I have a relative that identifies as a femnist. Through that relative I have been exposed to some of the femnist thoughts.I probably represent just about everything femnists stand against and am certainly in objection not only to the femnists thoughts and beliefs but even more so in the way they try to push those thoughts and beliefs on the world while claiming its best for women.
I could probably stay busy from now until forever writing about how those femnist thoughts and beliefs are in opposition to Scripture and how they are have made things worse for women not better but my intent today is to cover one tiny bit of a single part of femnism.
A while ago I was looking at something my feminist relative brought to my attention, more to see just what it was this relative was interested in than anything else, and discovered just how vocal some of these women, and a very, very few men, are on the subject of abortion.
That didn't even come close to surprising me. Well, maybe seeing that there are male feminists out there was a bit surprising. I guess I'm sheltered but there are some things I just don't know and that's one of them, or at least it was. I can't begin to comprehend why any man would want to be in support of feminist ideas. Isn't that like being against themselves, more or less anyway?
Shocking as that discovery was it didn't come close to my other discoveries. There were women actually writing of unborn babies being little aliens or monsters taking over their bodies.
It probably comes as no surprise to anyone that reads anything I write but just for claritys sake let me just say that I in no way support abortion. I do not feel that abortion should ever be allowed. Under any circumstances. I have a 'Christian' relative that used to say abortion was only acceptable if the pregnancy puts the mothers life in danger or if it's a result of rape. I do not support abortion for either of those reasons. To kill a baby because pregnancy could be dangerous to the mother is to kill a child for what might harm the mother. I would die before I would kill my own child, even a teeny tiny unborn child. And rape...well, a pregnancy that is the result of rape simply means that something wonderful comes from a horrible situation. Yes, I truly believe that. That same relative that says abortion is okay for rape victims once told me I could not really believe that. Oh, yes I do. Babies are wonderful. They are marvelous. They are as close to true innocence and perfection as we can get here on earth. At least to my mind and heart. And a child that comes from rape is a bright ray in a black experience.
Okay, so I'm biased toward babies. I gladly admit it. Picture a happy little yellow smiley face here.
But back to what I am supposed to be writing about...
In all those comments, comments that hurt my heart and baffled my mind, I came across one that said something to the effect of how men are silent on how abortion benefits them.
I guess, if I really think about it, there are some men that do benefit from abortion and I'm not talking about the doctors that get paid to perform such grisly acts. Some would be dads are 'spared' supporting a child, being tied to it's mother, or 'playing' daddy. They are saved from years of child support by abortions.
But those weren't the dads I thought of when I read that unfeeling comment. I thought of all the dads out there that have begged and pleaded a woman not to kill their child. I thought of all the dads that grieved the death of a baby because the woman they got pregnant didn't want to have the baby. I thought of all the dads that never even knew their was a baby.
Granted, a lot of those dads could probably care less but I'm sure there are some that would do anything to get to save their child, to raise it, to love it.
As I write this I have a small baby sleeping on my chest. The warm weight of this precious human treasure fills my heart with love and my mind and soul with joy. These tiny baby breaths make me grateful this child was given to the parents it was and spared the pure evilness of the mothers that would kill their own child. The type of mother that cold heartedly writes of how men are benefited by abortion and calls unborn babies monsters.
Monday, December 11, 2017
Monday, December 4, 2017
An atheists theory
Quite some time back I came across something written by an atheist. To my knowledge I have had very few encounters with true atheists and the ones that I have had have left me...disturbed, for lack of a better explination. I don't claim to fully understand the belief system of an athiest, or the lack of a belief system. I don't even claim to partially understand it. All I know is that they deny the existence of God. Should I know more? Maybe but I do not feel led to further learn their standings on any particular matter. What I do know is that the very few encounters that I have had with athiests have felt very much like butting my head against a brick wall. I got nowhere real fast.
