The Apologia Project Weblog

judge [juj]
n
[12th century. Via Old French juge from, ultimately, Latin judex , literally “one who speaks the law,” from jus “law, right” (source of English just).]

Encarta® Reference Library 2003. All rights reserved.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ann Coulter should probably be the one writing this, and I am certain that she would do a better job in articulating the travesty of justice occuring in our courts today.  Who will judge the judges?  It is a good question.  Take a look at some recent decisions made by judges here in our beloved country:

Judge Richard Kramer - San Francisco judge that declares state law on same sex marriage to be unconstitutional.

This should also be an interesting read:

Review Synopsis

Contrary to popular belief, fostered in countless school classrooms the world over, Christopher Columbus did not discover that the world was round. The idea of the world as a sphere had been widely accepted in scientific, philosophical and even religious circles from as early as the fourth century bc. Bizarrely, it was not until the supposedly more rational nineteenth century that the notion that the world might actually be flat really took hold. Even more bizarrely, it persists to this day, despite Apollo missions and widely publicized pictures of the decidedly spherical earth from space. Based on a range of original sources, Garwood’s history of flat-earth beliefs - from the Babylonians to the present day - raises issues central to the history and philosophy of science, its relationship with religion and the making of human knowledge about the natural world. “Flat Earth” is the first definitive study of one of history’s most notorious and persistent ideas, and evokes all the intellectual, philosophical and spiritual turmoil of the modern age.

A new book from Steve Fuller folks.  This should be a good read….enjoy!

AMAZON.UK description: “If you think Intelligent Design Theory (IDT) is merely the respectable face of Christian fundamentalism, and Evolution the only sensible scientific world-view, think again…IDT has driven science for 500 years. It was responsible for the 17th century’s Scientific Revolution and helped build modern histories of physics, mathematics, genetics and social science. IDT’s proponents take literally the Biblical idea that humans have been created in God’s image. This confident, even arrogant, view of humanity enabled the West to triumph in the modern era. Evolution, on the other hand, derives from more ancient, even pagan, ideas about our rootedness in nature and the transience of all life forms. It has been always more popular outside the West, and until Darwin few evolutionists were scientists. What happened to reverse these two movements’ fortunes? Steve Fuller’s brilliant revisionist history is essential reading for anyone who wants a deeper understanding of science’s most vociferous debate.”

I am sure most of you have heard about the Discovery Channel’s special about the Jesus ossuary.  The falsehoods being propped-up by the “scientific experts” is not a new attack on Christianity.  Not surprising their news coverage often bears titles such as, Jesus Died From Blood Clot and Jesus Walked on Ice, Not Water.  Well, I thought I should put something up for all of you to read.  Here is a great article that oulines some of the problems with Discovery’s documentary:

Note: (You will need Adobe Reader)

The Jesus Ossuary: A Critical Examination

Enjoy!

Lately I have been thinking a lot about writing a book on emotions.  I realized that every time people talk to me about their problems, they have a lot of guilt concerning their emotions.  They often feel guilty for being jealous toward their partner, or for feeling hate toward someone that wrongs them.  Here I will outline some of my thoughts on the subject, perhaps this will prompt me to pursue the subject further.

The way I see it, we were created in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-27), and therefore, bear all of His communicable attributes.  We should not be ashamed of our emotions, but rather we should embrace them and utilize them as God truly intended it.

The guilt that we often feel when our emotions have temporally marred our judgement derives from the fact that we have disobeyed God’s perfect law.  A law that, although not always obvious to us, abides in our hearts (Romans 2:14).  We project those emotions, not as God intended, but without restraint.

On Jealousy

Jealousy is an inherited attribute of God (Exodus 34:14)  which clearly demands exclusive loyalty.  Our projection of it, however, is often marked by selfishness; often attempting to force someone’s loyalty to us .

So, how can we change this?  Well, for starters, we need to recognize that it is NOT the emotion, “jealousy,” that is the problem, but our “projection” of it.  In other words, it is how we react to it that matters.  If we were to express how we feel in a positive manner, instead of reacting impulsively, the outcome would be far more pleasant.

Our emotions are indicators of what is going on; they are telling us something about a particular situation.  Jealousy reminds of a covenant, such as that we must be loyal to our relationships (Mark 10:6-9), or to God, our creator (Exodus 20:3). 

If we act out our jealousy in anger, we suppress the true intention of that emotion. 

