|
Evolution and Atheism Aren’t Married Organized
religion has several “sacred cows”, science has one also that answers to the
name “evolution”. Aren’t the rest of us lucky that we have just a few
choices to choose between without incurring the wrath of the “enforcers” of
these sacred cow proponents? Well, I want to clear my throat and muster my
courage by replying with my own eight-word salvo. Evolution and Atheism aren’t
married to each other! Yes
it is true that a large majority of skeptics and scientist believe in the
respected position of evolution. But there are several scientists who don’t
fully hold to evolutional theory, and certainly not to creationism folly.
These are outside of the box thinkers that respect scientific methods.
They understand that evolution is just a theory; I won’t insult those who have
forgotten what the definition of what a theory is. Christian
fence straddling,
Christianity
is married to creationism
As I earlier stated, evolution and atheism aren’t married, but Christianity and creationism should be! I could never understand the “cross-over” of those claiming Christianity and evolution views in unison together. Back then, I could not accept them as sincere because it just seemed to me that these guys were just compromisers. Most I suppose would find justification by referring to the “gap theory” which they would derive from the book of Genesis. I looked at these guys as already having “one foot out of the door” of Christianity. I suppose that many holding this thought later took the second foot out and left the Christian myth altogether. As to motives, I want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I thought that they wanted the affirmation of science so that they could appear as clever and respectable in society. I
don’t know of any atheist that holds to creationism. This would have to be an
utter impossibility, wouldn’t it? Atheists believe in logic, reason, and the
scientific method. Christians are interested in logic, reason, and the
scientific method but that is as far as they go, just lip-service! Facts are
facts and Christians cannot claim to follow logic and reason and still profess
to claim that the Bible is the word of God.
Science
has proven that the earth is much greater than 6,000 years old. Creationism is
an utterly absurd position to claim. I
suspect that this is what those who hold to anything like the “Genesis gap
theory” are trying to diplomatically say without opening their mouths. With
this said, I suppose that the Christian scientists that point out the flaws in
evolutionary theory aren’t of the fundamentalist persuasion but rather the
philosophical Christian types. I
really don’t care what they believe concerning religion. I find it odd that
they would step into the scientific ring with atheists holding a Bible. Now, if
they offered anything other than the so- called Intelligent Design theory or
creationism story maybe some might be willing to lend their ear to what they
have to say. Still, whatever they say while holding a Bible makes them difficult
to listen to. What they say is easy for the faithful flock to hear, but sheep
often believe what they are told to believe without question anyway. Us
de-converted souls can feed ourselves
A
point that many haven’t considered is that almost all of us who have
de-converted have been well schooled in creationism and the so-called
Intelligent Design theories. Most of us that attended Bible colleges or
universities have also had a steady diet of anti-evolution instruction fed to
us. We made it out of Christian
bondage, and respect evolutionary theory but don’t have this warm and fuzzy
feeling about it. Removing an obstacle in the de-conversion path I
suspect, that these anti-evolution instructions serve as a rather large obstacle
in the path out of Christian bondage for many considering leaving the faith.
Why, because of the perception that Evolution and Atheism are married to each
other. Why should any reasonable skeptic insist that they should be?
Doesn’t that defy the spirit within those that have de-converted? If
you left Christianity by means of logic and reason, this means (better yet
proves) that you have learned to question things. Isn’t that where science
begins, in the quest for truth? Looking at the problem with Hegel’s Dialectic in mind People
need to be acquainted with Hegel’s Dialectic; you remember it as thesis versus
anti-thesis producing the synthesis. Synthesis and anti-thesis do not annihilate
each other, they just separately coexist. Hegel’s Dialectic can be in place
either incidentally or on purpose. Sometimes
the synthesis produces wonderful results, other times the synthesis produces
stagnation and is just a spectacle for those enthused by conflict.
Yes, some knuckleheads enjoy conflict and being ineffective.
The bigger picture is that Evolution, Creationism, Christianity, and
Atheism all desire adherents to follow them.
All of the above have their own sales and marketing strategy. I have
problems with the sales and marketing strategy of some atheist, Evolution and
Atheism shouldn’t be packaged together! For
an example, the respected American Atheist website ran a headline during the
holiday season that went something like this: “Ron Paul Doesn’t Accept
Evolution” . It made me think,
first I was irritated and said so what! I have observed Ron Paul’s voting
record through his career, I challenge anyone to present somebody with a more
consistent voting record within the last 200 years of American history when you
judge by the intent of upholding constitutional principles.
The man is amazing if the constitution is important to you when you vote.