But then again I have had much the same experience with professing 'Christians' that are Armenians. It's just a matter of who, or what, they put their faith into and they usually cannot be shaken from that faith. An Armenian does at least profess the existance of the Lord and therefore gives you a placeof connection however flawed that belief might be. An atheist on the other hand...well, there is nowhere to start with them because they are disdainful of all of Scripture and lack any belief in a higher power, particularly God, and so they pretty much shut you down from the first word you say. Nothing you say after that gets anywhere with them. At least not in my limited experience.
My husband once told me...'he's an atheist. Don't waste your time debating with him.' And he was right. I tried and tried and got nowhere fast.
All that to say...I have little experience with atheists and what little I have had was disheartening to say the least. And so when I came across this short snippet written by an atheist I was intrigued. Not because I in any way shared their belief but because their thoughts were so far removed from my own and because that short bit of writing gave me insight into the thought process of a group of people that deny with their mouths the Lord I hold so dear.
This bit of writing was about the Bible. I would love to quote it here but that isn't an option so I must content myself of giving a summary of what was written.
This atheist wrote that they were more agnostic than atheist but that came after a profession of being an atheist, whatever that means. I guess it means this person is more than an atheist and less than an agnostic? I really don't know and I don't suppose it matters, whatever they are, they are lost, unregenerate, and writing out of their lost and sinful nature. This person admitted to believing there is probably some kind of 'omnipotent supreme being' in control of 'the universe'.
I can't even begin to grasp the mindset of someone that is agnostic/athiest and yet believes in a 'supreme being'. What exactly would this supreme being be? How would it operate?
I have no idea and I am not willing to put the research in to try and figure it out.
This atheist/agnostic implied that humans are a close minded lot with a very bad idea of what that supreme being is. Apparently Christians have it wrong as do all other belief systems...what then would this 'supreme being' look like?
The snippet of writing went on to say the Bible is wrong, the Koran is wrong, that all holy books are wrong. They admitted to talking to others, many of whom were supposedly church goers that all agreed with their thought process.
According to this person 'holy books' have given us much in the past but are no longer relevant. Why? Have we come so far as a human race that we no longer need the Lord of all? I have heard that college professors, among others, claim and teach that God is a crutch for poor people, that their lives are so bad they need some kind of hope so they must believe in an imaginary being that somehow makes it all better. Have we come that far? Did our distant ancestors need holy books that are no longer relevant to our modern times?
But here's the thing, from that point this atheist almost seems to me to prove his own point wrong. In a rather disjointed way he went on to say people are incapable of whispering a sentence to each other, passing it through several people, without messing it up. Their point, I assume, was to say that the Bible and any other 'holy ' book must be inaccurate because people mess things up and the Bible has been passed down through centuries.
A couple of years back I did some research into the history of the Bible, a fascinating subject, and read many things about just how amazing it is that the Scriptures came to be and how most of the authors never met, never read the others writings, and yet the different parts all correlate.
And yet this atheist says the Bible can't be right because it would have been messed up with each 'retelling'. No doubt there are some messed up versions out there. I would even agree that the changing of just one word can and does ruin the point to a whole section of Scripture. And out of all those differing versions, different 'holy books' as the atheist called them, we have many varying belief systems.
That is a simple, sad truth. It would seem that if people had only 'kept the facts straight' in Scripture, in the 'holy books', than we wouldn't have all these mixed up beliefs but that isn't the case. People have been believing erroneously since almost the beginning of creation. It is a flaw in the sinful hearts of men to seek after...something.
Scripture tells us that all men know the existence of God because all of creation points to it's Creator and yet some will deny that knowledge.
The Lord has protected his Scriptures, kept them holy, and reserved them for his people. For as long as their is time on earth there will be the written word of the Lord. People may do their best to corrupt and distort it through intention or error but the Truth will be preserved.
The Lord has allowed all these other versions to pervert his Truth while also preserving his Word for those that He has not allowed to be deluded.
And so...I have read and reread that atheists words, wondering, thinking, marveling at his thought process. Almost amazed at his thinking. How does one come to such a convoluted theory that they can both make a good point and prove their own point wrong at the same time, without realizing they have just done that?
