I am sorry, but it is true. God made dinosaurs.
One aspect of religion that I have been thinking about lately is the age old argument of Creationism Vs Evolution. Dawkins would have us all believe that there is a massive issue with the two and how they don't work in tandem with one another. In fact, a lot of prominant Christians would also have us believe that the two cannot be mutually true. Let me start straight away by saying I am NOT a Creationist, I do not believe that creation happened as literally as Genesis states. Nor am I a scientist. I have not studied the in's and out's of biology to any level other than my GCSEs. So, why am I writing this post? Because I feel that I am a rational human being with faith.
Firstly, I am not going to deny the existence of something that is proven. Fossils have been found, dinosaurs existed, humans share DNA with Apes and such like. This is fact. When people turn around and blindly state that it is not true they make themselves look narrow minded and, in my opinion, foolish and thus make what they stand for look foolish too. Often I have been informed by non-believers that I don't believe in evolution because I am a Christian. That is simply not true, I am a Christian, yes, and yes, I also believe in evolution.
So, why is the account of the Bible creation so vastly different from what science knows to be true? There are many reasons
Some state that translation of the word "day" - some state that this word is not the literal 24 hour period that we understand as a day but simply a period of time. A section of existence. God operates outside of time, he is not bound by our simplistic human understanding of the passing of hours, a minute to us could be an eternity to God. If those 6 days of creation were actually 6 million years of creation then evolution fits. (that is a loose estimation when it comes to time, I am not well versed in science, as stated earlier, or how many million years ago the world was created)
Secondly, when the Bible was written there was a lack of scientific awareness. That is obvious. Progress has since been made and we have learned about different aspects of the past from what we have discovered with the modern tools and scientic anaylsis we have. People who wrote the Bible were looking at the past in a very different way to the way in which we see it. They did not have the tools or the understanding to make the theories we do so could only write as they saw. They saw the various animals that they had and concluded that they were as God created them. God did create them, time evolved them. The two are not counter productive as arguments.
Lastly, my translation of the Bible does not list any animal specifically at the point of creation. It does not say "God created an elephant, it was grey and had large tusks and floppy ears" - the translation I have before me simply states "Beasts of the land and sea and birds of the air" - the scope is wide open for what these creatures are. There is no mention of them being the evolved and domesticated creatures that we have today. It is not until much later in the Bible that animals start to be named as specifics. Sheep for sacrifice, clean and unclean animals appearing in visions, birds such as doves and ravens being used in Noah's ark. Creation does not state specifics about what these creatures were.
This is by no means a fact. This is just the ponderings that I have thought over the last few weeks. I have been listening to a lot of the arguments that Dawkins puts forward in his videos. The man may not know much about faith (although he speaks about it a lot) but he knows his science and in that aspect, he is worth listening to.
Science does not disprove the existence of God and his creation it simply is the study of his creation.
Monday 18 October 2010
Sunday 17 October 2010
Live to serve
I was prompted into writing this blog in response to my good friend Steve. He has spoken on his blog about his son taking the first steps to be an Alter server in the Church of England.
This is an old tradition that goes back to the times before the great schism when the Catholic Church and the Protestant Church broke apart and it is a tradition that has stayed in the high end of the Anglican church. I was brought up in a very traditional little village church and it was actually my fairly modern and forward thinking Vicar that suggested I become an alter server. I served very happily for most of my youth and when I came back to exploring my ordination I started to serve again, until my move to Christchurch.
Steve's son's tentative steps into the hierachy of the Anglican church lead me to wonder, what did I get out of serving? What has it done for me? I know with most church based work it is not a case of what you get out of it but what you put into it, but I wondered, there were other people on sidesperson duty that could deliver the chalice just as well as I was able to, the only difference was the attire. I wore long black and white robes similar to the vicar when I served and the other sidespersons didnt'.
Why did my Vicar choose me to be an alter server? These thoughts have been running through my mind lately and I think I have hit upon an answer.
As an alter server I learned a lot about the church. The way it worked, the rules, the traditions and ceremonies, the politics and the general nitty gritty involved in the day to day running of services. I gained an insight into the work of a Vicar which has stood me in good stead for my current journey. Perhaps my vicar saw something in me then that made him believe it would be useful to me in the future. Perhaps my sense of calling was stronger than I realised and was already being outwardly projected to other people.
I also learned a lot about myself, I learned that I was capable of doing some aspects of the services in church, I was able to stand at the front and speak words from the book of common prayer and lead people through the minefield of Christian lingo to affirm our faith and repent of our sins. I learned that people accepted me in that role and my place within the church. I was encouraged by those involved in church life, the vicar, the wardens, the other sidespersons and the congregation. They appeared to enjoy having a young face in the team and I was happy to be there.
