Party Poopers

16 thoughts on “Party Poopers”

1. • The Bible has absolutely no hint of ages of evolutionary development. Forcing the “days” of Genesis 1 to mean “ages” can be done, but there is no support for that idea in the rest of Scripture (Psalm 33:6-9, 148:5-6; John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:3; Revelation 4:11; etc.).

   And it doesn’t have a hint of atomic theory, germ theory, plate tectonics, relativity…. Classic error, trying to use Genesis as a science textbook.

   • Evolution is not observed at all today. Empirical science is based on observation and verification. Nothing (from bacteria to people) is “evolving” into a “higher order.” Period.

   Wrong, plus evolution does not invoke the term “higher order.”

   • Fossil data does not show any transitional forms. If evolution occurred prior to recorded history, it can only be documented by the fossils embedded in the water-deposited rocks of earth. Those “missing links” are still missing.

   Monumentally wrong.

   • God’s character absolutely forbids evolutionary methods. God’s holiness demands truth, and His omniscience demands perfection. He cannot know what is best and then “create” something inferior. He wrote that He took six days to create the universe (Exodus 20:11). And He cannot lie!

   Literal readings lead to inconsistencies. Bad move.

   • God’s stated purpose for creating excludes evolution. The creation reveals the Creator (Romans 1:20, Psalm 19:1-4), gives authority to the message of Jesus Christ (John 1:1-14, Colossians 1:16-18), and is the foundation for the gospel and for worship (Revelation 14:6-7). Creating is what God does at the moment of the new birth (Ephesians 2:8-10). HMM III

   A Creator God does not exclude the reality of evolution.

   I’m convinced that the ICR and the Discovery Institute are far more upset by theistic evolutionists than by atheists. It’s easy to demonize librul atheist evilutionists, but their science vs. religion argument starts to unravel and crumble in the face of the Clergy Letter Project and the millions who believe in God and accept evolution.

   A warm welcome to Charles while I’m on that subject – you alone could give John and Henry Morris a double conniption fit!

2. I can just see their faces all flushed and twitchy as they wrote that email. Pretty funny.

3. Hi. This Christian would like to say a few things in response to the ICR Dallas article:

   The Bible does not have a footnote in Genesis 1 that says, “Reader stop!! This is real history and real science.” On their own, as frail human beings, the fundamentalists have chosen to believe that Genesis 1 is science and history. This is a man-made choice just as surely as the man-made laws of the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 22. The creation stories in Genesis are neither science nor history. They are most likely parables. Parables are “made up” stories or traditional folk tales used to convey assorted truths to the reader or listener. As a believer in Jesus Christ, I am absolutely astounded at how the fundamentalists allow Jesus to tell parables to illustrate spiritual truth throughout the four gospels of the New Testament but deny him that right in Genesis 1. Any good read of the four gospels shows that parable-telling is a favorite way of teaching for Jesus. The Bible teaches us that there is a constancy about God and his persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) over vast passages of time. If Jesus’ love of teaching in parables was great in 33 A.D., it is not unreasonable to expect that this was true 5000 years ago or 15 billion years ago. However, the fundamentalists will have none of it. They insist that God should have been working in their man-made way and should have been communicating with men their way in times past. It is high time for the fundamentalists to stop telling God how he should do his job. God knows how to do his job.

   This land of ours could begin a true revival if every Christian fundamentalist in it decided to wake up each morning by repeating in prayer and living out the following words, “You are God, and I am not.” In this same vein, I am reminded of an academic book written by Randall Balmer, who is a Professor of Divinity at Columbia University in New York City. In one of his chapters, Randy is having a discussion with a born-again Christian (Doug Frank) who was once his professor at a small Christian college (Trinity College). Doug had become very concerned about the activities of the Religious Right in the 1980s and had just written a very solid academic book entitled “Less Than Conquerors: How Evangelicals Entered the 20th Century.” Doug expressed the sincere hope that his new book would cause every religious conservative in the United States to fall on his knees and cry out before God in sackcloth and ashes, “Forgive us Lord, for we are sorry bastards!!! Forgive us Lord for we are sorry bastards!!!” If that day ever comes, we may really see a revival in America.

   We will now turn to the bulleted points made by the fundamentalists:

   Fundie Bullet 1

   “The Bible has absolutely no hint of ages of evolutionary development. Forcing the “days” of Genesis 1 to mean “ages” can be done, but there is no support for that idea in the rest of Scripture (Psalm 33:6-9, 148:5-6; John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:3; Revelation 4:11; etc.).”

