 2 year old mind even contemplate such things and handle them with any amount of responsibility?

      Lastly, lets examine God's original intent and purpose for us, which is revealed just after he creates man and woman:

Gen 1:28
28 Then God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and multiply. Fill the earth and govern it. Reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, and all the animals that scurry along the ground.”

     What sort of thoughts come to mind when you think of the words "govern" and "reign"?  Does your mind flash to examples of corrupt dictators, oppressors, and authoritarian rulers from humanity's past?  Rulers who take from lesser people just to line their own pockets with gold.  Is this not the example governance we have set through out history?  What do you think an all perfect, all powerful, all loving God intends by those words?  I believe that to govern and reign over something means to serve and protect it.  How do you think we have lived up to that blessing and purpose given to us by God?  What have we done with the knowledge and power that was revealed to us through the serpent's tempting of Eve?  I think the wars and strife throughout human history as well as the decimation of ourselves and the planet on which we live are enough of a testament to answer that question.  But that is just my own personal opinion.  I leave you to make up you own mind.

     I encourage you to never take anything at face value with out your own in depth examination.  Ask the hard questions and search for the answers.  And as you search for the truth you will become more aware of the various agendas that pull and tug our lives in so many different directions.  Hopefully along the way you choose to explore God's word with an open mind and, as you do, I believe you will see an amazing story revealed to you.  It is a story of a Father's love for His children as well as the great and amazing lengths He goes through in order to pave and light the way through the dark of this world and back to our home with Him.

**I also encourage you to check out**

What IS the Great Deception?

     Before I get into defining what I call "The Great Deception" I should first give a little context and history as to how I stumbled across it.  Last fall around the time that so many were falsely prophesying doom and gloom surrounding the Mayan calendar, I was exploring and often times laughing at the crazy conspiracy theories people were posting on YouTube.  Everyone seemed to have a different take on what cosmic disaster was going to end us all on December 21, 2012.

     Some said it would be global pole shift, others cried it would be a super massive solar flare, and still others warned about the legendary Planet X, Nibiru, Nemisis, Tyche, or whatever you want to call it.  Planet X was supposed to slingshot around the sun on it's comet like elliptical orbit, wreaking havoc and destruction on all the inner planets around this time.

    While these doomsday theories were all very interesting they have absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this blog except to serve as an index of the rather interesting path that eventually lead me to an intriguing and disturbing "documentary" (a term which I use VERY loosely here) called Zeitgeist - The Movie.

    This documentary was first published by Peter Joseph in 2007 and he has since gone on to create a few more Zeitgeist films.  Peter starts off highlighting everything he thinks is wrong with the world, religion, government, our debt based monetary system... some of which are very valid points and arguments.  Ironically however, the only "religion" he attempts to discredit is Judo-Christianity.  He then begins to outline his, in my opinion, naive and unrealistic utopian ideal for the perfect society.  What really hit me hard about this documentary was not his utopian dream however, it was the first 30-45 minutes or so in which he proceeds to try and rip Judo-Christian theology to shreds.

    His underlying premise is that modern Christianity is really a pagan religion of sun worship and based on an astrological calendar.  He claims that Jesus was simply a prophet of the astrological age of Pisces and as we move into the age of Aquarius a new prophet will surface just as there have been many other "prophets" in other astrological ages.  His proof for this is a very clumsy attempt to draw parallels between "messiah like" characters from ancient myths and legends of cultures such as Egypt and Ancient Greece in order to prove that the biblical Jesus Christ was not unique.  Thanks to Chris White you can find an excellent video that debunks every single one of Peter's points.

     It was through this Zeitgest movie however that I first discovered what many call the "New Age Agenda".  None of the prophetic predictions from Revelation about Christians being deceived and lead astray by a one world religion made much sense to me before.  I had often wondered how a system of belief that is set so far apart from the traditional non-christian religions of this world could be tied together with them into one unified religion.  After watching Zeitgeist however, much of the "how" became clear to me.  It would be so easy for the naive and uneducated to be drawn in by the twisted and half truths as well as blatant lies of such ideas.

    And herein lies the beginning of my quest to explore and pull back the veil on this great deception.  In future posts I will attempt to explore the fundamental ideas and precepts behind these various agendas and how they have propagated throughout every level of our culture and society, and have even infected and infiltrated the Christian faith.  I will also attempt to tie these agendas back to what God has to say about it through His word.  Pray for me and wish me luck!

For those interested in me and what I believe, here is a testimony video I did for my church: