Sunday, July 17, 2022

Americans should open their Bibles

The following article was published by the Washington Examiner and written by Katelynn Richardson [Opinion].

 

“By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral Subjects,” Benjamin Rush wrote to John Adams in 1807. “It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published.” 

Many Americans, considering the data from a recent Gallup poll, would find Rush’s suggestion absurd today. A record high of 29% believe the Bible is a collection of "fables, legends, history and moral precepts recorded by man.” That’s compared to 26% in 2017 and 17% in 2011.

Just 20% now say it is the actual word of God, while 49% say it is inspired by God but not to be taken literally. The number of those who say it is the actual word of God rises, though only to 40%, among those who self-identify as evangelical or born-again. These numbers are notable: Despite increasing mistrust in its veracity, most continue to hold the Bible in high regard, believing it in some sense to be given by God.

Many still don’t know what it actually says, with different surveys finding half of U.S. adults unable to name the four gospels and 60% unable to remember half the Ten Commandments. Last year’s Barna Research Group survey similarly found that only 6% of Americans have a biblical worldview. In May, the American Worldview Inventory survey conducted by Arizona Christian University’s Cultural Research Center found just 37% of pastors hold such a view.

These findings track with other Gallup polls from this year showing the lowest recorded belief in God, though 81% still believe, and declining church attendance, with 29% saying they attended in the last seven days. The pollsters note that the Bible’s loosening grip on the American conscience means appeals to it for policy positions, such as on abortion and gender-related issues, will have less of an impact.

“Gallup's data show that the use of a literal interpretation of the Bible as the basis or justification for social policy positions will likely resonate only with a declining minority of the overall U.S. population,” they conclude.

As biblical literacy has declined along with trust in the Bible, it’s a fair assessment. Biblical arguments are less likely to be understood or appreciated by audiences in a secular age. So are our culture’s greatest achievements. The Bible echoes through everything from the law to the phrases we use in daily speech. It’s in the great English literature of Shakespeare, Milton, and Dickens. It has influenced our history through our founding documents, the arguments of slavery abolitionists such as Frederick Douglass, and the rhetoric of civil rights leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr.

Controversial Canadian professor Jordan Peterson recently came to this conclusion, noting on Joe Rogan’s podcast how much of Western civilization has been founded on the Bible.

“It isn’t that the Bible is true," he said. "It’s that the Bible is the precondition for the manifestation of truth, which makes it way more true than just true. It’s a whole different kind of true. I think this is not only literally the case, factually. I think it can’t be any other way. It’s the only way we can solve the problem of perception.”

The decline of the Bible's popular resonance has manifested in cultural chaos. It doesn’t take much looking around to see our country is starving for a source of absolute meaning. Embracing a view of externally revealed truth would soothe our self-centered culture’s anxious search for identity and, as it has been for previous generations facing times of crisis, become a chief source of comfort.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt said on the 400th anniversary of the first printed English Bible that “one cannot study the story of the rise and development of the men and women who have been and continue to be the pathfinders and benefactors of our people and not recognize the outstanding place the Bible has occupied as the guide and inspiration of their thought and practice.”

There’s simply no book like it.

Despite its influence on political discourse, the Bible is most importantly a book that tells of God’s involvement and salvific intervention in the history of mankind. One, as it says of itself, that is not a bundle of “cleverly devised myths” but of eyewitness accounts. As Rush continued in his letter to Adams, “All Systems of Religion, morals, and Government not founded upon it, must perish, and how consoling the thot! — it will not only survive the wreck of those Systems, but the World itself.”

Let this be an encouragement to pick up your Bible and read.


Sunday, July 3, 2022

Did Prehistoric Humans Go to Heaven or Hell?

The following Reddit thread was created and posted by u/MaxTheAlmighty-Jan. 2022.

The thread below examines a few of the different theories and objections of the following question... 

Did the other ancient humans (Homo Hablis, Homo Erectus, Homo Neanderthanlensis etc.) go to heaven or hell?

Questions from MaxTheAlmighty:

I'm a Catholic Christian and this question popped out in my mind recently. Does God allow other humans to go to hell or heaven or is He a Sapiens supremacist?

Further speaking, is it possible that those ancient human fossils classified as different species were just people with deformations? And if they were actually human species, why did God create us in separated species instead of one? Is this racist to think that there were different human species?

If you find this question dumb, please don't be offensive.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Anonymous
(Eastern Orthodox)

Good questions that I wonder all the time. I don’t have an answer and I don’t think anyone does.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

michaelY1968

Unfortunately souls aren't preserved in the fossil record - that being said Neanderthals seemed to have language, creativity, and some sense of spirituality, which would suggest they shared our humanity. That, and most of us carry some of their genes, which would suggest they were regarded by our ancestors as fellow humans on some level.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

plutonium-loveship

Which immediately becomes problematic for, for instance, the Catholic teaching which requires belief that all humans after Adam were his progeny, since to find the common ancestor of sapiens and neanderthalensis (and thus an Adam that encapsulates both) you would have to go even further back to a species which inevitably would have lacked these cognitive facilities.

