Merry Christmas and the Dance of Equality, Technology and Spirituality

PerryMarketing Blog, Not on Homepqage166 Comments

Share This Post

The other day I was talking about the election with some friends. One of my most-trusted insiders, Michael Cage (a first rate marketing genius – at 28 years old he has yet to show the world what he is fully capable of) commented, “One of the things that defines the generation that elected Barack Obama is we just don’t relate to an us-vs-them mentality when we look out at the rest of the world. Everyone in the world is just an email away.”

Ten years ago someone commented, “These days you may not even know your next door neighbor, but you exchange emails with your buddy in South Africa twice a week.” I looked out the window at the house next to mine – barely knew the neighbors – and yes I was sitting there sending emails to someone in some far-off country.

Every week I get on conference calls and say hi to everyone and barely think twice about the fact that I’ve got 17 people from Texas, four from Perth, one from Amsterdam, one in Alaska, one in Lebanon.

Ever heard Thomas Friedman’s “McDonalds theory of world peace”? He observes that with only one exception, no two countries with a McDonalds have ever gone to war with each other.

Can you imagine, say, the US going to war with Australia? Think of all the emails the senators and congressmen would get: “Hey, stop trying to kill my customers! And by the way, here’s a list of 115 blogs from people who are trapped in the Siege of Sydney right now!”

The world of 2008 is truly a strange and wonderful place. Just before we took off for Nebraska to go see relatives, I loaded the first season of The Dukes of Hazzard on my video iPod so my 10 year old son would have something to watch while we trucked down Interstate 80.

That TV show ran in 1979 – the year that *I* was 10 years old. I said to Laura, “Who would’ve thought that 25 years later you’d be able to download an entire season of the Dukes of Hazzard onto a device that’s half the size of a pack of cigarettes, and our kids would watch it in the car with headphones and a 2″ screen?” We shake our heads in amazement.

OK, so what does all this have to do with Christmas?

Equality and technology… They have everything to do with Christmas.

Let’s start with equality.

The United States Declaration of Independence makes a world-shattering declaration that transformed the modern world:

“We hold these things to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

In his book “Democracy in America” (1835) Alexis de Tocqueville carefully traces this statement and its idea of equality backward through history and lands at Galatians 3:28, the words of St. Paul:

“In Christ there is neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek, slave nor free. All are equal in Christ Jesus.”

Before Paul said this, no one had ever made such a bold and sweeping statement. No one. Not the Jews or Babylonians, not the Egyptians, not the Greeks, not the Chinese. The concept of equality came first from Paul.

This idea got planted in western civilization and began to grow and develop, little by little dismantling slave trade, sowing the seeds for democracy and spurring technological and political progress. He says that from 1100 AD to the present, every major development led to more equality, not less. The Magna Carta. The invention of the horseshoe. The invention of the gun and the post office and the printing press and democracy.

If you live in a democracy and you’re thankful for the ability to vote, if you’re thankful that people generally consider you and themselves to be just as good as anybody else, then thank Paul. And his Rabbi, Jesus.

Because – despite what the Declaration says – equality really is NOT self evident. At least it wasn’t to any of the ancient world prior to 2000 years ago. On the surface, we’re all different. Some are stronger. Some are smarter. Some have more money. Some are politically connected. Some are more savvy.

And some people get the scraps.

You have no principle to guide you but the 80/20 rule. Which, divorced from any overriding sense of equality or individual dignity, is a cruel master.

But when Paul said this, he was declaring that there is an underlying *spiritual* reality, that yours and my true identity doesn’t come from accomplishments or money or power but from our Heavenly Father. That once we know that true identity we’re no longer slaves to money and power and accomplishments and the ‘natural’ order of things.

If you’re thankful that Western Civilization today considers all people to be intrinsically equal, be thankful that a young couple in Bethlehem gave birth to a baby who was to become the most loved, most hated, most argued about, most written about, most influential person in the history of the world. One who taught that the greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as yourself. One in whom there is no male or female, no Jew nor Greek, no slave nor free.

