Tag: #education

“A Republic, if you care to keep it.”

The Bible, Christianity & American Government, Chapter 9

Make us a king to judge us like all the (other) nations.”

1 Samuel 8:5
The King’s Crown

There’s a famous quote making it’s way around the Internet, about Benjamin Franklin being asked what kind of government the United States was founded to be. It is said that he replied:

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

Our founding fathers knew that the history of republics was not good, and that they often tended to end in tyranny.

For example, the once very successful Dutch Republic, formed in 1588, had declined and decayed until it had all but disintegrated by the time of the American founding. And in their own history, their ancestors had formed a republic named the English Commonwealth, in 1649, but it had only lasted for 11 years, until 1660.

But the primary example that the founding fathers looked to – which had been the model for all later republics – was the Roman Republic, which lasted 482 years, but it ended tragically in 60 years of civil wars and the rise of the dictator, Julius Caesar.

Julius Caesar

Why do republics fail?

In pondering this question, I was drawn back once again to a study of the world’s very first tyrant, Nimrod (first referenced in Genesis 10:8).

“Cush begot Nimrod; he began to be a mighty one on the earth.” (the Hebrew word used here is “gibôr“).

Genesis 10:8
Gibor = "strong, mighty, impetuous" (Genesius' Hebrew Lexicon)
Impetuous = "acting or done quickly and without thought or care," (Bing) marked by impulsive vehemence or passion (or) by force and violence.." (Merriam-Webster)

God had commanded mankind to spread out and take dominion over the earth, but instead the people congregated together in a city and started dominating each other, and Nimrod was the worst of them.

So, why do people follow tyrants?

An article in Psychology Today claims that people hunger for “strong parental figures,” and that they are afraid to take responsibility for their own lives, preferring instead to stay on the sidelines, and “let someone else run the show,” even though the people they follow are often “narcissistic,” “calculating,” and “cruel.”

Do you think that is true? That people are afraid to take responsibility for their own lives, and that they would rather follow the directions of someone else, even if they have demonstrated themselves to be narcissistic and cruel?

That’s exactly what the Bible says that the ancient people of Israel did, although they were warned against it.

“‘This is how a king will reign over you,’ Samuel said… ‘He will take the best of your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves, and give them to his servants. He will take a tenth of your grain and your vintage… He will take a tenth of your sheep. And you will be his servants. And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves…'”

1 Samuel 8:11-18

When told that George Washington had turned down an offer to become America’s first king, King George III of England said: “If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.”

But the people who rule our country today have little resemblance to George Washington.

The Psychology Today article goes on to say this about tyrants:

“They tend to have a blend of narcissistic and antisocial personality disorder traits such as a lack of empathy, grandiosity, thirst for power and control, lying and deceit, indifference to conventional laws or rules or morality, and more.”

Psychology Today, February 2, 2017

It remind us of a warning by one of the Founding Fathers, James Wilson of Pennsylvania:

“Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power, and the love of money. Separately each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but when united in view of the same object, they have in many minds the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men, a post of honour that shall be at the same time a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it… And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable pre- eminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters? It will not be the wise and moderate; the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your Government and be your rulers.”

James Wilson, Constitutional Convention of 1787

In Chapter 3 of our book, we talked about God’s plan for self-government, and the wise advice for doing so from Thomas Jefferson, Alexis de Tocqueville, and William Penn.

Back in the 1970’s and 80’s there was an old album cover that was pretty popular.

Keith Green‘s “No Compromise”

The artwork on the cover of the album depicts the scene where Haman, the Prime Minister of the Persian Empire is passing by, and everyone is bowing down to him – everyone but one man named Mordecai, and Haman tried to have him killed.

Some years earlier, another man named Daniel, had to disobey the king of his day, and his political enemies tried to have him killed.

And when that same king went to throw them into a fiery furnace, Daniel’s three friends replied:

“If that is the case, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will deliver us from your hand, O king. But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we do not serve your gods, nor will we worship the gold image which you have set up.”

Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego, Daniel 3:17-18

William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania, once said:

“Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.”

And in our third chapter, we quoted from Thomas Jefferson’s 1787 Notes on the State of Virginia, where he wrote:

“Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.”

What is venality?

venality = "openness to bribery or corruption" (dictionary.com)

One thing that Mordecai, Daniel, and Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego definitely had in common is that they were not open to corruption. They were incorruptible, in the same way that George Washington was incorruptible. If we want to be able to stand against tyranny, and against manipulation – even when your government is telling you otherwise, we have to take responsibility for our own lives.

Second Chronicles 7:14 says:

“If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

God is ready to heal our land. Are we ready to do our part?

History is the Life-Blood of a Free People

The Bible, Christianity & American Government, Chapter 7

The book of Exodus opens this way:

“The children of Israel were fruitful and increased abundantly, multiplied and grew exceedingly mighty; and the land was filled with them.”

Exodus 1:7

400 years earlier, Joseph had saved Egypt from destruction during the seven years of famine.

But, during those 400 years:

“There arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph.”

Exodus 1:8

It is never a good idea to forget your history.

England had experienced a religious reformation and had grown to be a world power under King Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth I.

But everything changed in 1603, when the King of Scotland also became – for the first time – the King of Great Britain (and thus the King of England). He didn’t know much about English history (such as King John and Magna Charta). He didn’t know much about the Rights of Englishmen, nor did he care.

King James I

When people (like the group we know as the “Pilgrims”) chose to separate from the Church of England, King James had some unkind words for them.

“I shall make them conform or I will harry them out of the land or else do worse” 

King James I (1603-1625)

And that is exactly what he did.

“For some were clapped into prison, others had their houses beset and watched, night and day, and hardly escaped their hands.  And most were feign to flee and leave their houses and habitations and their means of livelihood.”

William Bradford, Of Plimouth Plantation, 1630

You see, King James believed in something called “the Divine Right of Kings,” and that his power as the King over England was absolute (meaning that it could not be questioned).

One website says:

“James’s great failure as an English king stemmed from his inability at first to perceive wherein the English assembly differed from the Scottish Parliament, and from his unwillingness to accept the differences when at last he became aware of them.”

In fact though, the problems didn’t end with James I. They went on for many years, with struggles between various kings and Parliament, until the English Bill of Rights was signed into law in 1689. But that only came after the King at that time (James II) fled the country, which became known as The Bloodless Revolution!

When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, he wasn’t writing it from within the bubble of the current events of his time. He was writing it from within the context of the hundreds of years of history since King James and the Pilgrims. And not only that, he was writing it from within the context of the ancient rights of his ancestors going all the way back through history to Magna Charta.

That is the our heritage as American citizens, and we would do well to remember it.

Democracy is close to godliness, isn’t it?

The Ox-Bow Incident, 1943

In “The Ox-Bow Incident,” made in 1943, we get a very clear portrayal of democracy in action.

democracy = "comes from two Greek words that mean people (demos) and rule (kratos)." (National Geographic)
democracy = "government by the people, especially : rule of the majority." (Mirriam-Webster)

Genesis 12 begins the story of how God, in much the same way that He had previously chosen the individual man–Noah–to save the human race, selected a particular family of people–a tribe, if you will, to become his chosen people, to be His representatives to the rest of humanity.

We learn later, in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, that God’s chosen form of government is actually theocracy.

theocracy = "The Jews were under the direct government of God himself. The nation was in all things subject to the will of their invisible King." (Easton's Bible Dictionary)

Is the implication, then, that God wants the whole human race to enter into that type of system of government?

Well, yes, as a matter of fact, except that Jesus (the “Son of God”) will temporarily reign until He turns rule of all things to His Father.

“And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: ‘All power is given to Me in heaven and in earth.'”

