Search This Blog

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Christian Faith versus Darwinist Faith. Other voices speak!

Oh, you do not think Darwinism is a faith?   Darwinism is a fundamental doctrine of the Naturalistic Materialistic Faith.   Adherents include Atheists, Agnostics, Pagans, Pantheists and certainly radical Environmentalists.   While Darwinism is obviously a doctrine, for the most part radical environmentalism is as well.

To quote my revered elder, Dr. CR Wood:

"
     An oxymoron is not a person with a low I.Q. who needs a lot of air.  It is a figure of speech that involves placing opposing views or utterly opposite words together.  An example with be “thunderous silence” or “uniquely ubiquitous.”  Another very current example would be “A Christian Environmentalist.”  Are there not, then, Christians who are concerned about the environment?  Most certainly, but there is a vast difference between those who are concerned with the ”stewardship of the planet” and “environmentalists”

    The first and most obvious difference is that true environmentalists fall into one of three or four categories spiritually.  They are either worshipers of “Gaia” or “Mother Earth,” (note the very intentional feminine terminology), Pantheists (those who believe that all is God and God is all - these are the people who think that hugging a tree is an act of worship), Agnostics - those who aren’t sure if there is a  God or if we can even know for sure about the entire God question -and Atheists, those who are convinced there is no God.  Obviously, there is no room for a Bible-believer in any of these positions.

     Beyond that basic difference, true environmentalists tend toward weird extremes.  There are those - and they are many - who believe we should return the planet to its original or ancient form by dismantling what the vast majority of us consider progress.  There are even those who go far beyond that and suggest that we have an obligation to lessen the population strain on the earth by taking ourselves out of it (yes, they are suggesting that large numbers of us have an obligation to commit suicide, the only problem being that they want to talk the talk, but none of them seems willing to walk the walk).  Neither of these views seems in accord with a Biblical approach.


     Then there is the counter-intuitive relationship to the “settled science” of evolution.  Someone, somewhere told me that evolution involves the survival of the fittest.  I see environmentalism as seeking through “endangered species” activism and government regulation to assure the survival of the weakest .  Since we are assured that the progress of evolution is still taking place and most environmentalists are evolutionists, I see a basic contradiction.  Contrary actions involving evolution - and the theory itself - hardly seem the pace for a believer to be involved.


     We can move on to the amount of pseudo-science involved in environmentalism.  In the last decade, we have seen “man-made global warming,” become “man-made climate change,” and more recently, to “climate change.”  Many, if not most, environmentalists are Liberals who believe a lie is not a lie, even if it is demonstrably untrue, if it fits the narrative or advances a worthy cause.  Legitimate findings by equally legitimate scientists have given the lie to much of the global warming falsification, and the email leaks from the East Anglia Project along with the admission of fraud by a supposedly noted climatologist have weakened the position beyond comprehension of credibility.  Is there climate change?  Absolutely (and there always has been as far as we can ascertain). Is the climate change dramatic?  Not in the short term (but there certainly appears that there once was an Ice Age a very, very long time ago). Is the climate change created by or contributed to by humans?  Possibly slightly, but not sufficient to really make any significant difference.  Is the science really “settled?”  Absolutely not!   No Bible-believer should want to be associated with those who have such a record of distortion, duplicity and deceit.


     We are not Deists, believing that God created the universe, wound it up like a clock and tossed it, ticking, into space to run on its own.  We believe in the God Who created the universe, daily sustains it, and periodically, intervenes in its affairs. We know from Scripture that man isn’t going to blow up the earth or even wear it out.  At a point in time of His choosing - and known only to Him - He will care for the demolition and recreation of the earth.  Does that mean that we should just do anything we want to the earth and its creatures?  Most certainly not, but the terms used in Genesis for our relationship to the creation (especially “rule” and “dominion”) come from very strong Hebrew words that indicate that we are in charge, We might differ on the details, but we should all be concerned with the proper stewardship of the earth, but that is a far cry from environmentalism.  “A Christian Environmentalist?”  An oxymoron!   "

 “For those who understand, no explanation is needed.  For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.”  (Source unknown)


 


“Brilliance–even genius–is no guarantee that consequential factors have not been left out or misconceived. Intelligence minus judgment equals intellect. Wisdom is the rarest quality of all–the ability to combine intellect, knowledge, experience, and judgment in a way to produce a coherent understanding.  Wisdom requires self-discipline and an understanding of the realities of the world, including the limitations of one’s own experience and of reason itself. The opposite of high intellect is dullness or slowness, but the opposite of wisdom is foolishness, which is far more dangerous.”  - Conservative columnist and thinker, Thomas Sowell.  Note the definition of wisdom which is high-lighted.


"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." - Psalms 14:1 AND 53:1. - God  (Who repeats for the sake of emphasis).

How does a normal Christian think?   There is no cookie-cutter faith.   Christianity welcomes critical thinkers and questioning minds.   For example:

 



AAAAAAND one more time for the awesome Ian Juby!!!

3 comments:

Anonymous whatsit said...

It's a sad state of affairs indeed when "Christian environmentalist" is deemed to be an oxymoron. What a stupid article.

Anonymous said...

So you wanted to post an example of a Christian critical thinker, and the best you could come up with was that rambler? Did you post the wrong link or something?

radar said...

An oxymoron is a Darwinist with an extra oxygen atom attached to the molecule. Stupid is radical environmentalism. Supposedly they believe in evolution and yet they want to frustrate the very process they have as a tenet of their very faith by interfering in the process itself? How stupid can you get?

If evolution actually did happen, do you suppose dinosaurs banded together to campaign to save amphibians?

The truth is that radical environmentalism is all about man being quite certain that he is the pinnacle of all things. Man blames himself for "climate change" when one volcano has more of an effect on the climate than all the factories and herds of mankind can produce in a year's time. Man appoints himself as capable of deciding which animals need protecting and which do not, even to the point of putting the fate of a tiny commonplace fish over the health and welfare of an entire valley full of farmers and their workers.

Man is supposed to have dominion over the animal kingdom. Once we cared little for whether the Dodo or the Passenger Pigeon survived. Now we have gone to the other extreme, putting the good of mankind behind that of animals. When some woman heads off to the abortion clinic wearing a "Save the Whales" t-shirt, you know the societal mores have taken a nosedive.

I am going to give you credit that you were calling Ian Juby a "rambler" and not our son Nathan. Nathan has become a well known butterfly knife crafter and collector despite the challenge of Asperger's and we are very proud of his accomplishments. He has a world-wide reputation in his chosen field. Do you? I didn't think so...