Are We Creatures of God?

In other words, did God create the universe? Did God create man? Is there a creator God? It's easy to say yes if you're Christian or of similar faith. It's easy to deny it if you don't subscribe to such faiths. But such claims are usually based on simplistic reasoning, intuition, upbringing, parental and social influences, indoctrination of religion or lack thereof. Until the new millennium and the discoveries of the last couple years, our lack of crucial knowledge has kept the debate alive, with many espousing theories of Intelligent Design. That's the idea that our existence is so fragile that it requires a perfect set of laws and conditions, and the universe is of such complexity and balance that it could not have come into existence if it were not for an intelligent creator.


Science shows that energy can neither be created, nor destroyed. Thus it has always been, not come from anywhere.

Energy - the source of life and all the universe

Prior to Einstein's findings it was argued (and still is) that an unnatural creator god or spirit was needed to explain the creation of the earth, the universe and the creation of man. Energy is a natural force. All energy is nature. All nature is energy. Even our thoughts and feelings are expressions of energy that has organized as a mechanism for the preservation of a life form, us. A deity concept is no longer needed to explain the existence of the universe. That would raise the questions: Where did the deity come from? How does the deity exist? Why is the deity needed? Etc. All that leads to is more perceptions and fabrication that can't be substantiated.


It may be argued that the energy within everything is the deity, that we and the deity are one, which has similarities to Nature worship and Hinduism. For those intoxicated and addicted with deity, there is a need to cling on to one, to fabricate and worship a deity. If the Golden Calf concept is no longer sustainable, they will craft another to suit the times. The Biblical concept of deity, that which is not just the foundation, but the cornerstone of Muslim, Christian and Jewish beliefs, is now no longer sustainable. The truth is, energy is not God, but it has always existed. It is natural. It is nature in whatever form. It sustains life and it destroys it in transformations. It needs to be understood and respected. But to worship it, or any deity for that matter, is a sign of delusion and even fanaticism.


But how does that explain how the universe is so perfectly ordered for our existence? To have it all so tailored for us must have required an Intelligent Designer. Not really. The argument attempts to suggest that we are the purpose for the existence of the universe. However, all evidence shows that the universe has evolved for billions of years before man. Man is pure energy, a part of the universe, the creature that has evolved, transformed, adapted to it's environment rather than the environment tailored for it.


Are we creatures of God? The truth unfolds with every passing day.

Supreme Court Deals Religion Fatal Blow

The 9 member Supreme Court of Canada in session.

In a unanimous decision handed down on Friday, February 17, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada has dealt what amounts to a resounding defeat to all religious institutions on a matter that is crucial to the long term survival of religion in Canada. The verdict could have repercussions worldwide.

The Court ruling provides secular governments with a means of targeting religion's divisiveness and the resulting social disharmony, affirming government's right and obligation to use it's authority and mandate for education, to nurture a better informed and more harmonious citizenry.

Religion's primary tool for success in acquiring new members has been the indoctrination of young children before they have acquired sufficient knowledge or ability to research, reason or judge objective and subjective claims of "truth" for themselves. This manipulation of young children harms them and society, to say the least, but it can now be neutered by enabling and promoting objective, unbiased secular religious education, including atheism and ethics courses in schools, in the manner currently exemplified by the Government of Quebec. 

It all began in the majority Catholic Canadian Province of Quebec when schools, both public and private, were mandated by the Ministry of Education to teach a neutral, secular course in 'Ethics and Religious Culture' (ERC) from the beginning of school year, September 2008. The program's primary objective was and is, to teach children to recognize others and act for the common good, while seeking to cultivate a culture of dialog among children. It is mandated for all school children from Grades 1 through 11 in Quebec.


ERC has been opposed by many interest groups, the primary three being: Religious groups that claim it is relativistic and contrary to their faith, Nationalists who say the program is a form of multiculturalism and Secularists who claim the curriculum tends to be too respectful of all religions. The Council on Jewish Education in Quebec, commended the Quebec government for championing the cause of universal friendship among human beings, but the organization contended that Orthodox Jews are required, according to Torah law, to limit their study of theology to the theology of the Torah. The Council, in it's honesty, highlights the problems caused by religion.


The legal challenge to the government was led by Catholic parents, supported by the Roman Catholic Church and various other Christian denominations. They petitioned the Courts to exempt their children from the ERC course.


Writing on behalf of all nine Supreme Court Justices, Justice Marie Deschamps wrote:

"exposing children to a comprehensive presentation of various religions without forcing the children to join them does not constitute an indoctrination of students that would infringe the freedom of religion of [the parents]."

She also wrote:

"State neutrality is assured when the state neither favours nor hinders any particular religious belief, that is, when it shows respect for all postures towards religion, including that of having no religious beliefs whatsoever."

According to Deschamps:

"[T]he early exposure of children to realities that differ from those in their immediate family environment is a fact of life in society. The suggestion that exposing children to a variety of religious facts in itself infringes their religious freedom or that of their parents amounts to a rejection of the multicultural reality of Canadian society and ignores the Quebec government’s obligations with regard to public education.  Although such exposure can be a source of friction, it does not in itself constitute an infringement of s. 2(a) of the Canadian Charter and of s. 3 of the Quebec Charter."

The ruling in favor of the Ministry of Education has not gone well with the province's Roman Catholic majority. The Society of Saint Pius X - United States District concluded in it's response:

"As always, it is the weakness of the faithful and of the shepherds that it is the devil’s tool to bring about the destruction of souls, the loss of Faith, and the overturning of any semblance of recognition of God’s rights over families and society."

According to LifeSiteNews, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, formerly Archbishop of Quebec and the current prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Bishops, referred to it as:

"the dictatorship of relativism applied beginning in elementary school."

The Vatican, in the Circular Letter to the Presidents of Bishops' Conferences on Religious Education in Schools posted on their website, had this to say:

"The Christian faithful are to strive so that in civil society the laws which regulate the formation of youth also provide for their religious and moral education in the schools themselves, according to the conscience of the parents. In fact, the Catholic religious instruction and education which are imparted in any school are subject to the authority of the Church."

Now that the Supreme Court has ruled, it is very likely that those opposed will turn to politics or other means to end the ERC program. If not, the various religious groups will fail to maintain the ignorance and gullibility of their members and will find it difficult to persist in their claims that they each are the exclusive guardians of "objective truth". None-the-less, governments have a mandate and obligation to educate the public, and the intent of that obligation is to ensure a safe, harmonious and successful society. It is foreseeable, that other secular governments will now be emboldened to emulate the Quebec Ethics and Religious Culture program. It is a fact of society, that disputes often arise from ignorance, that lack of knowledge needed to understand the other side, and education is the key to building a better, more tolerant society. Social and cultural change resulting from this education will come slow, over many decades, and not without a fight from those with vested interests.


Sources:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/supreme-court-says-quebec-ethics-course-is-neutral-on-religion-but-vatican
http://www.sspx.org/miscellaneous/canada_imposes_relativism_2-27-2012.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_and_religious_culture
http://www.thecourt.ca/2012/02/28/the-positive-role-for-government-in-freedom-of-religion-s-l-et-al-v-commission-scolaire-des-chenes-et-al/
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20090505_circ-insegn-relig_en.html