There are religious atheists like myself who don’t hold to creationism
but are reluctant to identify themselves as a card-carrying evolutionist.
Perhaps it was a clever headline to lure his followers to visit an
atheist website. I resent the
implication that evolution is the absolute final word in science. Doing your own research and those thatFeel the need to misrepresent I
could give you several names and websites to alternative viewpoints. I think
that you should dig for them yourself; I don’t want you to be distracted away
from the point that I am making! When I read what others have said about these
men, I have to question the reading comprehension skills of those making
comments. They misrepresent the viewpoints that the author has expressed and I
smell a rat! The tactics that they
use is all the more reason to explore the views that they have expressed.
History has shown that great ideas are often ridiculed prior to common
acceptance. If the expressed idea is weak, then logic and reason alone should be
able to put the idea down! It
shouldn’t be important to you what I believe on the subject. The real issue is
freedom of thought and expression. Pressuring scientists to observe the party
line on evolution inhibits the potential of greater understanding. It is almost
the same phenomena as when you question Christian dogma within a fundamentalist
university. Both schools of these disciplines exert pressure upon those within
to stay within the lines. Challenge this and you can easily find your ass will
be kicked to the curb as a lesson. This
isn’t healthy and suggests an agenda. Limits in following important personalities I
have great respect for those well-known atheists that are better known for their
scientific viewpoints. They command
respect and I am inclined to immediately come on board due to their acumen. But,
I have learned my lesson in following Jesus like I once did. That lesson is to
not be so hasty in asserting belief in something due to personalities alone. Scientific
views are important, but how a laymen views a scientific question shouldn’t
prevent someone from accepting atheism. Most atheists will follow a certain path
of inquiry, while others approach it differently in their pursuit of facts.
Personally, I still have many questions and practice the right to explore
other scientific possibilities when discussing evolution. I strongly believe in
the scientific method, it is the interpretation of data that concerns me. Science
should be a battleground in establishing facts from fiction. If critics have
valid viewpoints, then let us not be so quick to shrug what they say!
Let us watch the process unfold like a spectator does when watching a
sporting event, we won’t know the outcome until the game ends. Why not say, up
until this time this is the best explanation of whatever scientific viewpoint
that we have. This I can accept and
respect! When a certain viewpoint
has sufficiently put down its critics then it has earned the right to reign.
Atheism has earned that right to reign, while evolution is still struggling to
reach that pinnacle. The end of atheism? A
hypothetical question needs to be asked here to those that insist upon evolution
and atheism being married. That question is, If someone steps up with a stronger
scientific accomplishment in the future, then would the break-up of this
marriage be the end of atheism? Doesn't it stand to reason that if they both
stand together, then they would also fall together? Closing thoughts Human
nature being what it is will see to it that some people feel the need to
straighten out this exminister. Maybe
we will always disagree upon how we approach things, but isn’t great that we
live with the freedom to do so? Spare yourself the effort of trying to convince
me of your viewpoint on creationism or evolution. I enjoy the process of
thinking as much as I do the results of it. I have a rather large library and
have read or have access to many of those that you might use to try to convince
me with. I am always open to enlightenment and do welcome your opinions if you
have something significant to say. I probably won’t respond to the diatribes I
expect to get for this, but I am interested in your well thought out opinions on
the subject matter that I have addressed with this article. Brian
Worley Exminister.org February
21, 2008 All rights reserved.
Since
I was challenged and ridiculed by some about evolution, I have placed several
links below for your viewing consideration. I asked the simple question
"Can anyone name a challenging viewpoint that isn't Theistic in nature like
the so called Intelligent Design or creationism ? Nobody was able to mention any
scientific alternatives! My main purpose in writing this was to remove an
obstacle in the path to de-conversion that some Christians encounter when
considering atheism. Evolution explains many things, but in my mind, evolution
as a scientific theory has some problems beginning with the Big Bang. Some might
accuse me of not believing in evolution, but I do and I am not afraid to express
my reluctance to question certain aspects of it! I am not a scientist, these men
are with the exception of the most interesting Laura Lee website. If someone
wants to challenge them, it then becomes your battle.
The Top 30 Problems with the Big Bang by Tom Van Flandern, Metaresearch.org
Biographical Sketch of Tom Van Flandern,
Laura Lee audio interview withTom Van Flandern
A fair review of Vine Deloria Jr.'s great book, Evolution, Creationism, and Other Modern Myths: A Critical Inquiry! The best that I have read on the subject! http://www.lauralee.com/deloria.htm
An Open Letter to the Scientific Community The letter is a brief letter that openly questions the big bang theory. Look at all of those that have signed this letter! |