Matthew 28:18

“For He must reign, until he hath put all his enemies under his feet.”

1 Corinthians 15:25

However, until Christ returns to do that, God has left it to men to rule themselves.

Interestingly, when the American colonists set up their brand-new experiments in self-rule, they did not choose a democracy. The question to carefully consider is why not?

“The founders feared that passions could arouse the public, and national policy could become hostage to these passions. Therefore, they wanted men mediating between public opinion and national policy. They also expected these men to be of substance and property, with much to lose from error and also more difficult to corrupt.”

Huffington Post, 11/17/2016

“Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths

James Madison, Federalist Papers No. 10

No discussion of governmental systems would be complete, I think, without a glance at King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, interpreted by Daniel in Daniel 2.

Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream, Daniel 2

The statue above indicates a series of “world” governments, beginning with the Neo-Babylonian Empire (represented here by the gold head) and including the Persian Empire (silver chest & arms), Macedonian Empire (brass abdomen), and Roman Empire–and all its reiterations (iron legs). The interesting thing about the statue, though, are its feet–a combination of the iron left over from the Roman Empire (think of it’s tyrannical strength) and clay.

What does that make you think of?

The Western Roman Empire fell in about the fifth century. Yet its legacy carried on, most immediately through Emperor Constantine and his cooperation with the Catholic Church, which became the most powerful organization in Europe. Out of that came association eventually came Charlemagne and the “Holy Roman Empire,” which lasted for about 1000 years. This empire was known as “the First Reich.” The “Second Reich” was the German empire that was ruled by Otto von Bismark, William I and II, that led to the First World War. You may remember that William II was known as “the Kaiser.”

kaiser = "Kaiser is the German title meaning "Emperor". Like the Russian Tsar it is directly derived from the Roman Emperors' title of Caesar..." (Definitions.net)

The “Third Reich” as you probably know, was “the official official Nazi designation for the regime in Germany from January 1933 to May 1945…“

There are still ways that the legacy of the Roman Empire lives on in Europe, England and even in the United States of America.

The U.S. Capitol

But what about the “iron mixed with clay?”

The main difference today between the governmental systems of most of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream is that all of the empires mentioned above were ruled by a dictator, while most of the modern countries are considered democracies.

democracy = 'control of an organization or group by the majority of its members;the practice or principles of social equality." (Bing)

That seems to make sense to me, that people would want to rule themselves by democracy, rather than submit to a dictatorship.

dictatorship = "autocracy (a system of government by one person with absolute power), absolute authority in any sphere." (Bing)

Then, let me ask you a question: Why doesn’t the malleable clay REPLACE the iron in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream?

malleable = "easily influenced; pliable" (Bing)

“And whereas thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay… but they shall not stick fast one to another, as iron cannot be mixed with clay.”

Daniel 2:43

Rather than replace the iron, the clay attempts to mix with it, but it is not possible. Eventually, under enough pressure the weaker, brittle clay will fall off. And only iron will remain.

In the book, How Should We Then Live?, Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer wrote (in 1976):

“Overwhelming pressures are being brought to bear on people who have no absolutes… The pressures are progressively preparing modern people to accept a manipulative, authoritarian government.. If these pressures do continue to mount, which seems probable, do you think people, young or old, will at great cost to themselves, at the cost of their present personal peace and affluence, stand up for liberty or for the individual? …When these outward forms are imposed on (their) wordview (which) would never have produced freedom without chaos in the first place, people will not stand when the pressures increase… As the memory of the Christian base grows ever dimmer, freedom will disintegrate…”

Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, “How Should We Then Live,” 1976

Is that the future you want?

While the ark was being prepared

Noah’s Ark

The earth was filled with violence in Noah’s day, but the Bible tells us that “God’s patience waited” (1 Peter 3:20).

Why did God wait? What was He waiting for?

“The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

2 Peter 3:9

Why was the ark being prepared?

