In a discussion with a work mate, I wanted to illustrate a point in a discussion about one of our projects, and referred to a TV program that discussed how ancient people's mistaken interpretations of fossils lead to the 'invention' of what we now understand as mythical monsters. For example, the unicorn, cyclops, etc. could have been misinterpretations of fossil skulls, explained with reference to known creatures (such as the horse).
My colleague replied something like: "yeah, just like in the Bible, where ancient people who didn't know as much as we do tried to make sense of the world".
We went on to discusss that comment: he thought that the Bible as a whole was an ancient text that simply, but mistakenly, reflected a cultural survival mechanism for the Jews and that the creation story was nothing more than representative of the ignorance of the period.
Then we went on to questions as to how we now know things: evolution, of course, was the basis of his belief, and the Bible has nothing to say to us now, in his view.
A typical example of (1) how any conversation touching on the 'natural' world can lead to the Bible. Then its an easy route to discuss 'beliefs' and who we are before God (taken in appropriate steps, of course); (2) that a belief in 'evolution' as having happened, was not a 'side issue' as many SADists (Sydney Anglican Diocese mainliners) insist, but is fundamental in this fellow's world view; and (3) belief in evolution ruled out the Bible's message in toto.
Now, this fellow is not an unusually perceptive or widely read individual: he's an ordinary educated professional. But he makes the logical connection that SADists can't! He's in line with Paul in Romans (1:20ff) and sees a single line of reality running from what he takes to be the 'real world' and the world of belief.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
Yes, the subject is there in the heart of the atheists. Darwinism is the fortress within which they have taken their defence.
It is amazing how theistic evolutionists attempt to win the atheists but offer them a god who is the reason why they reject any notion of a Creator. The atheists have have been sold an interpretation of origins which is a ruthless process of death and struggle with survival only of the fittest. They will have nothing to do with a god who uses such a process of creation - and rightly so!
The subject is being aired by David Palmer on the your.sydney anglican.net forum page who seems genuinely keen to redress the attacks of atheists. He asked for help and some of the usual suspects have come on being as much help as an ashtray on a motorbike. They accuse us of being rude but they were the first to be rude and still are.
In another segment of the Anglican site Sandy Grant struggles with failed evangelism techniques and ponders how things will go with the Connect 09 (or should it be Connect 99?) strategy for the Sydney Anglican Diocese. One clergymen comments on the Maroubra/Botany churches' attempt to minister to kids - you know to get to the parents! This has been done to death for many years. When are those contacts going to lead to something substantial? Child face painting as a ministry strategy really makes me cringe. What on earth is the church doing with such an evangelistic endeavour which is so far removed from evangelism in the New Testament? Its just a couple of hops away from bringing clowns into the church with their brightly coloured painted faces to amuse and entertain with some message thrown in to give some Christian flavour to it all! Surely the public will come to see clowns eh? This was done in England about fifteen years ago by a clergyman. The church has probably closed its doors in death by now.
Christians need to engage with the public - atheists and all. We have the answers to life, we have the Words of Life. There are solutions to make Connect 09 something of a success but I don't want to offer them just yet. If I had some access to some Diocesan funds, if I had access to someone of influence to Standing Committee I could show a means to engage with non believers and, Oh yes! throw in a few faithful men and women who will constantly be in pray to our Lord about their ministry and it will happen. It is, I am confident, the Lord's will to bless this means.
Neil Moore
Eric thank you for your provocative article.
Neil I do a little blogging on a US Christian site which attracts more atheists, and compromisers than Bible believing Christians.
The challenge has been put to evolutionists over and over to propose a laboratory experiment to 'prove' microbe-to-man evolution. The few replies have been meaningless chatter. They cry- evolution is a fact of science and only lunatics and fringe-dwellers disagree-then show us how it can be proved they are asked over and over! Alas they have but resorted to more babble with not one experiment suggested.
On this site Sydney Anglicam compromisers have been oft asked to supply Scriptural texts which support the crazy idea that God used evolution. Silence. At least unlike the yanks they have refrained from writing pages of nonsense on this point. Much nonesnse has been written by some of them but they ain't stupid, well knowing Scripture does not support their dangerous extra-Biblical view.
Neil I liked your comment regarding how the T/E's attempt to win athiests over,by promoting a God who used evolution! But my atheistic friends are well aware that the very idea of evolution does away with idea of God or any need of a god. The ex-athiests I know who are now Christian say when they came too understand that evolution was a belief, not proven fact, their minds became open to consider the alternative view: that the creator God of the Bible spoke and it happened, He needing neither time or chance. One said to me something like-how could a Christian imagine that an all powerful and loving God would use such an inneficient and murderous system as evolution? How indeed.
Keep up the God work.
It's good to see you are still active Warwick.
That which Atheists and T/Es point to as evidence of evolution in action is really just variation whithin a species. It is not additional information occurring but so often a loss of information.
Their claiming of the variation as evolution to higher order is like seeing a man outside Sydney Town Hall walking in a westerly direction and you say "Ha, he is going to Perth!" You then head off home failing to see that he was only going to KFC at the cnr of George and Bathurst Sts, Sydney.
Neil Moore
Theistic evolutionists trying to win over atheistic evolution are like Chamberlain trying to win over Hitler. Chamberlain thought that he could appease Hitler by handing over Czechoslovakia. But when Hitler took that over, he also aquired the massive Skoda industrial works that strengthened him immensely (e.g. using Czech-made tanks).
Modern theistic evolutionists think that by conceding matters of real-world history and science to atheists, they might be won over. But in reality, they have immensely strengthened their hands by turning such powerful armament over to them. And like Hitler, why should atheists make any concessions when the enemy is displaying such craven weakness?
In reality, the concessions are on the churchian side. Most recently, Howard van Till of Calvin College, who argued for decades that evolution was no threat to Chrsitianity. But after retirement, he showed his true colours (which blind Freddy's deaf guide dog could have discerned) by abandoning any pretence of believing in any supernatural God. See The New Theology.
A friend tells me of his outreach to the public using a Creationist approach as a starter. He says he has some terrific conversations with people. Apparently, at Strathfield late last year a young woman who said she was an atheist and a doctor sat down and talked with him in a public place for more than an hour. He said the woman was doing more intensive listening than speaking and went away seriously considering all that was discussed.
He said that was only one of several similar instances. It confirms for me that a Creationist intro is the way to go for evangelism. Obviously, not everyone requires the same approach but it sure seems a great ground breaker.
Neil Moore
Thanks for the information, Ktisophilos. I wonder how many Sydney Anglican Diocese (SAD) people have been influenced by Howard van Till and are they on the same path?
Neil Moore
Unicorns were made up from misinterpreting fossils? Pretty sure it was either skeletons (as opposed to fossils) or washed-up Narwhal horns.
And aren't there unicorns and other "mythical beasts" in the bible?
Post a Comment