   The Bible also does not say that the days in Genesis are 24-hour days as we normally think of them today. I agree. There is no support for geological ages in the Bible. However, there is also no support in the Bible for the man-made notion that Genesis 1 is history and science. At this juncture, the fundamentalists usually trot out 2 Timothy 3:16 as if it is some sort of magic wand, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” They can quote that all day if they like. Facts are facts. Literal is literal. This verse does not say a single thing about Genesis 1 being science or history. If you are going to read the Bible literally, you must recognize this. The truth of the matter is that fundamentalists read the Bible literally when the literal reading supports their preconceived human prejudices. As a friend of mine, a Baptist minister’s son from Indiana, once said, “In the fundamentalist mind, the Bible must be always read simply and literally from cover to cover, except when it becomes symbolic in Ezekial, Daniel, and Revelation.” So much for Biblical literalism!!! Fundamentalists are also famous for cherry-picking the scriptures to support their man-made Matthew 22-style laws. One of these man-made laws is their restriction on drinking wine. They can offer up all kinds of contorted thinking (based only distantly on scripture by the time they are finished) as to why drinking wine is Biblically illegal—all the while ignoring the scriptures that support wine drinking as an acceptable daily activity in the ancient world. Yes, Jesus did make wine and drink wine, and it was not grape juice. A literal reading of the Bible says so. The Pharisees accused Jesus of partying with sinners and being a drunk. When was the last time you got drunk on Welch’s Concord Grape Juice?

   Fundie Bullet 2

   “Evolution is not observed at all today. Empirical science is based on observation and verification. Nothing (from bacteria to people) is “evolving” into a “higher order.” Period.”

   Considering the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution, this statement is either an expression of monumental ignorance or a bold-faced lie. The people of Texas can decide which it is on their own.

   Fundie Bullet 3

   “Fossil data does not show any transitional forms. If evolution occurred prior to recorded history, it can only be documented by the fossils embedded in the water-deposited rocks of earth. Those “missing links” are still missing.”

   This is just plain false. The fossil record contains many examples of such forms from horses to humans. In fact, the fossil evidence for human evolution is amazing and really quite convincing. The man who taught me about primate and human evolution in my college days was Dr. Fred H. Smith, now at the Loyola University of Chicago. Fred is the nicest person you would ever want to meet and sharp as a tack. Back in my student days, Fred was a deeply devout Christian, a member of a small Southern Baptist Convention Church in Lenoir City, Tennessee, and (if memory serves) a singer in the choir. You have to attend church regularly to do that. The other professor who taught me about the millions of years in geological time and invertebrate evolution was Dr. James X. Corgan, now Emeritus Professor of Geology at Austin Peay State University. When I was in his classes 39 years ago, he made it clear that he was a devout Christian, a member of a local church that believes in Jesus, and a Sunday school teacher. You have to attend church regularly to teach Sunday school.

   If you are either not a Christian or are a Christian who is unsure about the evolution issue and who you should support on the Texas School Board, I would encourage you to get in touch with the Christian biologists, geologists, paleontologists, archaeologists, and anthropologists at a large, well-established, reputable, and accredited college or university in your area. I say that because it is a well-known fact, even among Christians, that many of the so-called “Christian” colleges around the nation are unaccredited, dishonest diploma mills, or centers of dubious quackery. As the scriptures say, be careful about choosing your teachers.

   Fundie Bullet 4

   “God’s character absolutely forbids evolutionary methods. God’s holiness demands truth, and His omniscience demands perfection. He cannot know what is best and then “create” something inferior. He wrote that He took six days to create the universe (Exodus 20:11). And He cannot lie!”

   That statement is pure hogwash. God is God. Because he is holy, omniscient, and perfect, he can do whatever he wants to do, whenever he wants to do it, wherever he wants to do it, and in whatever way he wants to do it. God is bound by nothing. In Matthew 19:26, Jesus plainly says that “…with God all things are possible.” Note that ALL. All does not mean 70 percent or 2 percent. It means ALL. If God wants to create via a process like evolution, he is free to do so, and no fundamentalist on this planet had better ever get in his way.