Noah’s Ark

God, contrary to what you might have heard, is kind.

It has always been God’s desire to give people a means of escape, if they would simply take advantage of it.

“The Lord saw that the wickedness of man (like all that we have been horrified to see played out in the news in 2020) was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart (like tyranny, resistance to civil and public health authorities, selfishness, disobedience, lying, deceiving, conspiring, greed, racism, murder, scheming, rioting, looting, and anarchy) was only evil continually.  And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.”

Genesis 6:5-6

One site, called The Hope Project, says: “The phrase, ‘And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth,’ could be understood in a number of ways…So what is this verse saying to us? …To say that God was sorry and that He grieved in His heart shows us that God has emotions… In the original text the phrase, ‘He was grieved in His heart,’ literally reads, ‘He was grieved to His heart.’  In other words, God looked on the evil in the world and was grieved ‘all the way to His heart.’  One version of the Bible (the NIV) translates this verse, ‘His heart was filled with pain.’ …If God is infinite, then how far is it to the depth of His heart? How big is His heart? How much grief would it take to fill God’s heart? …God knew He was going to hurt this deeply as a result of creating man, and He did it anyway. And not only that, He did it exactly the way He intended to do it. But why would God do such a thing?”

The Bible tells us that:

“God is love…”

1 John 4:8

A.W. Tozer writes:

“The love of God is one of the great realities of the universe, a pillar upon which the hope of the world rests. But it is a personal, intimate thing, too. God does not love populations, He loves people. He loves not masses, but men. He loves us all with a mighty love that has no beginning and can have no end.”

A.W. Tozer, Knowledge of the Holy

The Bible tells us the following:

  • Noah was told to build the ark three hundred cubits (450 feet) long, fifty cubits (75 feet) wide, and thirty cubits (45 feet) high.
cubit = "about 18 inches" (Bing)

In his book, God’s Plan: What Every Christian Should Know, Dan Malczewski writes:

“This is a gigantic boat! Only some of the modern luxury liners have dimensions greater than this.”

Dan Malczewski, God’s Plan: What Every Christian Should Know

The Bible also refers to Noah as a:

“preacher of righteousness…”

2 Peter 2:5

To whom did he preach? His friends, his neighbors, the families of his daughters-in-law. How did it go? Did many people listen to Noah?

The Bible doesn’t say.

However, we have an account of a similar event, when Lot warned his in-laws to leave the city of Sodom with him:

“So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who had married his daughters, and said, ‘Get up, get out of this place; for the LORD will destroy this city!’ But to his sons-in-law he seemed to be joking.”

Genesis 19:14

And we know that only Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives were saved.

“A few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.”

1 Peter 3:20

One website, “Answers in Genesis,” says:

“When the door to the Ark was shut, there was room for many more people.”

Paul F. Taylor, “Noah the Evangelist,” March 29, 2007

So why didn’t more people get on the ark?

I recently saw an interesting movie version of the story of Noah’s ark that was made in 2014. What I found unique in this film was that Noah’s own sons originally thought Noah was being foolish by building the ark..

The Bible says:

“God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are.”

1 Corinthians 1:27-28

Today people are claiming that Jesus may be coming back soon, to “Rapture” the church.

The Rapture

What does the Bible say?

“For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17

“Let no one deceive you by any means; for (the Day of the Lord) will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.”

2 Thessalonians 2:3-7

What do you think about these things? Do you think of it all as just foolishness?

What if you’re wrong?

What if you’re wrong?

I believe in Christ, but why should I believe the Bible?

The Greatest “Story” Ever Told?

“I knew that the cross was simultaneously, the point of greatest suffering, the point of death and transformation, and the symbolic centre of the world”

Jordan Peterson, 12 Rules for Life

“Who is Jordan Peterson?” you may ask.

The New Yorker magazine calls him, “one of the most influential—and polarizing—public intellectuals in the English-speaking world” (as a matter of fact, he’s actually a Canadian professor).