But then again I have had much the same experience with professing 'Christians' that are Armenians. It's just a matter of who, or what, they put their faith into and they usually cannot be shaken from that faith. An Armenian does at least profess the existance of the Lord and therefore gives you a placeof connection however flawed that belief might be. An atheist on the other hand...well, there is nowhere to start with them because they are disdainful of all of Scripture and lack any belief in a higher power, particularly God, and so they pretty much shut you down from the first word you say. Nothing you say after that gets anywhere with them. At least not in my limited experience.
My husband once told me...'he's an atheist. Don't waste your time debating with him.' And he was right. I tried and tried and got nowhere fast.
All that to say...I have little experience with atheists and what little I have had was disheartening to say the least. And so when I came across this short snippet written by an atheist I was intrigued. Not because I in any way shared their belief but because their thoughts were so far removed from my own and because that short bit of writing gave me insight into the thought process of a group of people that deny with their mouths the Lord I hold so dear.
This bit of writing was about the Bible. I would love to quote it here but that isn't an option so I must content myself of giving a summary of what was written.
This atheist wrote that they were more agnostic than atheist but that came after a profession of being an atheist, whatever that means. I guess it means this person is more than an atheist and less than an agnostic? I really don't know and I don't suppose it matters, whatever they are, they are lost, unregenerate, and writing out of their lost and sinful nature. This person admitted to believing there is probably some kind of 'omnipotent supreme being' in control of 'the universe'.
I can't even begin to grasp the mindset of someone that is agnostic/athiest and yet believes in a 'supreme being'. What exactly would this supreme being be? How would it operate?
I have no idea and I am not willing to put the research in to try and figure it out.
This atheist/agnostic implied that humans are a close minded lot with a very bad idea of what that supreme being is. Apparently Christians have it wrong as do all other belief systems...what then would this 'supreme being' look like?
The snippet of writing went on to say the Bible is wrong, the Koran is wrong, that all holy books are wrong. They admitted to talking to others, many of whom were supposedly church goers that all agreed with their thought process.
According to this person 'holy books' have given us much in the past but are no longer relevant. Why? Have we come so far as a human race that we no longer need the Lord of all? I have heard that college professors, among others, claim and teach that God is a crutch for poor people, that their lives are so bad they need some kind of hope so they must believe in an imaginary being that somehow makes it all better. Have we come that far? Did our distant ancestors need holy books that are no longer relevant to our modern times?
But here's the thing, from that point this atheist almost seems to me to prove his own point wrong. In a rather disjointed way he went on to say people are incapable of whispering a sentence to each other, passing it through several people, without messing it up. Their point, I assume, was to say that the Bible and any other 'holy ' book must be inaccurate because people mess things up and the Bible has been passed down through centuries.
A couple of years back I did some research into the history of the Bible, a fascinating subject, and read many things about just how amazing it is that the Scriptures came to be and how most of the authors never met, never read the others writings, and yet the different parts all correlate.
And yet this atheist says the Bible can't be right because it would have been messed up with each 'retelling'. No doubt there are some messed up versions out there. I would even agree that the changing of just one word can and does ruin the point to a whole section of Scripture. And out of all those differing versions, different 'holy books' as the atheist called them, we have many varying belief systems.
That is a simple, sad truth. It would seem that if people had only 'kept the facts straight' in Scripture, in the 'holy books', than we wouldn't have all these mixed up beliefs but that isn't the case. People have been believing erroneously since almost the beginning of creation. It is a flaw in the sinful hearts of men to seek after...something.
Scripture tells us that all men know the existence of God because all of creation points to it's Creator and yet some will deny that knowledge.
The Lord has protected his Scriptures, kept them holy, and reserved them for his people. For as long as their is time on earth there will be the written word of the Lord. People may do their best to corrupt and distort it through intention or error but the Truth will be preserved.
The Lord has allowed all these other versions to pervert his Truth while also preserving his Word for those that He has not allowed to be deluded.
And so...I have read and reread that atheists words, wondering, thinking, marveling at his thought process. Almost amazed at his thinking. How does one come to such a convoluted theory that they can both make a good point and prove their own point wrong at the same time, without realizing they have just done that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)