4: Do You Have a Better Idea?

Well? you're wondering. Do I?

I've been going on and on about how Evolution is wrong, people are being biased, people aren't looking into things, etc. etc. BUT. The real question is, DO I HAVE A BETTER IDEA?

Criticism without ideas for change is basically just nagging. So, unless I have a better idea of what to do with all this, I am the official most annoying Blog-Nagger out there.

But I DO have a better idea.

(Which just makes me the most annoying Blogger out there.)

Here are my ideas:
1. Stop seeing the issue as Bible vs. Science. They don't contradict. Evolutionary naturalists like to portray ALL Christians as "Genesis liberalists who reject the evidence of science for purely religious reasons". Not true. The Bible and good Science don't contradict.

I know some of your are saying, that the Bible says the world is flat, it says the sun rises, it says a rabbit chews cud. Well, yes, it does say that. But that's because the Bible was written in phenomonological (fih-NOH-min-uh-LOH-jih-cal) language, meaning it says things how it looks to us, not how it actually is. It's kind of a form of poetry almost.

2. Stop relying on the "blind watchmaker thesis". Having the world just suddenly "happen" or evolve from a single-celled organism is like trying to make a watch while blindfolded. It's pretty much impossible. All the tiny, tiny pieces have to mesh perfectly, and doing that blindfolded would be inconcievable.

3. Realize the philosophical bias in today's society. Most people nowadays think that "good science" BEGINS with the assumption that there is no God. Without even testing this theory, without opening any other options.

I'm just going to throw this out there: scientists are scard. That's why they make sure to define their terms so that naturalism is true by definition.

Why are they scared? Because their theories are not as sound as they like to make people think.

So, yes. I have a better idea. Those are some ideas, but my main idea is, as always this:

OPEN YOUR EYES.

I am trying to open mine. I research Evolution AND Creation both with an open mind, and I still come to these same conclusions. There are stories of countless Evolutionists who have tried to prove the theory, but instead realized it's holes and improbabilities.

Whether you are a Christian or and Evolutionist, or both, as some claim to be, don't defend your belief without first looking into it. Blind faith is silly. Check your facts, do your research, open your eyes.

3: Faith vs. Reason

This is possibly my "favorite" mistake in Creation vs. Evolution. All kinds of people, Creationists, as well as Evolutionists, like to paint this debate as "Faith vs. Reason". Science on one side, fantasy on the other. Fact on one side, wishful thinking on the other. Reason on one side, faith on the other. Well, here's something that might surprise you:

Faith and reason are not opposites.

Or, better put, faith and reason do not contradict each other.

In TV debates, newspaper articles, etc., people like to write off Creation by saying it's just faith. No reason involved. Just blind faith. Here's another something that might surprise you:

God does not even WANT us to have blind faith.

God is a very reasonable, logical god! He doesn't want us to follow him blindly. He doesn't want us to take everything every preacher says. He doesn't want us to take in the Bible without looking into it, testing it, questioning it. God thinks that faith and reason should go hand in hand!

Why have faith in something if reason says otherwise? It doesn't make sense, and our God is a VERY sensical God!

Evolutionists like to make God out to be like a grown-up version of Santa Claus. Santa makes little kids feel safe, watched, and loved by someone bigger than just their own family circle. The child has faith, and that's all that matters to him.

As the child gets older and is exposed to more ideas and opinions, he will be told that Santa isn't real. The child will, at first, think this is a horrible lie and refuse to look into it further. As the child gets older, he will probably preform a little expirement and stay up to see if Santa comes.

When the child sees his parents sneaking gifts under the tree, he will be faced with two options: one, stick with faith and continue to believe something he knows is a lie, or two, go with reason and give up his faulty belief.

If the child choses to believe in Santa despite what he has seen, people will probably put up with him, maybe even think he is cute, but they will not take him seriously. If he continues to believe in Santa into adulthood, he will probably be labeled insane.

So, is the God of the Bible like Santa Claus? Just a cute little myth that one must rely on faith to believe? One can defend a myth by saying that it gives comfort, and can even be morally and socially helpful if kept in its place. Even athiests worry about what will happen to society if religion disappears completely. Christians can even buy the tolerance of agnostics by using the "faith escape".

So, for all scientific and intellegent purposes, Christianity is classified as a "higher supersition", which is basically an irrational belief that's relatively respected in society.

But all this isn't true. Faith and reason are not opposites, they are not mutually exclusive, and they do not contradict each other.

I know what you're thinking: "Easy to say. Show me. Prove it."

Okay. I will.

Keep reading, because that's just what I intend to do. I refuse to be one of the Christians who believes in God simply because it's what they were always taught, it makse them feel better, and they don't want to explore other options. I refuse to take what I've always been given simply BECAUSE it's what I've always been given. I refuse to believe in God only because it makes me feel better about my life. God gave me a brain, he gave me resources to explore, and theories that need to be looked into.

I firmly and honestly believe that God is happiest when we challenge him, look into things for ourselves, test him. Wanna know why?

Because God isn't scared.

God has nothing to be afraid of.

God is the truth, so what IS there to be afraid of?

