Monday Quote of the Week

Charles Darwin was much more balanced and less-biased than the evolution fundamentalists of today...

"... The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth, (must) be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory."

- Darwin, C. (1859) The Origin of Species (Reprint of the first edition) Avenel Books, Crown Publishers, New York, 1979, p. 292

I stumbled across a survery located at http://www.fredoniaportal.com/TheSurvey/tabid/73/Default.aspx that is looking to get an idea from "self-professed Christians" on their views of various trinity related thought.

After I took the survey, I was directed to the results page, which was very interesting. There is over fifty questions, so here are the highlights. First of all, the questions that had most agreement or consensus. There was two questions that were 100% disagreed on by all respondants so far, and that was:

13. Jesus is God incarnate, which means that he is not a human being, although he appears to be human.

26. Jesus was a truly righteous man, and was sent by God, but was not the unique Son of God. God has equally well used a number of other great religious leaders.

So it shows the respondants believe Jesus was actually a human being in the flesh (at some point) and was the unique Son of God.

There was no questions universally agreed upon, but one question came close with over 90% of responses agreeing on:

50. The Father of Jesus and the God of Moses are one and the same, namely, the one true God.

Also very interesting!

The creator of this survey has a blog at http://trinities.org/blog/ which also seems to be a decent read for any interested in that type of thing.

Apologies

Due to holidaying over the recent "Easter" holiday period, I have missed some of my regular posts (Thursday BBW, Friday Fun & Monday Quote), but I am now back on board and hope to be getting back to some regularity.

Tuesday Top Seven

For this weeks (belated) Tuesday Top Seven, I have chosen a short, sweet and opinionated list:

My Top Seven Translations of the Holy Scriptures

1. New World Translation - literal, precise, translators had great knowledge of original languages

2. New American Bible - very literal, but try and get the 2nd version that gets rid of most of the "inclusive" language used in the 1st, 3rd & 4th versions

3. Jerusalem Bible - a poetic, "dynamic equivalence" translation, features God's name in the Hebrew Scriptures.

4. New Jerusalem Bible - update of the Jerusalem Bible, uses some "gender inclusive" language

5. American Standard Version - based on the King James Version, but updates the speech and common errors, very accurate for its time, and one of the most literal Bibles of all time.

6. New English Bible - relatively free translation with some interesting renderings

7. The Bible in Living English - The eccentric Byington's own translation, features the divine name, modern language, and faithful renderings.

America - nation of Biblical illiterates!

Time magazine has an artile entitled The Case for Teaching The Bible that examines developments in the United States calling for secular Bible classes to be taught in schools. An interesting quote caught my eye:

"According to Religious Literacy, polls show that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the Bible holds the answers to "all or most of life's basic questions,"but pollster George Gallup has dubbed us "a nation of biblical illiterates." Only half of U.S. adults know the title of even one Gospel. Most can't name the Bible's first book. The trend extends even to Evangelicals, only 44% of whose teens could identify a particular quote as coming from the Sermon on the Mount.

While this biblical illteracy is no surprise to many true Christians, we can also take note that many Americans still view the Bible as a high authority, they just lack understanding of it. All there more reason to get out there and preach the good news!

U.N. HRC passes resolution against religious defamation

This news article comments on a resolution that has just been pushed through the United Nations Human Rights Council that promotes a global prohibition on the defamation of religion. It was supported mainly by Islamic nations as a response to the "Danish Mohammed cartoons" controversy.

It mentions only Islam and no other religions, and has already begun to draw alot of criticism from other human rights organisations as well as Japan, Canada, South Korea and many European nations.

Monday Quote of the Week

Origen (3rd-century "Church Father") wrote regarding John 1:1:

We next notice John's use of the article in these sentences... He uses the article when the name of God refers to the uncreated cause of all things, and omits it when the Logos is named God...as the God who is over all is God with the article, not without it.
God on the one hand is Very God (Auththeos, God of Himself); and so the Savior says in His prayer to the Father [John 17:3], "That they may know the only true God"; but that all beyond the Very God is made God by participation in His divinity, and is not to be called simply God (with the article) but rather God (without article).

Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol. 9, p. 323