The way we handle jealousy really depends on the situation we find ourselves in (i.e. whether the emotion was a result of somebody else’s actions, or the result of our own fertile imagination).  If it is the case that we are feeling jealousy without any concrete reason, then it is best to reassess our thoughts as to what the real problem is.  If we are experiencing jealousy as a result of someone’s actions, then we need to tell the person about it and point out how his/her actions cast doubt on their loyalty toward us.

On Anger 

The bible tell us that God angers (1Kings 11:9, Nahum 1:3), but that we should be “slow to anger” (Proverbs 16:32).  Not that we shouldn’t anger, but that we should’t emote in haste or impulse.  Again, this emotion tell us that there is something wrong, some problem that is in conflict in our heart.  Anger, in the form of righteous indignation is not a bad thing.  It is not until we abuse relationships that anger becomes a dangerous emotion.  Often, anger can lead to hatred and so , not having a clear understanding of the two, makes it nearly impossible to control both the anger and the feeling of hate in the proper context.

A person can be angry without having hatred toward the thing causing the anger.  It is also true that a person can hate something without being angry over it.

The idea here is that a person should only express their anger in such a way that it does not conflict with God’s commandments (such as to “love your neighbor as yourself” -Mark 12:31).

On Hate

The proper context of “hate” needs some clarification.  For example, a passage of scripture can clearly indicate God’s preference of one person over another (see Romans 9:13), however, that is not to say that God is expressing utter odium for the other person, but simply that he has chosen one person over another and bestowing his grace upon that person.  

In the context of God’s character, however, hate is an expression of  His antipathy towards evil and all kinds of abominations (Deuteronomy 12:31).  Hatred in this context is not only justified, but commendable. 

Hatred should never be directed at an individual, but toward the individual’s negative actions.  So to change someone’s character is to help them hate the same evil that they themselves perpetuate through their lives.  This can only be done through the expression of love.

On Love

So, what is love? The Bible (1 Corinthians 13:4-7) teaches us that love is patient and kind; it does not envy, nor does it boast; it is not proud or rude; it is not self-seeking nor is it easily angered; it keeps no record of wrongs nor delights in evil, but rejoices in truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, and always perseveres.  Love never fails.

This emotion is often hard to distinguish, and often confused with lust, affection, or attraction.  It is, in fact, none of these.  This emotion is referred to as agape because it is a selfless emotion.  When a person’s emphasis is on the “fuzzy feeling”, instead of a selfless commitment, “love” becomes extremely disposable (”fuzzy feelings” ebb and flow).  That is not to say that these “feelings,” in the natural sense, are wrong, but that they tell us nothing about love’s true purpose.  Notice that the passage of scripture above says a lot about what love ought NOT to be;  so when these conflict within our relationships, we know we are no longer acting in love, but in selfishness.  In contrast, when we love as we are told in scripture, love never fails.

Notice also that the passage tells us that love rejoices in truth.  Why is that?  What does being truthful have to do with being selfless?  That is because love can only be exercised in truth.  For example, if we are trying to help someone out of self-destructive behavior, we need to remember that we can only help that person if we are honest enough with them about their problem.  Often times we tend to “water” things down in the name of “political correctness,” but how is that going to help anyone?

If we act in love, as outlined in scripture, we know that we are, 1) being obedient to God, and 2) perpetuating the qualities of love.  The bible tells us that love must be exercised even on our enemies (see Matthew 5:43-48); for what good is it to only love those who love you back?  Love is of no effect in this manner, therefore, when we love—we must love unconditionally.

Hello fellow scholars,

For a long time I have provided posts on current events concerning the ID/Evolution controversy.  Well, all that is about to change (for this blog,  at least).  As you may already know, this site (mainly our forum) has taken a tremendous beating from hackers in the past few years.  To be honest, it has been very difficult to keep up with them.  I have lost posts from contributors and so, sadly, many of them never return.  I have been working diligently on securing the site, blog and discussion forum in hope that it may deter any further attacks.  My plans are to continue posting, of course, but with a little less focus on only one subject.  Since this site is intended to address a wide readership, I intend to write about anything that I may have in mind during the day.  Hopefully, that will reflect a broader range of topics.  This may help in spending less time researching and more time reflecting on the various topics that I present. 

I encourage you to challenge my thoughts or make comments relevant to the subject matter.   If there is anything you’d like to see me post, please bring it up.

Thanks. —Mario