   Fundamentalists are heavily into telling God “…what he cannot do…” There is a reason for this. Fundamentalists claim to love God, but they live in abject, quivering terror of him day-in and day-out. The Bible has become a focus of idolatry for fundamentalists because they view it as their talisman, a magical fetish that protects them from a God they quietly regard as a perpetually angry bully capable of doing unspeakable acts modern day human tyrants like Pol Pot could not even imagine. They believe the Bible is a cookbook that tells them all of the things they can do, not do, or manipulate to protect themselves from this monster. Moreover, and perhaps most importantly, they believe that God has made certain statements in the Bible that necessarily place a limitation on his power and on certain actions that he might take. It usually takes the pattern of: “God has said in the Bible—God cannot lie—Therefore, God cannot do this, that, or the other thing.” These people actually think that they have God corralled, roped like calf, limited, and domesticated in ways that allow them to protect themselves from him.

   Let us be clear on this. The fact of the matter is that nothing is impossible for God, as Jesus says. He can do whatever he wants, and by definition that “whatever” is true and right. No one has him corralled, manipulated, or domesticated. No one tells him how to create. I would also submit that it is almost impossible for a human being to love a supernatural being that they regard as a source of intense fear and abuse. Rather, for the Christian, “God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind” (2 Timothy 1:7). Modern fundamentalism is highly suspect on all of those counts. Creation Science/ID/Teach the Controversy/Academic Freedom almost certainly fail the “sound mind” count.

   Fundie Bullet 5

   “God’s stated purpose for creating excludes evolution. The creation reveals the Creator (Romans 1:20, Psalm 19:1-4), gives authority to the message of Jesus Christ (John 1:1-14, Colossians 1:16-18), and is the foundation for the gospel and for worship (Revelation 14:6-7). Creating is what God does at the moment of the new birth (Ephesians 2:8-10). HMM III”

   Creation does not exclude evolution. God is all powerful and nothing is impossible for him. God can and does create in whatever manner He desires. I agree that all of the things around us here on earth and in this vast universe were made by God. The only questions are “why” and “what processes” were used to do it. Over the past several hundred years, science has shown (and continues to show) some of how God did it. We no doubt have much more to learn, and each new scientific fact is a revelation and a manifestation of the creator (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). While we may not know everything about the evolutionary process, it is (in one way or another) part of the creation story.

   Over the years, the creation science/ID crowd has attempted to make hay out of the notion that Genesis 1 is necessary for the plan of salvation and that without the historicity of it, Jesus would have had no reason to come and make his sacrifice to have our sins covered with God’s grace. I would submit that this is not true and that the mission of Jesus Christ would have remained true and viable even if Genesis 1 had never even existed.

   Here is why:

   1) If Genesis 1 is only a fictitious parable, it still gets across the clear spiritual message that we humans live in a fallen state—a state where each human heart dares to think that it knows the difference between good and evil and that this knowledge is sufficient to nudge God from his throne and crown ourselves as Lords of the universe—which is the precise Biblical definition of original sin. Therefore, Jesus would still have needed to come and save us from that condition. Adam and Eve did not have to exist or be real people to get that message across.

   2) Even if Genesis 1 had never existed, even as a parable, each of us knows that something is wrong with humanity—that we fail in much—that we are imperfect—that we are petty—that we do wrong constantly—that we cannot help ourselves—that we are selfish—that something is missing in our lives. We see it in ourselves and in our neighbors. In his ministry alone, Jesus makes this clear and tells us that he is the pathway out of this misery. I can accept his word by faith on that without any resort to Genesis 1. I dare say that many other people also have that capacity. Perhaps some people would be unable to do so without a “tight little system” founded on the Genesis 1 parable. Therefore, I do not question God’s wisdom in giving us the parable and the spiritual truth it contains.

   A Final Point

   The creation science/ID fundamentalists love to threaten and bludgeon people with scriptures such as the one set forth in the article that started this blog thread:

   “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” (2 Peter 2:1)

   For the past 20 years of my life, I have spent much of my spare time reading and studying the Religious Right in the United States, its many activities, its ideology, and the dubious methods used to implement its activities. I have always tried to understand these activities through the filter of scripture. As a result, I have come to this scriptural conclusion, which I believe collectively and correctly describes the Religious Right, the creation science/ID movement, and their assorted cronies—so I hurl this scripture back at ICR Dallas in hopes that they may see themselves in the same mirror that so many ordinary American citizens and other Christians see them:

   He [Jesus] answered and said unto them, well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, this people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me (Mark 7:6).

4. The radical religionists that have dubbed themselves Fundamentalists don’t follow the Christian fundamentals that I learned in Vacation Bible School. The fundamentals that I remember best were forgiveness, understanding, compassion, and kindness. There are more, but they did not include beating other people over the head with a “holier than thou” club. I think we should use a more accurate and descriptive term for these folks. The term biblical literalist zealots (BLZ’s) should leave no doubt where they stand, and it will separate them from the concerned and self-described conservative Christians who support modern science in our public schools. Much of America’s leadership in the world comes from our technological prowess and our future economic and military strength depends on it. These BLZ bubbas at the ICR, Discovery Institute, and the seven BLZ’s on the Texas State Board of Education are trying to subvert science education at the high school level because they know these fallacious, mendacious, and irrelevant “weakness” arguments were rejected at the professional scientist level. They had tried to pass them off variously as Creation Science, ID, and now “strengths and weaknesses” , but we know these arguments for what they are. They are not supportive of good science or the academic progress of our children, they only support the perverse religious and ideological goals of their very selfish group.

5. ICR is a very powerful organization. They have some very top notch scientist that work for them.

   The points they continue to make are good points, and still cannot be refuted today.

   transitional forms, I have asked many of my professors to link one for me and they always fall short.

   So I have to say that the ICR group has strong arguments. I have even listened to their over 400 debates they have been involved in and again, what they point out the other side ignores or has no answer.

6. reality,

   Unless you improperly define “transitional form” as a chimera of two modern-day species (which is not predicted by evolution! expect no crocoducks) then you’re completely wrong. Here’s a place to start educating yourself: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

   I don’t know if you’re honestly ignorant about the subject, but in this day and age there is really no excuse for you, and especially, the ICR, to remain uninformed and, worse, to keep spreading falsehoods.

7. Sure—and the Earth is flat, the sun rotates around the Earth, and diseases are caused by bad airborne ethers.

   Genesis 1 is a nice and very informative parable that God told to the primitive, uneducated, illiterate, nomadic ancient Jews . God did what any good parent would do for his children. He told them a parable that a child would be able to understand. He could have given these primitive people several days of Ph.D. seminars in biology, biochemistry, and genetics, but they would have had no basis whatsoever for understanding it. God knew that. God is not stupid. As a good parent, he gave his children something simple enough for them to understand without telling them the whole story.

   In the New Testament, Jesus said that a time in human history would come when “knowledge” would be greatly increased. In this scripture, He was not referring to spiritual knowledge—but rather to what we call “factual knowledge” today. Its very nature is to increase as time passes. By 1859, this increase in knowledge was at a point where God could reveal the true nature of biological creation to Charles Darwin. God knew that we human beings were intellectually ready for it and at a point where we would be able to begin understanding the biology, biochemistry, and genetics behind evolution.

   All children have to grow up someday—even God’s children. The Genesis 1 story is a child’s story. God’s revelation about biological evolution is a true story that modern adults can finally understand. God said it best himself. “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things (1 Corinthians 13:11). It is clear that “Reality Says, ” the ICR, and Christian fundamentalists in general are still sucking on their creation science/ID baby bottles with Genesis 1 when God wants them to put away such childish things and grow up.

   However, I am not so foolish as to believe that I could ever persuade any Christian fundamentalist away from his baby bottle. They are by nature a stubborn, stiff-necked, and hard-hearted people. Talking to them is like talking to a fence post—useless. Instead, this post and all of my other posts here at the Texas Freedom Network are AIMED at other fellow Christians and nonChristians out there who are undecided about where they should stand on the recent Texas Board of Education issues and concerns. The Christian fundamentalists on the Texas Board of Education and at the ICR would like you to believe that the current science curriculum fight is solely about ALL “Godly People” standing monolithically together in the gap in a brave fight against a mongol horde of atheists, agnostics, and secular humanists. The truth of the matter is that atheists, agnostics, and devoted ideological secular humanists make up only a very tiny percent of the American population. I have seen figures as low as only 2 percent. That is 2 people out of every 100.

   What the Texas Board of Education and the ICR will not tell you is that hundreds of Christian and Jewish denominations representing literally millions upon millions of Christians here in the United States and around the world are on record IN FAVOR OF EVOLUTION. The United Methodist Church, which is the second largest protestant denomination in the United States, is officially on record as being in favor of evolution and sound science. So, as you can see, it is much more a battle between the “milk bottle” baby Christians in the fundamentalist churches and the “grown up adult Christians” in the other denominations. Putting it in Romans 14 terms, it is a battle between the weaker fundamentalist Christians who view ignorance as a holy virtue and the stronger Christians in the other churches who are striving after real truth. Romans 14 gives the stronger brothers and sisters in Christ responsibility for educating the weaker brothers and sisters in Christ. However, as one pastor remarked years ago, Romans 14 never intended for the weaker brothers and sisters to take over dictatorial control of the church and Lord their weakness over the stronger brothers and sisters. To do so would be a perversion of the gospel, but that is precisley what the Texas Board of Education, Religious Right organizations, and assorted Christian fundamentalist organizations are trying to do with this Creation Science/ID/Academic Freedom issue. So, that is what this fight is really about.

   So, I would encourage my fellow strong Christians and any nonChristians who are so inclined to contact your representatives on the Texas Board of Education and voice your strong support for biological evolution and the teaching of sound science in Texas classrooms (minus any dubious “sufficiency vs. insuffiiciency” arguments or so-called “Academic Freedom” clauses, which are little more than attempts to enthrone childish ignorance.

8. TFN says,
   –While more than a thousand religious congregations from a wide variety of faith traditions gathered last weekend to celebrate a more positive relationship between religion and science, the Dallas-based Institute for Creation Research (ICR) wanted no part of it.–

   And you find this surprising? There are some fundies who even reject or ignore intelligent design because they think that implying that god’s word needs scientific support is blasphemous.

   My favorite bible verse is from the homepage of the website for the Creation Science Association for Mid-America —

   “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.” I Timothy 6:20-21 KJV
   — see
   http://im-from-missouri.blogspot.com/2008/08/creationist-outfit-goes-off-deep-end.html

   LOL

   Here is another one from the same webpage —
   “Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;” II Corinthians 10:5, KJV

   Charles said,
   –Over the years, the creation science/ID crowd has attempted to make hay out of the notion that Genesis 1 is necessary for the plan of salvation and that without the historicity of it, Jesus would have had no reason to come and make his sacrifice to have our sins covered with God’s grace. —

   I am really annoyed at the way you Darwinists lump together religious and scientific (or pseudoscientific) criticisms of evolution.

   –I would submit that this is not true and that the mission of Jesus Christ would have remained true and viable even if Genesis 1 had never even existed. —

   That is just your interpretation. Others have other interpretations.

   IMO debating the evolution v. religion issue is pointless. I don’t care how many popes, archbishops, lubavitcher rebbes, gurus, etc. can be cited on either side of the issue. To me it is just a personal thing.

9. Many fundies doubt evolution not because of a belief in Genesis but because they find the scientific arguments for evolution to be unpersuasive. These same fundies generally accept heliocentrism because they find the scientific arguments for it to be persuasive.

10. Larry said,
    “IMO debating the evolution v. religion issue is pointless. I don’t care how many popes, archbishops, lubavitcher rebbes, gurus, etc. can be cited on either side of the issue. To me it is just a personal thing.”

    I feel the same way about gravity. I know a lot of people believe in it, but I’m skeptical. I think it’s a personal thing.

11. Most fundies couldn’t give a coherent definition of what evolution actually is.

12. — I feel the same way about gravity. —

    Another straw man from Ben the troll.

    –Most fundies couldn’t give a coherent definition of what evolution actually is. —

    Most Darwinists couldn’t give a correct definition of intelligent design.

13. Larry, you obviously don’t have a very scientific mind. If you did, you’d be able to refute my Satan-wrote-the-Bible theory.

    You’ve crowed repeatedly about your coevolution “evidence,” and you’ve repeatedly brought up the fact that nobody has refuted you–yet you can’t refute my theory.

    You are a hypocrite.

14. Ben:

    Actually, if I remember this correctly on the Old Red State Rabble blog, Larry Fafarman actually argued that one of the key telltale evidences of ID, made manifest in the physical condition of planet Earth, is that the continent of Africa is in the shape of a human head in right profile. I would like the two of you to add that into your discussion while I sit here on the sidelines and enjoy the show. You are doing great Ben. Keep up the good work.

15. Charles Says:
    — Actually, if I remember this correctly on the Old Red State Rabble blog, Larry Fafarman actually argued that one of the key telltale evidences of ID, made manifest in the physical condition of planet Earth, is that the continent of Africa is in the shape of a human head in right profile. —

    I never, ever said that.

16. Lary, you probably “implied” it.