I, myself, am only just learning about Peterson, but so far I find him to be one of the most interesting, engaging, and provocative speakers of our generation

He clearly points out the overall positive effect that Christianity has had on the world, writing: “Christianity elevated the individual soul, placing slave and master, commoner and nobleman alike on the same metaphysical footing, rendering them equal before God and the law. It’s nothing short of a miracle.” Yet, he does not claim to be a Christian, nor to believe that the Bible is true.

The obvious question, then, seems like it should be, Is it?

I think it is. Why?

  1. I have chosen to believe that Jesus is who He said He was.
    • Remember that C.S. Lewis wrote: “A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell.”
    • Matthew 26:63-68, where the high priest accuses Jesus of blasphemy for saying He was the Messiah
  2. Jesus considered the Bible to be the “Word of God.”
    • John 10:35, where Jesus said that the Hebrew “Scriptures”could not be “broken”(the Greek word translated here as “broken” is lyō , which Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines as “to annul, subvert; to do away with; to deprive of authority.”
  3. The New Testament was written by Jesus’ friends and relatives and people who knew them personally.
    • What I find very compelling about these writings is that they often include many instances of Jesus “apostles” doing many uncomplimentary things.

Accepting Jesus as the long-awaited Jewish Messiah (and therefore, the Christ) allows one to find the epistemology, ontology, and even the cosmology of the Bible to be clearly stated, understandable, and comprehensive.

The Bible as “True truth” should be able to stand up against all scrutiny, historically, prophetically, doctrinally, ethically, and morally.

‘I began with a mind unfavorable to it [Acts], …but more recently I found myself often brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth.’

St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, By Sir William Mitchell Ramsay, 1896

Simon Peter, a man who knew Jesus well, often considered the leader of the early church, once wrote:

“For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

2 Peter 1:20

This is actually from a very interesting portion of the New Testament:

“For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,’ we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

2 Peter 1:16-21

So what problem are you having with the Bible? If you believe in Christ, but not the Bible, then why?

That I may tread safely into the unknown…

“How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?” Sherlock Holmes, “The Sign of Four”

We’ve discussed Science; we’ve talked about Empiricism, and Rationalism. We’ve even appealed to Tradition (listen to our latest podcast).

Now, we venture forth into what–in today’s postmodern world–might be considered by many to be (for all intents and purposes)–the unknown…

In this blog, we are going to start taking a look at the world’s religions and their “sacred” texts from the vantage point of epistemology. Is it possible–as Sherlock Holmes might say–that one of these religious texts might prove to be a source of ultimate truth?

According to one website, the oldest religion in the world is Hinduism. And it’s associated group of texts is called the Vedas. It seems that the Vedas were written sometime after the Aryans invaded the Indian subcontinent (c. 1500 BC). They were based upon oral traditions which seem to be much older. The Vedas tell us that the Hindu religion involves the worship of many gods, which does not seem that unusual, but they also include rules for something called the caste system, through which the earlier (pre-Aryan) peoples–called Dravidians–began to be considered to be “untouchables.”

One interesting feature of Hinduism is the idea that God (Brahman) and the universe are one. He (it) is “eternal, conscious, irreducible, infinite, omnipresent.” The purpose of life for the Hindu is Moksha— “considered the most important meaning of life and (offering) such rewards as liberation from reincarnation, self-realization, enlightenment, or unity with God.“

Think of Odo and the “Great Link” from Stark Trek: Deep Space Nine.

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com

For Odo, his physical form is something he takes on for the sake of his interaction with humanoid (“solids”), but his “real” existence is something other-worldly, a condition which is often associated–especially among westerners–with eastern religions, in general, and with Hinduism, in particular.

Terms that have come into the West from Hinduism include: Maya – the idea that the physical world and all that is in it is an illusion, and that “the real nature or essence of this world is divinity alone.” Adherents (and proselytes) are encouraged to “see” real reality through “spiritual wisdom” obtained through yoga. They are also encouraged to achieve ethical standards through dharma, a kind of general moral law (but which also includes specific laws to be followed “according to one’s class, status, and station in life.”)

It is thought that the Aryans were a originally a nomadic nation of Central Asian cattle-herders that actually conquered and subjugated the previous (pre-vedic) culture of the surprisingly -sophisticated Indus Valley Civilization.

Cosm…er, what?

PHOEBE: Go ahead and scoff. You know, there’re a lot of things that I don’t believe in, but that doesn’t mean they’re not true.
JOEY: Such as?
PHOEBE: Like crop circles, or the Bermuda triangle, or evolution?
ROSS: Whoa, whoa, whoa. What, you don’t, uh, you don’t believe in evolution?
PHOEBE: I don’t know, it’s just, you know…monkeys, Darwin, you know, it’s a, it’s a nice story, I just think it’s a little too easy.
ROSS: Too easy? The process of every living thing on this planet evolving over millions of years from single-celled organisms, too easy?
PHOEBE: Yeah, I just don’t buy it.
ROSS: Uh, excuse me. Evolution is not for you to buy, Phoebe. Evolution is scientific fact like the air we breathe, like gravity.
PHOEBE: Ok, don’t get me started on gravity. (Friends)

So, we ended off our discussion last time with our introduction of cosmology.

cosmology = "the science of the origin and development of the universe." (Bing)

We have been asserting that there is a relationship between what you think is true, what you think is real, and where you think everything came from.

For example, let’s say that you believe–like the character Ross in the TV sitcom Friends–that Science is the source of “ultimate truth,” then you would probably be a materialist, or, at least, a naturalist. For you, you would have to try to explain where everything came from from within that context. The answer, then, for you would have to include evolution, natural selection, and “survival-of-the-fittest.” In other words–we are all just products of chance (over time).

But what if, like, Phoebe in the scenario above, there is something about that line of thought that you’re uncomfortable with?

Some people believe in “intelligent design.” That theory is that things are just too complex to have just come about by chance–you know, the galaxies, the solar system, the human body, the eye, even life itself. These folks think that someone or something created the universe and its contents, and mankind.

Where do you come down?

Take a look at our Cosmology grid printable document download.

If it’s real, where did it come from?

“They were born in stable orbits. Within the black holes, creatures formed from the primary elements. Air, Water, Fire, Earth. The science division had a technical name. We just called them Elementals.”
―Mysterio

In our last blogpost, we postulated that one’s epistemological position would lead to a related ontological position. (What is true –>What is real.)

postulate = "suggest or assume the existence, fact, or truth of (something) as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or belief."

Another way of saying this is to say that what is true is a factor of what is real.

factor = "a circumstance, fact, or influence that contributes to a result or outcome."

A interesting illustration of this is in the movie, Spiderman: Far from Home.

www.denofgeek.com

In it, there is a conversation between Peter Parker, Nick Fury, and a new super hero named Quentin Beck, or Mysterio.

Which brings us to our third question in this thought journey. Once you’ve decided what is real, you might wonder where it all came from.

So what is real?

Some of us adhere to a form of monism.

monism = "a very broad term, applicable to any doctrine which maintains either that there is ultimately only one thing, or only one kind of thing..." (Routledge)

That can apply both to the materialists, as well as to the Eastern mystics (e.g., The Matrix or Dr. Strange), who consider matter to be only an illusion (remember the quote, “There is no spoon”?).

And others of us ascribe to pluralism or dualism.

pluralism = "a condition or system in which two or more states, groups, principles, sources of authority, etc., coexist." (Bing)

dualism = "the quality or condition of being dual; duality." (Bing)

People who accept the spiritual (i.e., demons, witches, angels, miracles, God) as an unseen reality, in addition to the physical universe, are considered to be dualists.