So then how about technology?

Science itself is, at its core, a presumption of discoverable underlying order. A belief, an assumption (which cannot be proven in advance BTW) that when an apple falls from a tree it does so because of some law of nature that caused it to do so. That there was a string of cause and effect that can be traced back to explain why this happened.

The apple did not fall from the tree because, say, Zeus was having a snit with Apollo and that’s why there was the lightning storm which is why there was a wind that caused the apple to swing back and forth and fall from the tree…. no, it happened for rational discoverable reasons. That God made a world which could operate consistently on its own without Him constantly making corrections from the outside.

What is "80" and what is "20" for your business right now? Take my 2-minute quiz and I'll show you where you'll get the highest compound interest on your time and money!

So far as I can tell, the inspiration for this belief first came from Wisdom of Solomon 11:21: “Thou hast ordered all things in measure and number and weight.”

(The Protestants omitted that book, but our Catholic friends thankfully left it in.)

If a scientist does not presume that there is a rational reason for what he is about to investigate, there is nothing for him to investigate at all. Belief in rationality comes from belief in a rational God. A God who wants us to discover His universe. For whom such discovery is an act of worship.

If you read the history of science over the last 500 years, the only reason science succeeded in the West – after getting started but failing in Greece, Rome, China and in the Arab world – is that Christian theology understood God to have created the universe to operate according to fixed discoverable laws. Theology made that prediction, then people had a philosophical basis for having a scientific method.

In his fascinating book “The Victory of Reason” historian Rodney Stark further explains that the forward march of technology began after the fall of the Roman Empire and has marched steadily forward ever since. Equality implied that slavery was wrong, so people had to develop technology in order to free their slaves and still get the work done. So… part of the inspiration for inventions like water wheels was a belief in dignity and freedom and the rights of the individual.

Technology is supposed to empower people, not enslave them. Because, as Paul said, in Christ, all are equal.

If you trace these ideas back through history, equality and technology and even iPods and Democracy have everything to do with our very beliefs about the universe and about God. And yes, even Jesus. Case in point: it’s politically incorrect to say “Merry Christmas” cuz it’s too religious. Instead you get a tepid, watered down “Happy Holidays.”

It’s because Christ is offensive. When a guy smashes his thumb with a hammer, he doesn’t say “Krishna” or “Buddha,” he says Jesus Christ. Because that’s the most loaded, most powerful word in the English language. There’s no name you can invoke that’s more powerful than the Son of God.

~~~

Do you know what the most important invention in the history of the world was?

It wasn’t the computer. And it sure wasn’t the light bulb or the telephone. (Or even the electronic voting machine.)

It was the printing press.

In 1445, Johannes Gutenberg invented the world’s first movable type printing press. He didn’t know it, but he was unleashing a revolution that continues to this day. Even the mighty Internet in the 21st century is just an extension of Gutenberg’s original, revolutionary machine.

The first book he printed was the Bible. And that led to controversy, too, because Luther translated it into German, the people’s language, instead of Latin, the lingo of the religious elite.

Suddenly, ordinary folks could not only afford a copy, but they could read it for themselves instead of getting some guy’s slanted interpretation. Soon the cat was out of the bag–there were copies scattered all over Europe.

When people started to read it, they were alarmed at what they saw, because between the covers of this book was an amazing story that had seemingly little to do with the politics and shell games they saw in some corners of organized religion.

Luther wrote a list of 95 accusations against the church — priests taking bribes and granting ‘indulgences’, an institution setting itself up as a ‘middleman’ between man and God.

He argued that God didn’t need a middleman, or a distributor, or an agent, or a bureaucracy. People could go direct to the source.

This little ‘schism’ in Worms Germany unleashed a firestorm of protest and permanently changed the way people approached education. No longer was a big, faceless institution responsible for your spiritual progress — YOU were. Now that you had the knowledge in your hands, you were accountable before God to do something about it.

I’m not trying to attack the Catholic church, by the way. The problem is not institutions per se; it’s just that it’s easier for most of us to mindlessly follow some guru than to listen to God’s still small voice, and use the minds He gave us.

It’s no coincidence that the scientific enlightenment and industrial revolution began in earnest within 50 years of this. Not that it wasn’t already underway (it had already gathered considerable momentum) but now that ordinary folks had access to knowledge and the freedom to pursue it, the possibilities were limitless.

The printing press took the handcuffs off of knowledge and spirituality, and the world has never been the same. Equal access to knowledge empowered people everywhere, and it was only natural that the Renaissance, and in time, democracy too would follow.

So on Christmas we celebrate the person who inspired these revolutions. Jesus’ teachings were radical and scandalous. He claimed to be the Son of God. He said he would rise from the dead, and according to the historical accounts, he did. He stepped into the world and split time in half: BC and AD. And his words still resonate throughout the earth in 2008.

Still rolls the stone from the grave.

Today I wish you a very Merry Christmas and a happy new year. And in the spirit of what Jesus taught us, I hope that in 2009 you’ll use the 21st century printing press, the Internet, to not enslave but empower individuals. To bring more equality, to make the world a better place for your fellow man.

Thanks for reading.

Perry Marshall

P.S.: You might also enjoy my email series on science, “Where did the Universe Come From” as well as “7 Great Lies of Organized Religion.”

Share This Post

About the Author

Perry Marshall has launched two revolutions in sales and marketing. In Pay-Per-Click advertising, he pioneered best practices and wrote the world's best selling book on Google advertising. And he's driven the 80/20 Principle deeper than any other author, creating a new movement in business.

He is referenced across the Internet and by Harvard Business Review, The New York Times, INC and Forbes Magazine.

166 Comments on “Merry Christmas and the Dance of Equality, Technology and Spirituality”

  1. “It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would strongly be tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare.

    All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations.

    It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics.

    There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal.

    Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations–these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit–immortal horrors or everlasting splendours. This does not mean that we are to be perpetually solemn.

    We must play. But our merriment must be of the kind (and it is, in fact, the merriest kind) which exists between people who have, from the outset, taken each other seriously–no flippancy, no superiority, no presumption. And our charity must be real and costly love, with deep feeling for the sins in spite of which we love the sinners–no mere tolerance, or indulgence which parodies love as flippancy parodies merriment.

    Next to the Blessed Sacrament itself, your neighbor is the holiest object presented to your senses. If he is your Christian neighbour, he is holy in almost the same way, for in him also Christ vere latitat, the glorifier and the glorified, Glory Himself, is truly hidden.”

    CS LEWIS “The Weight of Glory”

  2. Tim,

    1) Joyce and Lincoln are to be congratulated. A lot of intelligence and deliberate design work were required to make this experiment achieve its desired result.

    2) This doesn’t address the question “where did the information in DNA come from” or any aspect of the origin of the genetic code, because these chemicals contain no codes.

    3) I talk about chaos and fractals and their contrast to codes and information very early in my talk at http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/proof

    Perry

  3. Perry,

    Hey, what d’ya know! Speak of the Devil. :)

    Just a follow-up on the DNA discussion — this fascinating article sprung before my eyes this morning:

    http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/090111-creating-life.html

    One of the theories of how we got to DNA is that DNA came from RNA, which is a *much* simpler molecule. Well, some scientists synthesized RNA enzymes that *replicate* and *evolve*.

    This is profound.

    Chemical replication is obviously a necessary precurser to life. What’s fascinating about this experiment is that the molecule in question has only 140 nucleotides. Here’s an article with slightly more detail:

    http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2009/January/09010901.asp

    Note this is starting with a soup of chemicals! What I found incredible from the latter article is this quote:

    “The system, created by Gerald Joyce and Tracey Lincoln at the Scripps research institute in La Jolla, California, involves a cross-replicating pair of ribozymes (RNA enzymes), each about 70 nucleotides long, which catalyse each other’s synthesis. So the ‘left’ ribozyme templates the synthesis of the ‘right’, which in turn templates the ‘left’ and so on, building each other via Watson-Crick base pairing.”

    That sounds a lot like the precursors of DNA. We are well on the path to explaining DNA.

    And by the way, this reminds me of a point I wanted to make yesterday, and that is to be beware of false complexity. Ever seen fractal patterns? They are incredibly complex patterns that are produced from very simple rules. Looking at them, you would think they must be astoundingly complex to produce, but they aren’t. There are a lot of instances in nature where things seem complex, but they are just built up from relatively simple rules.

    Anyway, I thought the answer for DNA would take a few hundred years, I didn’t expect it to pop to my attention the next morning. :) That’s the great thing about science. Patience is always rewarded.

    Cheers,

    Tim

  4. Dear Perry & Different Tim,

    I promised myself that this will be my only interjection into the endless discussion concerning the existance or non-existance of God.

    Spirit is outside the realm of the five senses. In other words, it is super-natural. God built a bridge between the two realms, but He only reveals it to those that hunger to find it with a pure motive.

    Therefore science will never “see” God because He will be forever beyond its reach. Spiritual things can be ascertained, but they can not be analyzed.

    I have to compliment most everyone that has participated in this mile long discussion. The reason is that most have been mature and civil with a highly volatile subject matter.

    For me the five senses will never prove the existance of God, nor will true science ever disprove His existance. But for those who want to know that they know, God can be closer than their own breathe if they allow Him.

  5. Perry,

    I can appreciate all of your arguments. And it all boils down to the “God of the Gaps” argument. :)

    Let’s go back to the eclipses. Let’s say we lived 4,000 years ago in the time of Moses. We know the sun goes dark every so often. I say to Moses,

    “But Moses, there has to be some natural explanation for why the sun goes out every so often. I don’t think it proves anything about whether God exists.”

    Moses replies, “What? Are you daft? How can there *possibly* be any explanation for the ENTIRE SUN going dark? Do you not feel the heat of the sun? Who would wield enough power to stop all that heat?”

    Don’t you see that your DNA arguments are just a more sophisticated version of that? “Who would wield enough power to create such an artifact in nature?”

    You are incorrect that DNA theories cannot be tested. As computers progress, someday we will be able to simulate millions of years of time and test the various theories of Abiogenesis (and yes, there are many), and see if those lead to DNA.

    What we absolutely know is that evolution and natural selection happen, including creating new species (This has been observed multiple times contrary to popular belief, google for “observed instances of speciation”).

    You admit that miracles continue to recede as our knowledge grows. Why is it so difficult to imagine that this process won’t continue? In other words, why is it so important for you to have answers *right now*, when history shows that the answers come in time? Why the impatience? Why is an answer of “I don’t know” so terrible, so unacceptable, to the point that you must cast faith in *something* to have an answer?

    No, “I don’t know” is simply not proof of God.

    When people ask, “If God created everything, who created God?” The typical answer is, “well, God has just always been.” Exactly how a complex, intelligent being can arise spontaneously is never really questioned. But if God has always been, why can’t whatever mechanisms that gave rise to the universe have “always been”? Occam’s Razor would tell us that a reality that’s always been is a better explanation than a reality that’s always been with a complex, intelligent being.

    Anyway, I can give you a perfectly reasonable scenario for DNA, even granting your point (that I don’t agree with) that DNA is spectacularly unlikely.

    Let’s say the Universe is cyclical. It explodes every so often and then comes crashing back down, and then explodes again. So we’re dealing with infinite time. With infinite time, even things that are very unlikely happen eventually. What if it took 100 trillion trillion trillion universe cycles for DNA to pop up, leading to intelligent life? How would we know?

    This is why the Anthropic Principle is so powerful, which states (paraphrase) that the Universe is the way it is because we wouldn’t be around to perceive it if it wasn’t. We simply don’t know how much time without life passed before DNA and self-awareness sprung up. All we know is that we’re here.

    So the “improbability” argument doesn’t really help you with God. It’s entirely possible the Earth rolled 1,000 sevens in row, and fortunately we didn’t have to perceive the time passing. :)

    But I’m just speculating. I actually think in a couple of hundred years we’ll have computers that can simulate the Earth to the point that we will have definitive models for how you get from C-H-O-N to DNA.

    I would like to know right now how it happened, but I’m patient. “I don’t know” is a perfectly reasonable and acceptable answer to me. And once you’re able to accept “I don’t know” as an answer, religion doesn’t really offer much.

  6. Tim,

    The phrase ‘god of the gaps’ has become a retort that means “I’m sorry, but no question science is currently unable to answer is permitted to be seen as evidence for God.”

    I fully appreciate the motivation behind this. If you are employed as a scientist, your job is to not throw up your hands and say ‘goddidit’ every time you can’t explain something. Science can only explore material explanations of things. Since we do not know the limits of science, the scientist is obligated to assume a material explanation exists.

    On the other hand, science is very limited in what it can explain. Most importantly it cannot explain itself. Why is the world rational? Why are there scientific laws in the first place? Why is there order in the universe?

    Outside of science itself is philosophy and theology. This is why Kurt Goedel’s incompleteness theorem is so central. It says, essentially, “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself.” It directly infers that outside the universe there is an uncaused cause that you cannot draw a circle around. Sounds a lot like God to me.

    Back to ‘god of the gaps’: My observation is that every answer science produces comes with three more questions. People often say that the history of science is a progression of rational explanations for what used to be considered miracles. I agree.

    But science never gets rid of the miracles. They just get pushed back further in time – and with every step they get bigger. The miracle used to be that it rained this afternoon. Now the miracle is that an entire universe started expanding from a single point 13.8 billion years ago and eventually produced things as complex and amazing as German philosophers.

    Nah – science sure hasn’t made the miracles go away.

    Another thing that concerns me is those who label theories “scientific” just because they’re materialistic. The best example of this is in the origin of life field. If science is systematic and testable then one is hard pressed to name a single theory for the origin of life that qualifies as science at all.

    I’ve got a dozen esoteric textbooks on this topic and very little in their pages is anything more than fairy tales clothed in scientific-sounding language. Hubert Yockey, who is a thoroughly irreligous man, pointed out that from a scientific standpoint the origin of life is categorically un-knowable simply because the laws of the genetic code cannot be derived from the laws of physics. He is absolutely correct, but he’s been largely ignored.

    5 years ago I was dragged kicking and screaming into the intelligent design / evolution debate. I struggled to find which way was up until I started studying DNA. DNA is a digital communication system, and as author of an Ethernet book I suddenly had a clear framework for understanding it.

    It has a physical layer, an application layer, error checking and correction mechanisms and data redundancy. And a very specific data structure. Just like computer networks.

    I recognized that reproduction of any life form is impossible without having all these things in place FIRST. The concept had to exist in the abstract before they were physically implemented in reality.