From Humani Generis...

For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.

 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

therespaintonthewall
(Roman Catholic)

I think there's some debate as to whether hominids and other human ancestors had the moral agency ("rational soul") for their lives to be judged on the whole sin/salvation eschatalogical drama. The hybrid literalism of Catholicism implies a hypothetical "Adam and Eve" where the shoe finally dropped and human history began in the Christian theological sense. There's basically some vague notion of a pair of ancestors somewhere on the evolutionary spectrum that screwed us all over with original sin.

Then there's Christians who don't wring their hands over this question because they've abandoned Atonement Theology and the Original Sin doctrine that lies at its foundation. Or a more moderate position is to not consider Original Sin to be an actual historical event but a more loosely defined moral imperfection of humanity.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Enough_Lavishness299

I understand from this question, that you take mans theory of biological evolution, i.e. that the vast complexity of life we observe on this planet today, arose form form a chain of genetic mutations that improved the functions, and viability of the organisims which posessed them?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Mlg_Rauwill

You could also view original sin cosmically rather than just at this flat level individual way we view things now. That the fall of man represents a cosmic event that is represented fractally in our own lives, because I know for one I've seen myself participate fractally in the fall of man. It's no like suddenly oop the fall happened now man has been tainted with original sin. Then you have to answer all these complex questions as to what generation do we count as humans and which one don't we count. Seems rather arbitrary. Also you could make the case that through sin of Adam humanity became corrupted which then actually emanated down to the other animals as well, so the other animals have partially rational souls, and through our redemption and salvation they can participate fractally in that as well.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

jamieh800

Those places where the Law did not exist or was not Known, are places where the Law did not apply. In theory, it could go either way. Considering you're catholic, chances are if they didn't commit any mortal sins, they'd go to Purgatory.

Though my best guess would be God sorted them out on a case by case basis. It's the same argument for, say, someone with mental disabilities, right? If they're incapable of knowing God's Word, then they don't fall under the same jurisdiction we do. After all, no Just God would create beings with a soul that had NO chance of seeing paradise.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

ZucchiniOverdose
(Roman Catholic)

No one is sent to purgatory permanently in the doctrine of the Catholic Church purgatory is a process of purification prior to entering heaven and all in it will eventually enter Heaven. Purgatory is not some in-between realm for those who don't belong in heaven or hell.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

xTyRaNoXx

1 Corinthians 15:1-4

Every sin is mortal and every sin will send you to hell. It is only Jesus' sinless blood that can wash your sins trough faith in Him.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

misterme987
(Christian Universalist)

Yes, of course other human species go to heaven, assuming of course they have a (human) soul.

The demarcation between soulless animals and humans gets a little fuzzy in this area, but some have proposed that physical features divide soulless ‘proto-apes’ and humans, which would mean that Homo habilis, erectus, floresiensis, neanderthalensis all are human, whereas Au. sediba, afarensis, etc. are soulless.

Those animals without human souls wouldn’t go to hell, but the same would happen to them as to other animals (whatever that may be, this is debated and a sensitive topic because pets, etc.)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Horror_War_3049

This is a great question.

I also wonder if the ancient Egyptians and ancients Greeks got the chance to go to heaven because they didn’t have a chance to hear of Jesus.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

SwiftSpear
(Christian: Alpha & Omega)

While this is fun to think about, I think we as Christians have to accept that the bible is not a science textbook, and there is a ton of spiritual mysteries we're just not supposed to have answers to yet. We don't really have a fully fleshed out model for the human afterlife, let alone how the afterlife works with animals, or where the conciousness line gets drawn by God. We just have limited answers as they apply to our ancestors.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

mugdays
(Seventh-day Adventist)

Look at Neanderthals: distinct from homo sapiens but could interbreed with them. So if one says that Neanderthals didn't have souls (and therefore cannot be saved), what about the child of a Neanderthal and a human? What about someone who's 1/4 Neanderthal? 1/8th?

There are people with some Neanderthal DNA today, so the line has to be drawn somewhere, right?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Emotionless_AI
(Atheist)

Is this racist to think that there were different human species?

I won't speak on the other questions but this one interests me. Could you please clarify your thoughts on this

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

lukenonnisitedomine
(Roman Catholic)

Why wouldn’t they?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

tranquilvitality
(Buddhist)

What was Adam and Eve?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Other articles:

Prehistoric man - Wikipedia

Where does “prehistoric man” fit into the Bible’s history? – Creation Moments

The Prehistoric Ages in Order: How Humans Lived Before Written Records - History