And you might consider those who believe in the existence of a multiverse (think here of Spiderman’s Earth-833), or the quantum realm (think here of Ant-Man) to be pluralists.

So, where do you come down on all of this? What do you believe to be true? Why? And what do you think is real? What is your reasoning? Can you explain? Eventually, you’re going to have to answer the question, Where did it all come from? When you watch Far from Home, pay attention as Quentin Beck talks about the Elementals. Think about epistemology, ontology, and cosmology.

Hollywood Reporter
cosmology = "an account or theory of the origin of the universe." (Bing)

Truth now Seems to be Stranger than Fiction

“Life is infinitely stranger than anything which the mind of man could invent. We would not (formerly) dare to conceive the things which are (now) really mere commonplaces of existence… it would make all fiction with its conventionalities and foreseen conclusions most stale and unprofitable.”
― Arthur Conan Doyle, The Complete Adventures of Sherlock Holmes

In our recent first podcast, we detailed a number of options regarding the source of ultimate truth, and we said that- where one ends up is really a function of your starting or “jump-off” point.

For example (we said) if you believe that Science is the source of ultimate truth, than your view of Reality must be a form of materialism (everything that is “real” is composed of matter and energy) or naturalism (Nature is all that is real).

By the way–now that we’re mentioning it– let’s nail down some of those terms.

epistemology = What is True?
ontology = What is Real?

Your epistemological position will necessarily determine your ontological one.

Let’s say that you think that human reason is a good place to start (kind of like Spock on Star Trek). Then everything you choose to accept as real must be reasonable.

Did you know that Thomas Jefferson (the author of The Declaration of Independence) believed that way about the Bible? He took a razor blade and cut out anything that had to do with the miraculous (Moses parting the Red Sea; Jesus’ virgin birth, etc.) He could not fit miracles into his worldview. His ontological viewpoint did not include them as part of what he saw as real.

Another worldview that some people have had is called Empiricism. That means basing your worldview solely upon your own experience. There was a movie some time back, with Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix, called Signs. In it, one of the characters talks about his and his brother’s experiences, using that as a frame of reference for his belief in God–something like “God was there for me before, and I therefore have no problem expecting His help now.” His brother’s experience, however, had led him to believe the opposite.

What is your epistemological viewpoint? What is your ontological one? Are you a materialist? A naturalist? A rationalist (like Spock)? An empiricist? Or are you something else? The point is that you have to go from point A to point B to point C, like the Long Island railroad. Not all of the lines lead to Shirley. To get there, you can’t take the line to Stonybrook or Yaphank. You’ve got to take the line to Montauk.

What do you think is the source of what is ultimately true? What do you think is real? The two things are connected, and they are connected to our third question as well: How did everything get here? Where did it come from? How did it start?

Big Questions…

We’ve been talking (in our previous blog posts) about knowing–to be more precise, we’ve been talking about epistemology.

episteme = "knowledge" (Greek)
ology = "the study of" (such as biology, psychology, sociology, etc.)

Take a look at our Mind Inputs sheet (https://thinkingaccuratelyeducation.comindex.php/product/mind-inputs/). Where do you go for knowledge? People often say, “you are what you eat.” We could say that looking at how you fill out the sheet will also tell us your epistemological position or worldview.

worldview: a particular philosophy of life or conception of the world.

Everyone has a worldview from which they view the world–and the universe, for that matter!–around them (a perspective).

https://images.app.goo.gl/W6u4ru2Cf8iDcoUb6

What do you think yours is? And where do you go for ultimate truth?

I suggest that this is the single biggest question you will ever have to answer—and you do! Everyone has to answer it for themselves.

https://www.celebritypresspublishing.com/our-publications/the-big-question/

Want to know another question you’re going to have to answer?

What is real? Ponder it until our next blog, OK? Now that you’ve decided where to go for ultimate truth, this one should be a “no-brainer”–right?