Why should we refuse to test God because we're afraid he won't stand up to it? If we're afraid to look too hard, if we're afraid we'll disprove God, why are we still believing in him? If God is a big phoney, DON'T YOU WANT TO KNOW?

That's why this series is not just for Evolutionists. It's for Creationists, too. Don't be afraid to test God. Don't be afraid to look into the Bible, asked the hard questions, tear apart Jesus's logic.

Because faith and reason are not opposites.

2: Caring vs. Detached God

I apologize for posting so late. I was on vacation and I didn't have my notes with me. Yes, I actually outline my Carpe Noctem posts. Yes, I am a nerd.

Today I'm going to be talking about Common Mistake Number Two: exchanging the Caring God for the Detached God.

One way that people like to fit Evolution and Creation together is by employing this method. They suggest that maybe God created the laws of nature, and then just kind of left things to their own. That isn't true. God created the laws, yes, but he didn't just retire after that. He's alive and doing things here and now. God is a Caring God.

The "Detached God" theory is called "deism".

The "Caring God" theory is called "theism".

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe both terms came from the Greek. "Deism" coming from the word "deos" and "theism" coming from the word "theos", meaning "god".

This mistake may seem like a fairly minor one because the post isn't as large as some others have been. However, the difference between a Detached God and a Caring God is infinite. Just think about it.

I'm not trying to convince you to become a Christian. I'm not trying to show you that Evolution is wrong (yet :)). This part of my series is just explaining three common mistakes made by both Evolutionists and Creationists. I really hope you'll stick around for the "meat" of this whole series.

Coming up:

July 18: The Opposites Myth
July 25: Owning the Microphone
August 1: Truth (not part of the Evolution series)

**New Series Begins!

Logic:
August 8: Selective Use of Evidence
August 15: Appealing to Authority

Thanks for reading!

1: A Definition Disaster

Sorry I didn't post yesterday like I was supposed to. It was the Fourth of July, you know, and things were really busy. I'm posting now, though, so yay.

This is the beginning of my first series of posts, Myths (or Mistakes) About Evolution. There are probably quite a few, but I will only be dealing with four.

The first mistake is getting mixed up in the definitions of Evolution. I covered this a little in my last post.

According to the National Association of Biology Teachers, the definition of Evolution is this: "An unsupervized, impersonal, unpredictable, and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historal contingencies and changing environments."

Basically, that definition says that life began as an unguided fluke and evolved into all the beings we have today by chance, strategic inheritance of helpful traits, and changing environments.

Some people, even Christians try to believe in both Evolution and creation by relying on different definitions. Some Christians, fairly well-educated Christians, say that they are Creationists as well as Evolutionists. They do not realize how utterly incompatible the two beliefs are, and one of the ways they confuse themselves is by getting mixed up with the definitions of Evolution. Some Evolutionists will even let such people make that mistake, not bothering to correct them.

Now, if the definition of Evolution were something like "a gradual process of God-guided creation", that might be something worth looking into. Unfortunately, that is not how the intellectual elite of today's society define Evolution.

In short, this post is saying, "Watch out. Check your defintions before agreeing with something." Evolution-believing scientists will go out of their way to make Evolution appeal to people, sometimes even bending the facts and definitions. If they think feeding you a slightly (or extremely) altertered definition of Evolution will make you a believer, they will do it.

I'm certainly not saying that all scientists are scamming little hypocrites. Not at all. I'm not even saying that all EVOLUTION-BELIEVING scientists are scamming little hypocrites. I'm just saying be careful. Don't take things without at least thinking them through. I'm not suggesting you Google and look up every piece of information you come across, but DO use your good sense.

If someone tells you the word gullible isn't in the dictionary, just laugh, okay? If someone tells you that you can be an Evolutionist and stil retain your Christian faith, feel free to laugh at that as well.

Because sorry, folks, that's just not happening.

Before I end this post, I want to get into one more thing: creation itself.

Now, I've (obviously) read the Bible's version of creation in Genesis, and I, too, have noticed that God creates light before he creates the sun.

Don't ask me! I don't know how that's possible! Who knows how literal the creation is supposed to be taken?

I don't.

And some people argue that God couldn't have created the whole universe in SIX DAYS.

My answer is, well, seeing how he's GOD and all, I guess he could if he wanted to.

But, maybe he didn't. Maybe that part of Genesis is figurative. Maybe God counted days differently than we do. But, here's the bottom line when it comes to stuff like that:

It doesn't really matter.

Yes, I wonder. Yes, I'm curious. I don't know how literally that part of the Bible is to be taken. We can't exactly waltz up to Moses and ask him.

But, if you're just arguing over HOW LONG it took God to make the universe, who cares? The important thing about that is that he did, that it wasn't just an accident.

I know I haven't given evidence for or against Evolution or Creation yet, but, all in good time. I want to do this series the right way, and that means taking things one step at a time. It's important to start with a good foundation and then build on that.

I think all of us, Evolutionists and Creationists alike, agree on that, don't we?

And that's what this series is all about: starting with a foundation of solid facts, and exploring the world of true science from there. Thanks for reading, and I hope you stick around for the next chapter in this series, Caring vs. Detatched God.