Search This Blog

Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Why do I do this, anyway?

...So as blogging resumes, I first had to ask myself why I wanted to do this? The answer was that doing this blog is in keeping with my worldview. I am a Christian, became at a later age after I had become both a husband and a father. Perhaps I would have been a missionary if things had gone differently? In any event, I am true to my worldview as a Christian. I provide for my family and teach them Biblical ways. I live those Biblical ways in front of them so they might follow my example. I give both time and money to the cause of Christ. I tell others about my faith. I believe in what the Bible says and make the effort to adhere to those precepts found within. I do so imperfectly at times, yet I do make a renewed effort each day and hour to do my best to be what I am, a Christian.

What does this mean? It means that I am like many others, nothing special, but my life sometimes reveals the difference. I didn't have relations with my wife until we were married. I remain faithful to her. I speak like I belong to God, act like it, vote like it, think like it. This blog is another way for me to share my Christian faith and worldview with others. Therefore I have come back! I am being true to who I am.

I don't believe most atheistic evolutionists are true to their cause, by the way. They often talk a good game, yet they live by a hodge-podge of both humanistic and Christian rules. It makes me wonder, really, what a true atheistic evolutionist ought to be. I suppose I should blog on that next, since I really don't remember what particular point we were stuck on in the Creation debate now. Perhaps commenters will remind me? Meanwhile, stay tuned for my post about the Ethical Atheistic Evolutionist!

3 comments:

Lava said...

I don't believe most atheistic evolutionists are true to their cause, by the way. They often talk a good game, yet they live by a hodge-podge of both humanistic and Christian rules.

What? Example please.

cranky old fart said...

"I don't believe most atheistic evolutionists are true to their cause, by the way."

What "cause" is that?

Anonymous said...

I was beginning to think you were stuck under something heavy.

"I really don't remember what particular point we were stuck on in the Creation debate now. Perhaps commenters will remind me?"

If by this you mean the number of points you've abandoned when you could no longer support your stance, the list is really quite long and it would take too much out of my day to compile them all. Your blog does have a good archiving feature in the left sidebar, where you can find all these.

For the moment, here is a brief rundown of recent open questions:

1. You recently used evidence of ice cores going back something like 800,000 years and tree rings going back over 10,000 years in order to back up a certain position on global warming that would be insupportable given only the written records of the last two centuries that are available to us. When I drew your attention to the fact that this was incompatible with your YEC beliefs, you pretended to misunderstand the problem for a while, but then endeavored to show how ice cores and tree rings actually indicate a young Earth.

So you posted an opening argument that did not show such a thing about ice cores. The "opening argument" was not followed by any subsequent argument.

Are you going to finish this argument, or are you content to admit that ice cores and tree rings indicate a world older than 6,000 years?


2. Your larger argument about global warming - that it doesn't matter because there have been climate cycles in the past (a position that by itself you cannot support with the amount of scientific evidence that your worldview requires you to ignore or refute) – doesn't add up, because it does not logically mean that these cycles will continue indefinitely into the future, certainly not if any factors affecting the climate change. It is like saying that a Tsunami could never happen because we see the tide go in and out every day.


3. The folks at ICR debunked the argument you posted about the speed of light changing. I posted both an excerpt from and a link to their argument.

Do you think the ICR is part of a secular conspiracy?

Do you still maintain that the speed of light is changing, and if so, on what basis?


There's probably more that are also recent, and a whole slew from last year, but this should serve for now to continue the conversation.

About the content of this particular post:

1. "I speak like I belong to God, act like it, vote like it, think like it."

Is it considered a Christian virtue to continue to spread fallacies even after they are pointed out to you?

2. "They often talk a good game, yet they live by a hodge-podge of both humanistic and Christian rules."

There is significant overlap between how a good Christian and a good humanist conduct their lives (indeed, there are both Christian and secular humanists). Unfortunately, you don't seem to know what 'humanism' is and you leap to some rash conclusions because of it. It would be very helpful if you could read up on the subject, of course with the proper degree of tolerance that one would expect from an observing Christian.