Friday, November 12, 2010

faith and reason

Posted a comment on Darlene Egelhoff's blog

Wonderful blog post Darlene! I studied physics at Carnegie Mellon University (before my mental illness struck) and I *love* science. The great lie of the so-called New Atheists (people like the insufferably arrogant and condescending Richard Dawkins!) is that one must reject theism to be accepted as a rational thinker, to be a scientist. This is a ridiculous false dichotomy and it’s so sad so many young students are being indoctrinated into a binary view of epistemology where one must either reject reason and the modern world or embrace theism. There is nothing new under the sun, as Scripture says, and none of these “new” arguments are new at all. We Christians can use science and engage in scientific research without compromising our faith. As you echoed God gave us a mind to explore, to question, to ponder! Praise God. I personally do not see enough evidence for macro evolution, but as you said even if that is true it should not bother one who has built their faith on the firm bedrock of faith in Christ the King of Kings and Lord of Lords! All of creation testifies to the handiwork of the Creator and I’ve truly seen that manifested in my intellectual inquiries into the natural world. Let us not shrink back into the corner in the realm of public discourse, whether it be a Sunday school class, a university classroom or a discussion group with our closest friends, and be afraid to boldly proclaim that we are thinking Christians! Virtually all of Western science has been laid down by people who expressed Judeo-Christian faith. Let us remind students that perhaps the greatest intellect in history, Isaac Newton, was a fervent follow of our Lord Jesus Christ!

1 comment:

  1. I have instructed physics for more than 30 years and I WAS an evangelical Christian but now I am an atheist (scientific pantheist)

    I even studied in seminary for a while but ultimately I feel as Einstein did. I would have written what you wrote about binary epistimology 40 years ago, much soul searching and a huge amount of reading in all relevant areas long ago convinced me that it there is a god then he is an obscene sadist.

    Nature is red of tooth and claw, energy goes up the food chain almost always associated with suffering, if that is the "intelligent design" then that intelligence is the same cruel old testament god that Jesus was devoted to.

    This is from Walter Issacson's new biography of Einstein, who despite often referring god took strong exception to anyone who tried to use his name to promote religion.

    Quote 1917 a letter to an associate who was trying to get him to promote religious Judaism.

    "I see that it is writen that god punishes his children for their foolishness, for which he haas only himself to blame. THEREFORE the only excuse for god would be his NON-existence."

    I know the bible from ene to end I also am certain as I ever am that that collection of writings is not even vaguely true as a historical accounting.

    Here a video of one of the worlds foremost biblical scholars who points out that when you take the manuscripts that are the source of the New Testament there are more differences in them than there are words in the NT.
    Worse the English translations are among the worst compared to those in other languages.

    If you do not see enough evidence for macro evolution you are suffering from what is called "commitment bias" in neuro science, reading only what confirms your beliefs.

    Have you read Dawkins "Greatest Show On Earth" in which he clearly and eloquently lays out the evidence.

    Ohh and as for Issac Newton he was one of the single meanest, nastiest people you might meet. He was also very deeply involved in Alchemy, Numerology and despite his brilliance was not above faking results. His analysis of the speed of sound in the Pricipia itself is fudged.

    He was vain arrogant and his sanity was dicy.
    He was also brilliant and insightful as a youth, but after that initial brilliance he was a vindictive, insecure, and religious, but his religion bears little resembance to what you would consider Christitanity today.


Please leave a comment. I appreciate your feedback. Thanks!

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain