and will there be a lot of skull cracking the day they claim their inheritance?
2007-11-25 01:18:35 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
If the species survives long enough, very likely imo.
Despite man's relentless attempts to control everything, there is a force that he cannot, and that is change; that is he cannot stop change.
There is no doubt that aggression is not a requirement for survival, but strength is. They are not the same thing.
Aggression encourages conflct. Conflict usually manifests in 2 ways, the 'winner', and the 'loser'.
At our current stage of development, we are just at a point in the bio-chemical (evolutionary) process that started some millions of years ago.
For whatever reason (or even if there is no reason), it appears that for Homo Sapiens, evolution has scored in the development of the 'intelligence'. I would propose that this is the primary characteristic that has ensured that Homo Sapiens is the dominant species on the planet.
As intelligence progresses, it becomes clear that many negative and destructive characteristics of the species are patently dangerous both to the species and the individual.
The intelligent attitude is one that is looking for win-win solutions, not win-lose (and as so often happens lose-lose).
It is my opinion that this trend in perception will continue as the Genes and DNA evolve and mutate and tend to err on the side of the survivors (those who remain to pass on their DNA). This is a selection process.
So a very moot question is to ask 'who are the survivors?', because it is based on the characteristics of those that the future of the species will be based.
In the 'Nature red in tooth and claw' state of existance, where survival is a brutal competition with the environment, the survivors will tned to be those who 'win', and that will tend to be by brute (and lethal) force. Being an intellectual is less effective.
I would also suggest that we (mankind) have sufficient control over the environment that simplistic characteristics of Aggression as manifest in prehistoric and relatively recent times is no longer an evolutionary imperative. No longer is it the aggressive that survive but the passive too. Our society and technology ensures that a much wider range of 'types' survive, and their DNA will have a higher contribution to global genetics than otherwise would have been the case.
Eventually, the need for aggression could be evolved out completely, particularly if that characteristic is one that 'threatens' the survival of the species.
The 'meek' as expressed by Jesus, indicates that it is those who reject the characteristics that cause conflict, hate, jeolousy, greed, avarice, etc., are those that will remain after all the others have evolved out of the species.
The comforting thing for me is that I am sure that this process is inevitable, assuming the species survives long enough. If I was to hazard a timescale? I have no idea, but I would guess that we are talking about thousands, if not tens to hundreds of thousands of years...
I'll conclude with a parable:
I am a man who rejects aggression, conflict, and hate. I want a secure place where I can live my life in peace with myself and others. I point my fingers at those who would kill, torture, and abuse and say "You are a threat to my well being, and that of my family and friends"
To me, this is a more powerful evolutionary characteristic which will eventually filter out the 'skull crackers' and all their abominable kind. However, it will sadly take a very long time...
2007-11-25 07:58:57 · answer #1 · answered by TheWizard 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I thought it was the Greek who inherit the earth but I'm cool with the meek getting a taste as well, I guess.
2007-11-25 01:22:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
God said the meek will inherit the earth! There will not be scull cracking!
2007-11-25 02:01:46 · answer #3 · answered by Gerry 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
they won't be meek if they did, so a new class of meek people will want their rights and so on. not very well thought out, maybe it lost something in the translation.
2007-11-25 02:52:16 · answer #4 · answered by numbnuts222 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The meek toward God inherit the earth.
Being meek to God...means you obey him, listen to His Word...respect the prophets he sends....
and they always do inherit the earth.
2007-11-25 01:21:52 · answer #5 · answered by Digital Age 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Yes, meek in that context means "surrender" or "Lose you life to find it." That is the formula to reconnect to the Godlike potential we all have within us as children of God.
First book on this site explains this puzzling principle.
2007-11-25 01:26:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes they will it is assured by the creator.
He also said, ‘“Not by a military force, nor by power, but by my spirit."
Zechariah 4 v 6
2007-11-25 02:45:06 · answer #7 · answered by Jadore 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It'd be a fairly boring place anyway, if everybody was meek.
2007-11-25 01:24:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, it was mistranslated. The bland shall inherit the earth.
Listen to contemporary Christian music for an idea.
2007-11-25 01:21:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Maybe by then, it'll be so trashed and polluted, the meek will be the only ones who will take it.
2007-11-25 01:38:31 · answer #10 · answered by Acorn 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