I took it on myself to compare two websites. What started as
a study in contrasts ends in sad irony.
Site #1: Answers In
Genesis (as most Christian will know as an apologetic source)
Site #2: National Center
Presuppositions…This is the first word that comes to mind
when dealing with the two links above and their diametrically opposed topics.
It is the idea that you can show the same exact set of data to two people and
they will interpret it completely differently. One will see the complexity of
God’s creation and the other will see a sum total of innumerable mutations and
processes over an extremely long period of time. One will approach the data
like Answers in Genesis (AIG) under the presupposition that God does indeed
exist and all natural or supernatural processes are the product of or set in
motion by a divine sovereign God. The other will see the data and will see only
the natural or naturalistic and totally preclude the supernatural which is to
deny it outright or purposely limit the scope of their investigation. Partial
analysis produces partial results. To me it is intellectual bias (or
arrogance). To acknowledge that there might be a plausible alternative by even
mentioning it on your website National
Center
Why? I believe it is because Creationism seems to be on the
endangered species list of the world because most have bought the half-truths
or outright lies of evolution hook, line and sinker without ever once
questioning its validity. Science and the godless world has Creationists on the
run. Evolution takes center-stage and snubs its nose at God while Creationism and
theistic origin accounts float on the periphery soon to wink into the darkness
of the world’s myopic vision.
This then brings up an interesting conundrum. In our culture
and world nowadays, Science does have the upper hand in this polemic/debate.
What was once something that could’ve been made in harmony with Christianity
and religion in general is now antithetical to it. In a wish to preclude the
supernatural, science and humanists have tried to preclude God. Regardless of
whether or not they acknowledge God or not, He is still there/here. These
people have sadly confused God’s grace, mercy and silence for the end result.
At some point God’s mercy runs out and the silence to these people will end.
Try only to give what they believe is the truth and what they
believe it. If they believe in something then I would have to say that this
comes close to constituting a religion in and of itself. They want what they
believe taught in classrooms and disseminated to the world but for all intents
and purposes they want to shut up the propagation of creationism and keep it
out of classrooms. This to me seems a little bit like a breach of the religious
rights of some in favor of others. I thought the First Amendment rights in America (never
mind the idea of separation of Church and State is not even in the
Constitution). The sad fact is that the scientific side has clear acknowledged
that they limit or pigeon-hole their scope of data. The exact quote of NCSE
was, “For more than two decades, the National
Center
What I will say in this NCSE defense is that they at least
recognize and accurately represent the fact that there is a continuum of
Creation/Evolution. They specifically state that:
One goal of this section of the website is to make the
public aware that the dichotomous view represented by creationists and
antireligious atheists leaves out a large range of more moderate religious
views. We hope that you find these materials useful in considering these
important issues.
The continuum starts with the hardcore on opposite ends of
the Evolution/Creation debate and then goes towards the middle to the “not so
sure”. It speaks of those that try to straddle the fence between Creationism
(religious based) and Evolution (which tend to be, but not always
materialists/methodological naturalists). Regardless of the pretense/subterfuge
NCSE puts up of being somewhat impartial, the site still doesn’t speak too
kindly of those of a theistic or religious persuasion. It is still
humanism/humanistic based and therefore is not of the spiritual mind but rather
of the natural man mentioned by Paul in Romans and 1 Corinthians.
If you are going to believe something, at least do so with
conviction not half-heartedly. Figure out what you believe and think through
things to their logical end and stop being force fed what others want you to
believe. Both sites advocate this to some extent but I sense a disingenuous
nature in the NCSE site since the anti-Christian/theistic posts are scathing
and venomous at times.
The truth is Science doesn’t necessarily make you hardcore
atheist and Christianity (Religion) does not necessarily make you a hardcore
Young Earth Creationist either. There is
some breathing room. Science books are not the Bible but they have things to
teach us, just as the Bible is not a science book but when it speaks of things
scientific, science would have a hard time of proving it wrong. If we do not at
least try to meet in the middle to talk about these things the sides can only
grow farther apart and become more acrimonious towards one another. This
doesn’t help evangelism and it keeps theists in the dark about things that
could potentially help them. My assumption is that evangelism helps those on
the fence or on the other side of the fence.
Proverbs 8:24-29 When
there were no oceans, I was given birth, when there were no springs abounding
with water; before the mountains were settled in place, before the hills, I was
given birth, before he made the earth or its fields or any of the dust of the
world. I was there when he set the heavens in place, when he marked out the
horizon on the face of the deep, when he
established the clouds above and fixed securely the fountains of the deep, when
he gave the sea its boundary so the waters would not overstep his command, and
when he marked out the foundations of the earth.
Christians approach God knowing they know very little and
this is often the reason for the need to approach Him. True Christians by
nature will be humble. We know that He has the answers we do not. Scientific
types on the other had refuse to go to God for answers. Usually because they do
not even believe He exists. More importantly, scientific empirical types
approach reality with arrogance cock-sure of themselves that they will be able
to determine and answer on their own. My nature they are not intellectually
humble. They are usually pretentious and haughty. This arrogance stems from a
support system or society that looks up to them and never tells them they are
wrong. This is not support, it is enabling, just like a junkie enables an
addict. They are addicted to themselves and wisdom of the world and the masses
are the pushers of their egos.
No comments:
Post a Comment