I became closer to God in terms of faith. I felt that I was working directly for him. I now know that all Christians are working for God (or should be striving to do so) but when I was younger I thought it was only the clergy that worked for God. The ceremony and tradition gave me a sense of value within the church, I was no longer just another young person, but one that had a set direction and I think this made me more open to the plans that God had lined up for me.
Most importantly though I learned the value of service. I don't mean delivering the chalice to people or leading from the front but genuine service, doing jobs for other people simply because it is a good thing to do. Being an alter server has instilled those values in me and I *try* to be good at service now. Life does have a tendancy to get in the way and I know that I have not always been the best server I could be - at home for example I would often shy away from various chores such as washing up. I suppose the main reason is that it was my family and I didn't feel that I needed to make any special effort there which is not the right attitude to have.
Since I have moved across to Christchurch I have tried to serve as best I can. I quite enjoy helping others and easing the load when I am able to. Sometimes it is difficult to serve without being detremential to yourself, sometimes you can do too much and wear yourself out or simply not have enough time for your own rest and relaxation. I think a lot of Christians can experience this "burn out" if time is not well managed. It all ties in with what we were learning about on our leadership course this week. Jesus spoke about not having to make oathes to people and simply letting your yes be yes and your no be no without putting in time frames and other stipulations.
If people ask me to do something I will do my best to get it done. I cannot promise it will be instant though. I think that serving in my little church in Granborough helped me to see how much serving others is appreciated and valued, after all Jesus was the servant king and I do wear WWJD on my wrist - what would Jesus do? I am uttetly convinced he would serve.
So, if you pop around, expect a cup of tea.
God Bless
This is an old tradition that goes back to the times before the great schism when the Catholic Church and the Protestant Church broke apart and it is a tradition that has stayed in the high end of the Anglican church. I was brought up in a very traditional little village church and it was actually my fairly modern and forward thinking Vicar that suggested I become an alter server. I served very happily for most of my youth and when I came back to exploring my ordination I started to serve again, until my move to Christchurch.
Steve's son's tentative steps into the hierachy of the Anglican church lead me to wonder, what did I get out of serving? What has it done for me? I know with most church based work it is not a case of what you get out of it but what you put into it, but I wondered, there were other people on sidesperson duty that could deliver the chalice just as well as I was able to, the only difference was the attire. I wore long black and white robes similar to the vicar when I served and the other sidespersons didnt'.
Why did my Vicar choose me to be an alter server? These thoughts have been running through my mind lately and I think I have hit upon an answer.
As an alter server I learned a lot about the church. The way it worked, the rules, the traditions and ceremonies, the politics and the general nitty gritty involved in the day to day running of services. I gained an insight into the work of a Vicar which has stood me in good stead for my current journey. Perhaps my vicar saw something in me then that made him believe it would be useful to me in the future. Perhaps my sense of calling was stronger than I realised and was already being outwardly projected to other people.
I also learned a lot about myself, I learned that I was capable of doing some aspects of the services in church, I was able to stand at the front and speak words from the book of common prayer and lead people through the minefield of Christian lingo to affirm our faith and repent of our sins. I learned that people accepted me in that role and my place within the church. I was encouraged by those involved in church life, the vicar, the wardens, the other sidespersons and the congregation. They appeared to enjoy having a young face in the team and I was happy to be there.
I became closer to God in terms of faith. I felt that I was working directly for him. I now know that all Christians are working for God (or should be striving to do so) but when I was younger I thought it was only the clergy that worked for God. The ceremony and tradition gave me a sense of value within the church, I was no longer just another young person, but one that had a set direction and I think this made me more open to the plans that God had lined up for me.
Most importantly though I learned the value of service. I don't mean delivering the chalice to people or leading from the front but genuine service, doing jobs for other people simply because it is a good thing to do. Being an alter server has instilled those values in me and I *try* to be good at service now. Life does have a tendancy to get in the way and I know that I have not always been the best server I could be - at home for example I would often shy away from various chores such as washing up. I suppose the main reason is that it was my family and I didn't feel that I needed to make any special effort there which is not the right attitude to have.
Since I have moved across to Christchurch I have tried to serve as best I can. I quite enjoy helping others and easing the load when I am able to. Sometimes it is difficult to serve without being detremential to yourself, sometimes you can do too much and wear yourself out or simply not have enough time for your own rest and relaxation. I think a lot of Christians can experience this "burn out" if time is not well managed. It all ties in with what we were learning about on our leadership course this week. Jesus spoke about not having to make oathes to people and simply letting your yes be yes and your no be no without putting in time frames and other stipulations.
If people ask me to do something I will do my best to get it done. I cannot promise it will be instant though. I think that serving in my little church in Granborough helped me to see how much serving others is appreciated and valued, after all Jesus was the servant king and I do wear WWJD on my wrist - what would Jesus do? I am uttetly convinced he would serve.
So, if you pop around, expect a cup of tea.
God Bless
Wednesday 6 October 2010
Born to lead?
Today I had the first set of lectures in the term at CML. We are doing the Leadership module.
The lecturer started with introducing the different styles of leadership that are prevailent in the world today and how each of them differ, we did a lot of questionaire tests to work out our own style and generally to assess where we are. But the most interesting and perhaps challenging part of today was when he said "Everyone is born with the ability to lead" - I am not sure that I agree.
As Christians we are constantly told about discerning what gifts God has for you. I remember being told over the years that not everyone is supposed to do everything. Some people don't play any instruments or have the ability to sing, so the chances are God is not going to call them to be worship leaders. Some people really don't do well with reading aloud and in front of people, so chances are God is not going to choose them to do Bible readings at cell/life groups or at church. But then this phrase comes in that we are all called to lead? Some people, I am afraid, are not born leaders. They don't inspire or motivate people, their gifts are not in time management or planning. Some people just lack charisma that is needed for leadership. It is not a bad thing, their gifts, no doubt, lay elsewhere but I just don't think it is healthy to suggest that everyone can be taught to lead because it is already within them somewhere.
The lecturer was also talking about influence and Christians infiltrating society in order to evengelise in a way that was not shouting from street corners with a megaphone and I full agree that Christians are called to influence people with their chosen way to live. The morals that go against the accepted secular norm in favour of a different way of life. I fully agree that influence is PART of leadership.
For example, if I were to buy a homeless person a cup of coffee because I felt that I should and that example caused a passerby to reconsider their stance on charity, that is influence. I don't think it is leadership. Leadership comes with a more hands on approach over a longer period of time. You have to be there to walk with people as they progress, you have to motivate and encourage in times that are difficult, you have to reward their success and share in their joy of achievement. This is a process that is on-going and could last for years (or until the end of a project)
I also agree that different leaders and different styles of leadership are needed for various times and varying socities and such like but I still don't think that everyone has the ability to be a leader.
Ultimately, it is in the hands of God. My personal faith would have me believe that God would never call you to do something that you are not capable of. Maybe there is a dormant and underlying seed of leadership within everyone he created that is awoken at the right point, for the right purpose and then is done. I don't know.
Just thought I would share my thoughts.
God Bless
The lecturer started with introducing the different styles of leadership that are prevailent in the world today and how each of them differ, we did a lot of questionaire tests to work out our own style and generally to assess where we are. But the most interesting and perhaps challenging part of today was when he said "Everyone is born with the ability to lead" - I am not sure that I agree.
As Christians we are constantly told about discerning what gifts God has for you. I remember being told over the years that not everyone is supposed to do everything. Some people don't play any instruments or have the ability to sing, so the chances are God is not going to call them to be worship leaders. Some people really don't do well with reading aloud and in front of people, so chances are God is not going to choose them to do Bible readings at cell/life groups or at church. But then this phrase comes in that we are all called to lead? Some people, I am afraid, are not born leaders. They don't inspire or motivate people, their gifts are not in time management or planning. Some people just lack charisma that is needed for leadership. It is not a bad thing, their gifts, no doubt, lay elsewhere but I just don't think it is healthy to suggest that everyone can be taught to lead because it is already within them somewhere.
The lecturer was also talking about influence and Christians infiltrating society in order to evengelise in a way that was not shouting from street corners with a megaphone and I full agree that Christians are called to influence people with their chosen way to live. The morals that go against the accepted secular norm in favour of a different way of life. I fully agree that influence is PART of leadership.
For example, if I were to buy a homeless person a cup of coffee because I felt that I should and that example caused a passerby to reconsider their stance on charity, that is influence. I don't think it is leadership. Leadership comes with a more hands on approach over a longer period of time. You have to be there to walk with people as they progress, you have to motivate and encourage in times that are difficult, you have to reward their success and share in their joy of achievement. This is a process that is on-going and could last for years (or until the end of a project)
I also agree that different leaders and different styles of leadership are needed for various times and varying socities and such like but I still don't think that everyone has the ability to be a leader.
Ultimately, it is in the hands of God. My personal faith would have me believe that God would never call you to do something that you are not capable of. Maybe there is a dormant and underlying seed of leadership within everyone he created that is awoken at the right point, for the right purpose and then is done. I don't know.
Just thought I would share my thoughts.
God Bless
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)