    That, my friend, is the definition of design: An idea exists before implementation.

    There was a period of time where I almost was persuaded to become an atheist. But I’m a rational person and for me any worldview had to be able to explain three things:

    1.Where did the big bang come from?
    2.Where did the information in DNA come from?
    3.Do moral absolutes exist, and why?

    Let me explain #3. For example, we all agree that it is wrong to throw a hand grenade into a room where children are playing – and that this is not merely a matter of personal preference or social convention. Killing innocent children is ABSOLUTELY WRONG. So… WHY is this wrong?

    In 15 years of exploring questions like this in great detail I have never met an atheist who was able to provide a scientific or even rational-sounding answer to any of these three questions.

    As a Christian I believe that:

    1.When Genesis 1:1 says “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” – this 3500 year old statement describes the Big Bang perfectly.
    2.DNA is a communication protocol designed by a fabulous mind
    3.It’s absolutely wrong to kill children because they were made in the image of God. Who will judge us all for how we’ve lived our lives.

    All of these views are logical, rational, and to me, personally satisfying.

    Here’s the irony:

    Atheism was tempting because it appeared to provide relief from essentially theological questions, such as:

    -Why is there evil and suffering in the world? (Because shit happens, Darwin and all that…)
    -Do some people go to hell? (Of course not, hell is just a fairy tale)

    But the reason I was forced to reject atheism was because it couldn’t answer the science questions!

    How contrary this was to the popular stereotypes. I knew the idea that the earth is 6000 years old was absurd. (Though it was at least a testable hypothesis.)

    But I realized the idea that a bunch of proteins spontaneously formed and just happened to produce a living, self-reproducing cell – purely by “happy chemical accident” in Richard Dawkins words – this was just anti-scientific nonsense. Not testable, not systematic, not reproducible in any lab.

    The atheist fairy tales were more outlandish. They should have been provable – but they were not!

    Ultimately I saw that the ingenious machinery of life, the very existence of the laws of physics, and the rationality of the universe, could have only one explanation: A rational God.

    Perry Marshall

  7. Perry

    Regardless of my views on this specific topic, I think you are a doing great work in spreading the message about good marketing. This giving is what embodies the true interpretation of teachings in Christianity and other religions which is mostly missed.

    Best Wishes
    Ravi

  8. To Tom Doiron @ 5:30 pm

    Tom, MAN gives too much importance to his own existence with respect to GOD, assuming that GOD is obsessed about MAN above everything else in this universe. For an all knowing, omnipresent GOD this cannot be the case.

    The above is what comes across from those interpreting any book, belief (deemed important)across all religions.

    This then leads to hate, the very opposite of what the message is supposed to be as Stakeholders will usually interpret it to achieve their own predefined goals. These goals maybe political, non-political, purely religious as in evangelising their version.

  9. Hi Jenny,

    Respectfully, some of your questions have answers, and some don’t (e.g., we are held together through chemical bonds, which is described by a field of physics called quantum electrodynamics).

    But what you’re really asking is, “if science has all the answers, then why can’t it answer [xxx] question.”

    The problem with that is that science doesn’t claim to have all the answers. Only religion claims to have absolute answers. Science is only a formal method for finding and testing answers.

    Your argument is commonly called the “God of the Gaps” argument. Any gap in human knowledge, any open questions, or any sort of “gotcha!” question is seen as proof of God.

    The truth is that human beings will always have open questions. A long time ago there were a lot of things we used to ascribe to God that we would think are silly now, because our knowledge of the world has expanded so much.

    For example, people thought God punished people by blocking out the sun. Think of how powerful that proof was! Who else but God could possibly blacken the sun!? Of course, now we know it’s the moon blocking the sun causing an eclipse, and it happens on a regular schedule. No direct action by God is necessary to explain it, any more than God makes us cast shadows on ants.

    My point is that asking “Gotcha” questions doesn’t provide any proof of God. It only proves we have open questions — and we have fewer all the time. (and it certainly doesn’t prove the Christian God — Zeus is just as capable of filling the role of a power figure, if you need one).

    The “God of the Gaps” has a long and interesting history, actually. The term was coined by an evangelical Christian in the 19th century who was dismayed by Christians who openly mocked science, which he saw as mocking God’s work (which it is). We could really use someone like that today!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

    Tim

    P.S. I tried really hard to answer your questions respectfully, and if I didn’t succeed, it wasn’t my intent.

  10. Questions for the people out there who think that when our body, including our heart and brain of course, dies, that’s the end…

    How did we come into being in the first place please? How did the sperm and the egg become a “person”? How did we take our first breath? How is it that we, as humans, can think about ourselves thinking? And another: Since we are each a mass of energy molecules (for want of the proper scientific term) moving and being, what holds us together in the shape we are? And with all the new discoveries about the brain (The brain that changes itself by Norman Doidge) HOW does all this happen in our brain?

    Jenni

  11. Ravi,

    At some point in time you will take your last physical breathe here on Earth. Next you will come fullface with your future or your lack thereof.

    Like your heart muscle, your physical brain will also be dead.

    How will you think about all this stuff then?

  12. Strange that human society and the world at large has gone on considering the billions of creatures who don’t say Jesus Christ except a percentage of the human species and these too have to be TRAINED to do so.

    If they were picked up at their birth and placed in Japan, they would say whatever they were trained to, maybe Buddha. At birth all they say is Waa or something similar.

    More people now believe in Jesus Christ than 2000 years ago. An even larger number do not even know about him than those who did not know about him 2000 years ago.

    A high number of Christians migrated from the region where Christianity was dominant to escape the misery to a non Christian continent which had riches and very little resistance to pillage and plunder.

    Mostly discarded from their Christian mother country as being criminals, a lot of discarded Christians were sent to a wilderness in the southern hemisphere where they proceeded to pillage and plunder the local inhabitants to establish themselves.

    Today both these regions evangelize (market) Christianity like no other.

    All organized religions have a somewhat similar background. The muslims have historically destroyed all non muslim cultures which they could at that point in time. The hindus have created a caste system which renders their own co religionists to live in the most inhuman of conditions.

    All are nothing but the scavengers and predators between HIM and MAN using the names of books or prophets or animist beliefs to exploit, brainwash and desctory the very base of human decency under the guise of being the torch bearers of the same.

    Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Dalai Lama, Krishna, Gita, Bible, Koran are tools of destruction even as they contain references to love.

    They bring out the worst in human society as most even don’t understand what they mean. So they are told by the very miniscule few who claim to be experts in their interpretation. These wield great power and use it ruthlessly for their ends.

    All creatures just want to live their lives as given to them by HIM but they are not let alone to be.

  13. The pros and cons of the topic will go back and forth. Then one day the last of the human species will come to an end and all the remaining species (if any) will rejoice in HIS NAME for correcting HIS ONE AND ONLY MISTAKE.

    The earth will continue to rotate and revolve around the sun and the infinite universe will go on without noticing the tiny blip of humanity.

  14. Hi Perry,

    I enjoyed your post although I’m not religious myself. It was balanced and non-preaching and made some excelent points, which if you look at some of the replies above seems almost impossible for a Christian to carry off.

    The thing that annoys me, and it appears other non believers in a supreme being, is the way Christians state as a fact that there IS a god, and anybody who disagrees is wrong. This despite there never having been a single shred of physical evidence in the history of mankind.

    We’re all entitled to our beliefs but mine is that although religion has it’s place in teaching children right from wrong, otherwise it is more responsible for the ills in the world than any other single thing.

  15. Adding to my post, I believe Jesus’s peaceful principles were foundational and necessary for our modern society to exist. Rome fell to brutality through its Games, and it took 12 centuries of Dark Ages to rebuild human consciousness. The Enlightenment was the re-igniting of the individual mind.

    So everyone who believes in liberal democracy with minority and civil rights is an inheritor of Christ’s revolutionary change to human experience.

    The world isn’t really divided into “Christians” and the rest of the world. The morals Christ preaches are universal now, in our day and age. I don’t know many people who don’t agree that we should care for the less fortunate and be nicer to one another. That is Christ’s word resonating through humanity.

    It’s a new time. Evangelicals that came before, the missionaries, did the work of spreading the Word. NOW it is about role-modeling the behavior Christ instructed, to show yourself as His follower and that His Word is real and genuine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *