Monday, meh.

Today is a slow day in an otherwise busy month.  It is about to get really crazy in my world.  The posts will keep coming, don’t worry about that.

In lieu of the recent conversations that I have been having with a few of my readers, in the comment section of A Line of Demarcation,  I am going to post a poem I did concerning Atheism and Evolution.  –Apples and Oranges (of Peaches)  Enjoy! [Also at the bottom of this post].

Also I will be doing more theological polemics in the future so get ready!

Before you read the poem I would like to retract one thing that I said in A Line of Demarcation and clarify others.

One, I retract that I was ever an Atheist.  Sure, I may have rebuke and wounded many Christians for believing in a God and mocked an existence of God.  I may have flaunted an arrogant intellectual swagger.  And yes I might have even crushed my father to contemplative silence, who was the most intelligent and compassionate man I have ever known,  with intellectual banter.  But after what I have witnessed by reading Affable’s comments on what an Atheist truly is and that there is no way to define Atheism except by denying God’s existence with an unproven theory.  The sheer magnitude of faith that it would take to believe in something so destitute and uncertain, I never had that level of faith.  I simple used their rhetoric but in my heart I secretly hoped that I was wrong…and I am glad that I was wrong.

Two, I used the term Neanderthal as a broad brush to paint over all of prehistoric man and since I used a scientific term I should use the actual one.  Neanderthals were not Homo-Sapiens but “Cousins”, meaning we (today’s humans) are not direct descendants.

Three, I still maintain that my original premise is correct.  I will explain it further in future posts.

Four, my claim that evolution is progressing toward perfection may not have been correctly expressed, but that will also be discussed in another post.

I will address all of the questions brought up by Affable and Not A Scientist in the upcoming posts, and from there we well delve further into the Mysteries of Life.  Again, these are all the questions that I have spent the last 25 years asking and these are the answers that have sustained me.  I have scoured the earth for truth and I have placed every question and belief on the chopping block.  I held no question so sacred that I didn’t not seek its answer out in earnest.  This is where I stand today.

I still ask questions and I still seek answers.  I have not subscribed to Christianity in idiocy or gullibility.  I choose Christianity because it was the most logical choice and because it is the only philosophy that offers hope for mankind.  Can I be wrong?  It is possible, but I will die with Hope in my heart and the name of Jesus on my lips.  Because when you hold the Myth (unproven theory) of Evolution against the Myth (a theology disavowed without credible proof) of Christianity there is no comparison, Christianity is by far the better choice.  What will you choose?

Enjoy the Poem!

“We all live in a box; an organic sphere of containment, governed by unseen magistrates…from whence came the box?” Chadwick Alexander Stephens III (CAS III)

Apples and Oranges (of Peaches)

A conundrum, a riddle most unnerving
To consider intelligent disturbing
Of controversial matter(s) forming
An illogical opinion

In conversations not baited
All matter(s) anatomically stated
Correlations of information encased,
In invisible spheres but not of thinking.

Though dissecting the angles (to the nth degree)
Resolved to mitigate the propitiation of thee and me
And defend an ardent and profane theory,
Bare a burden that is unforgiving

Here is the simple complexity of that circular thought
You need must disengage the box
Or concede forever there to rot
Having never answered the initial question

5 thoughts on “Monday, meh.

  1. Greetings Wes,
    Respectfully, please excuse the forthcoming tone of this response.

    I must admit that I am truly disappointed. Though I disagreed with you, I had a good deal of intellectual respect for you until this post, and it disappoints me that you have resorted to such an argument as “I don’t have enough faith not to believe.”

    You are clearly intellectually capable of so much better than such a knowingly sarcastic, dishonest misrepresentation of what I said and what I believe. You dedicated an entire post to advocating against what you believe to be false representations of Christianity which you claim leads to “Christian stigma”, yet you so readily do the same against views different than yours.

    Though I disagree with you, I will make every attempt not to put words in your mouth or misrepresent what you believe in order to try to knock down, dismiss, or otherwise dodge your points, I will address them directly and honestly and I would expect the same from you.
    If I have done so in my prior responses I am willing to retract incorrect comments, please let me know if I have.

    The correct definition of an atheist (which isn’t proper noun – not capitalized, by the way) comes from the root meaning “without god.”
    I will repeat this again until it is understood – that an atheist is simply an individual who does not believe in gods. That’s all an atheist is. That’s the only question that word addresses.
    Anything and everything else they do believe is an entirely separate matter.

    It’s not a matter of denial or active disbelief.
    I also don’t believe that aliens are abducting farmers and performing all manner of humiliating experiments on them. Does this make me a denier? Does this require effort to actively not believe?
    Of course not. I simply don’t believe it because such claims are without proof.

    The existence of God is not “denied through an unproven theory.” I don’t think you honestly believe what you said there, I think you’re simply attempting to be provocative.

    In fact, many if not most Christians accept the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution. Some of the earliest proponents of evolution were Christians trying to inform other Christians that this is something they should pay attention to.

    Something on the order of 97%+ of biologists agree on evolution, yet a significant chunk of those scientists are religious, many Christian. In fact, the head of the Human Genome Project claims to be a born-again Christian.

    How do you explain this if you imply that evolution is the faith of the atheists?

    If you personally feel an individual cannot accept what we learn scientifically and have it be compatible with Christianity, that would be a discussion between you and a Christian who does.

    Continuing on.
    Not only was your claim that evolution is progressing toward perfection not correctly expressed, it was entirely false.
    If you take issue with science, address it honestly. Claiming that evolutionary theory states something that it does not for no other reason than to refute it is the definition of a straw-man argument.

    If you are uninformed or uneducated regarding specific fields of science, I encourage you to learn the basic facts prior to inadvertently misrepresenting them. If your mission to seek truth is as you claim, this should be no problem for you and I am happy to address specific issues to the best of my ability.

    To address your final paragraph, I look forward to learning about your reasons for belief in upcoming apologetic posts; I imagine we’ll get a good dialog going.

    I’ll finish this with restating that evolution is no myth.
    Evolution: changes in allele frequency through successive generations – is a fact, and it’s the best proven field of science we have.

    I’d like to direct both you and readers to http://talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ which is a good place to start if you’re looking for information on how we know evolution is a fact.

    Thank you Wes

    • I replied to this this response last week, but for some reason it didn’t take. I was not dodging conversation, I was partaking in my life and family, which is extremely busy.
      I will respond to your questions over the next few months of posts, so keep checking back. I did go to the website and many more after that, so meaty stuff. Here’s a website I would like for you to check out. http://www.thegoodpersontest.com let me know how you scored.

      I will say that some over your comments are biting at times, I will say it is the nature of conversation. “Intellectual sloth” comment is quite over the top, I get what you are saying, but I think that I can prove it to be a misrepresentation after a few more posts.
      And equating Infinite God to Underdog…really? a cartoon character? I know you are trying to show both the childish level of maturity and absurdity that it takes to believe in a god or God, but that is not even a good representation. I know the exact date, time, and place that Underdog was created. You can not brush God aside so effortlessly.

      Until we meet again.

      • Tests such as those are a bit loaded, don’t you think?

        The example of Underdog was not intended to equate to God, but rather to illustrate that on the basis of special pleadings an equal argument could be made for both the existence of Underdog and of God.

        I absolutely can brush aside claims of gods just as easily as any other claim until the actual existence of a god is somehow substantiated.

      • It was not meant to “spring” anything on you, or being loaded. I think that they ask very honest questions, hard questions to answer but honest ones. I think that those questions are just an important in life to answer as any. I had written twice a response and my computer lost both before I could post them, so I thought that the website would explain it best. I cannot continue in a conversation with someone and not share the Gospel that would be hypocritical. By the way you didn’t tell me how you scored.

        How can you absolutely brush aside God, when 99.999999% of all knowledge is unknown? That is not an arbitrary number, I am using the 13.5 Billion years that you suggest by 8,000 years of consistent recorded history (you could go 10,000 if want, not going to change much) and that is .00000059% (+/-). Are you 100% percent sure that your analysis of the less than one percent is correct and that the other 99% will line up. We as humans only have decipherable and communicative analytic skills for about 50 years of our life, so that is a fraction of that less than one percent. First we have to assimilate the knowledge before us, digest it and regurgitate it so we understand it. Our lives are truly but a wisp of smoke, a vapor and then it is gone. The thought of this humbles me, and I truly know that I know nothing.

        Are you sure that you are not rejecting overwhelming evidence, based on your current perspective? Even if Macro-evolution is true that still doesn’t take God out of the picture…it doesn’t explain how we got here. And according to the Head of the Genome Project (you were right, he is a Christian), evolution doesn’t conflict with the “notion” of God. I still don’t subscribe to the whole theory of evolution, but that is for a latter post. So what is the payoff for not believing, what is your end game? Why would you not believe in an infinite, omniscient, omnipresent, and all-powerful God? And what substantiated proof are you looking for? Are you also an existentialist?

        Maybe the question of how did we get here is irrelevant. As well as the question of where are we going. Is our existence, our extremely brief existence, worth contemplating? The absolute fragility of life is frightening, one wrong step and you may no longer exists. What of family? What of love? What of hope? Why is there a desire to know? C.S. Lewis said, “If mans hunger proves he inhabits a world where food exists, my desire for Paradise is a good indication it exists.” What happens once we exhaust the earth for evidence that we are the product of Chaos? Transpermia only offers us the exact same questions, but in the expanse of space. Science may offer some answers to what we are made of or how we exist but the why question, it has not been answered, and I don’t think science can answer it. That fact that I can ask the question means that there is an answer. We live a world bound by laws, laws that are constant and cannot be broken. 2+2=4, Gravity, Light/Dark, Inertia, buoyancy, cause/effect, etc… The laws of physics do not stop at what is visible; the invisible and immeasurable are just as real and tangible.
        Maybe the question of how did we get here is irrelevant. As well as the question of where are we going. Is our existence, our extremely brief existence, worth contemplating? The absolute fragility of life is frightening, one wrong step and you may no longer exists. What of family? What of love? What of hope? Why is there a desire to know? C.S. Lewis said, “If mans hunger proves he inhabits a world where food exists, my desire for Paradise is a good indication it exists.” What happens once we exhaust the earth for evidence that we are the product of Chaos? Transpermia only offers us the exact same questions, but in the expanse of space. Science may offer some answers to what we are made of or how we exist but the why question, it has not been answered, and I don’t think science can answer it. That fact that I can ask the question means that there is an answer. We live a world bound by laws, laws that are constant and cannot be broken. 2+2=4, Gravity, Light/Dark, Inertia, buoyancy, cause/effect, etc… The laws of physics do not stop at what is visible; the invisible and immeasurable are just as real and tangible.

        Here is some food for thought from C.S. Lewis, a former Atheist who converted to Christianity. I realize that his declaration of being an atheist means nothing to you, but I thought you should know.
        “The theory that thought is merely a movement in the brain is, in my opinion, nonsense; for if so, that theory itself would be merely a movement, an event among atoms, which may have speed and direction but of which it would be meaningless to use the words ‘true’ or ‘false’.”

        “My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such a violent reaction against it?… Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too–for the argument depended on saying the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies. Thus, in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist – in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless – I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality – namely my idea of justice – was full of sense. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never have known it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.”

        “If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents – the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else’s. But if their thoughts – i.e., Materialism and Astronomy – are mere accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It’s like expecting the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.”

        These will be some on my last thoughts on this thread, I must move on, but I am sure that there will be more to comment on soon. I look forward to your responses.

  2. Websites such as those are designed only to tell the viewer “you are going to burn in hell.” Regardless of the answers given, everyone fails. Obviously you’re aware of this, why bother asking me how I scored?
    Is this supposed to have some kind of emotional impact?
    I understand your intention is to share the Gospel, but do you really think I haven’t heard it?

    To be fair you don’t know me, so you wouldn’t know where I’m coming from. I was a God-fearing, Jesus-loving, Bible-believing born-again Christian nearly all of my life – until several years ago. I may get into my deconversion another time, but suffice it to say I’m well versed in matters of scripture.

    —————-

    Where in the world are these facts and figures coming from? How can you quantify knowledge known in relation to unknown? Please stop pulling things out of thin air.

    None of my previous comments delved into any timelines, but let me clear this up for the sake of scientific accuracy. Our universe has been accurately measured to the age of 13.7+ billion years. Our solar system (including Earth) has been incredibly accurately measured to the age of 4.5 billion years, give or take a million years. As for recorded human history, cave drawings date back tens of thousands of years. The Chinese may have been writing as early as 8,000 years ago.

    Do we know everything? Of course not, but we certainly know a lot more than you seem to think we do.

    —————-

    No. What evidence do you mean?
    Isn’t that exactly what you’re doing? Rejecting overwhelming evidence because of your perspective of Biblical-literalism?
    You are correct in that evolution being true does not remove gods from the picture, why would it? Evolution is a biological science that explains the diversity and development of living organisms, it doesn’t address theological questions.

    The question isn’t why I would not believe, the correct question is why WOULD I believe in the god you describe or any other god? What proof are you offering? The burden of proof is yours…

    I might generally fall into a definition of existentialism, though I hesitate to label myself as such as it varies from philosopher to philosopher.

    I don’t get what you mean by end-game or payoff. My goal is to understand reality and for my beliefs to align with it as best we know it. I care about what is true.

    —————-

    Science does explain the how’s, and you are correct in that it doesn’t explain the why’s. It isn’t meant to. We don’t even know that asking the why’s has any real relevance or meaning. Just because you can formulate a question doesn’t mean it’s deserving of an answer, or that it even has one.

    I am of course familiar with CS Lewis and very well aware of his style of apologetics. Aside from his scientific misrepresentations, he piles assertions on top of assertions and is quite fond of making arguments of analogy, which are most effective on an uncritical audience. His creative rehashings are quite unconvincing and are really only intended to provide some kind of substantiation to those who already believe.
    I won’t bother addressing the chunks you’ve pasted in here as his works have been thoroughly refuted many times over.

    Lewis claims to have converted to Christianity in his teenage years, though if he spent his teenage years trying to formulate an argument against God, I’d argue he probably already believed in God. He seems to claim we should believe because he can’t think of a reason not to believe, rather than providing any proof of what he claims to be true.
    To borrow an analogy: I don’t spend any time worrying about ways to prove UFOs don’t exist.
    If you want me to believe give me data, not rhetoric.

Comments, Thoughts, or Suggestions?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s