Members Log In Not Registered? Register Now.
Updated 04:40 pm.EST, Sat November 21, 2009
- RSS|
- E-newsletter - Preview : Daily | Weekly
CP Contents
Hot Topics :
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. (JN 8:32)
Siamang's Comments
-
'Atheism Remix' - Understanding and Answering the New Atheism
Siamang »Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:30 pm
Agree: 0 
Disagree: 1
Looks like the Reverend Samuel Krouse plagerized some of this article when he wrote his article for the Colusa County Sun Herald.
http://friendlyatheist.com/4110/did-the-reverend-plagiarize/
I agree with Listbox, who wrote:
"There seems to be so little kindness in Mr. Mohler's essay."
I don't think he desires kindness towards atheists. I think he sees atheists as a threat to his profession... pushing the 4.6 billion dollar religion industry in America.
I just don't buy it. I think he and all the religious leaders in the world are selling a product, and I want none of it. That's all there is to it.
If he finds that threatening, that says far more about him than it does about me. -
Chuck Colson has corrected this article Here:
http://breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=1999
Kudos to him for doing this.
The correction reads as follows:
Correction: Chuck Colson’s statement above, “Even atheist Richard Dawkins admits that there is a one-in-seven chance that God might exist,” is in error. Instead, according to a New York Times Book Review article dated October 22, 2006, “On a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 is certitude that God exists and 7 is certitude that God does not exist, Dawkins rates himself a 6: ‘I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, [Dawkins said] and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.’ ” -
"I would suggest you sacrifice whatever time you have to for your daughter and your wife. Those lost moments will never be recaptured."
I agree. I'm doing the best I can to enjoy these years with them.
"Yes, I am remarried."
Glad to hear it. Marriage can be a great solace and a source of strength. As I said before, I can't imagine how different my life would be without it. -
"This country has usually applied the Just War doctrine, but not always."
Unfortunately, recently our foreign policy seems to be using the other definition of "Just"... as in "Nothing but". This is troubling, to say the least. But the part that I cannot stand is this culture of glorification of war, and the culture where voices against war are sneered at as being "french", "America haters" whatever. It's a culture where diplomacy is denigrated as "weak".
It's like we cannot even discuss these issues anymore, because the well of discourse has been so poisoned. How can we even discuss whether or not X policy is better than Y, in this culture where folks call their opponent "biased" and "carrying an agenda". It's poisonous, and I fear that this language has taken over the culture. Nobody ever seems to WANT to learn from someone who's different from them in any way... and I'm pointing that accusatory finger as much at liberals as conservatives.
"I do believe that it was an unintentional error as Colson has too good of a reputation to intentionally lie."
I would counter that his reputation for honesty does not extend far outside the sphere of conservative Christian evangelicals. Remember, this is Nixon's hatchet-man we're talking about, and he hasn't yet buried that hatchet. Here's a writer for Christianity Today:
http://www.yuricareport.com/Impeachment/ColsonOnDeepThroat.html
His "reputation for honesty" is about as gold-standard as Clinton's reputation for fidelity! I understand Colson is somewhat of a hero to political conservatives, but I don't regard the Watergate cover-up as heroic. Meanwhile he seems to have something of a job trying to get paid by the government to preach to prisoners. Nice work if you can get it, and put it on the government's tab. I know lots of ministers who'll pray and work with their congregations for free, or though donations(I blog for a Christian ministry). Never once met one who could manage the keen trick of pulling down a government paycheck doing it. I guess when you used to cover up crimes for Nixon, the politicians answer your phone calls!
Anyway, Colson may have a stellar reputation in your circles, but I regard him as a shifty character who decided to reboot his reputation by converting. His change to Christianity does not seem to have changed him in any way. He was anti-gay before Christianity, he's anti-gay after it. He was anti-Islam before, he's anti-islam now. He didn't change, he just started believing in a theology that told him that God was a Republican. -
"My midlife crisis hit at 40 and I looked out into the future and lamented "is this all there is?" The kids were in their teens and fast approaching maturity. I must admit that my marriage was not harmonious. But there was this overpowering sensation of being adrift without a long term purpose. My father went through something himself, but not nearly to that extent. He was drinking heavier than usual but not getting drunk. Just something for relaxing."
Hmm... that's got to be a difficult part of the journey. You said that your marriage wasn't harmonious and that you divorced. Are you remarried? I cannot imagine how different I would be if my marriage wasn't working.
I hit 40 this year. My daughter is still young, so I do not have a feeling of emptiness... far from it. My cup runneth over, and then some! I don't know what I will be facing when approaching the empty nest years. I guess it depends on where I'm going in my career. Right now my career is very fulfilling, but I can definitely see continuing to grow. Our marriage is very strong... heck, it would have to be. Nobody told me that parenting was this much work!
My parents were very much adrift while I was growing up. There was a bit of infidelity which broke up two of my mother's marriages. My father is still a pothead and mostly a bum. My mother finally figured out what she wanted, found someone who fit the bill and settled down happily. But it was rough growing up with constant family change, and no good relationship role models. So I'm glad NOT to be repeating their mistakes. My wife is much the same way, a child of divorce. We worked damn hard to build a relationship that works. We put off having a kid for 11 years while we worked through the things about each other and our love that we needed to build up. It's amazing and wonderful what we have, but it was a lot of hard work. Now it looks easy, but we both had a lot of growing up to do, and we continue to work on our communication. I've had friends tell us how much they envy our relationship. We are still very deeply in love, and nothing makes me happier than the idea of us growing old together.
We've just gotta raise up this girl right! -
Do your and/or your wife have concerns for the morals and values your daughter will be exposed to?
Yes, but probably not the same way you are. I'm guessing from your history of being in the military, and stuff, you're a conservative. We're not. So, yes, I'm concerned about the morals and values of a country which takes violence as a solution to political problems, which leads by rhetoric but then undermines its own core values, rather than leading by example. I'm concerned she is growing up in a world that glorifies power and sneers at the weak, glorifies the rich and sneers at the poor, glorifies those arguing for war and sneers at those arguing for peace. I'm concerned that she lives in a world where people are far more concerned with owning things than taking care of people. I'm concerned she's going to grow up in a world that decided that Hummers were more important than polar ice caps. I'm concerned she's living in a world where facts are a matter of opinion, and opinion is treated like fact. I'm concerned that the world is full of people who are willing to kill each other and anyone else just to prove, once and for all, which god is the "right one" to believe in, and most of the people in our country think that the solution is to kill them first.
" What are your thoughts/concerns for her educaton? "
I'm afraid that the public school system will not be able to give her enough of a challenge. I think she will be a brilliant student, but the material might not be advanced enough for her. I don't want her limited by the available education like I felt I was. I plan on making sure that she can graduate early if she needs the challenge. -
"What prompted you to come to the CP site then engage in the discussions? What were you looking for?"
I blogged about the Colson article and I thought that it was only fair to post my same objections here. I wanted to see what reaction I might get from Colson, CP or the readers here. Most places I blog, the author of the article interacts and fixes mistakes... but I haven't seen that happen sometimes the more radical left or right wing the poster is.
Sometimes when I see a phenomenon like this, I like to see if I'm perceiving it correctly, or if it's because I'm seeing it as an outsider. Not for this to be a taunt, but I wonder if proper quotation, attribution and methodological follow-though is a shared value within Christian culture. I've gotten this a lot when posting about "hey, this guy took this quote totally out of context". I take that as lying. My professors in college would have knocked me through a wall for such sloppyness, but from Christians I often hear "no big whoop." Unless you misquote the bible, and then it's serious business.
"What you explain of yourself is different than what you originally portrayed as I perceived your demanding an apology fo the Colson error to be taunts at Christians in general."
Sorry about that. Sometimes I push to see if anyone's listening. After 4 posts on the issue and no response, I thought I'd push a little harder. I do consider misquoting as lying, and I don't count lazyness as an excuse. I'm usually amazed at the difference in level of outrage when this kind of thing happens.
But in the meanwhile I thought if Colson wasn't going to correct the record, by posting here at least I could do a little bit. Also I think spread some skepticism about the general honesty of Colson's arguments. -
"These pursuits eventually lead to discontent. Alcohol and drug abuse become temporary fixes, along with sexual escapades and perhaps high risk behaviors, but the discontentment never goes away."
I don't know how you explain me then. I don't smoke or use alcohol or drugs, and I have never had a drug or alcohol problem in my life. My wife and I have been together for 16 years, both she and I are monogamous. I live a very mild-mannered existence... much more conservative than many people I know who are churchgoers. I'm a great dad to my terrific four-year-old girl. I work while my wife stays at home and takes care of our girl. We send her to Methodist pre-school, and I make the peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. Last time I had so much as a speeding ticket Boy George was selling records. I'm as squeaky-clean as squeaky-clean gets. I could be a Mormon if I didn't enjoy a good cup of coffee every now and then.
Let me know when I'm going to hit my eventual discontent and start that drug and alcohol-fueled spiral into sexual escapades. WHOOOHOO!!!
On the opposite side, I do know of people who have the opposite story. They were battered by depression, mood-swings, anxiety problems and suicidal thoughts and self-destructive behavior (overeating) while they believed in God, but once becoming an atheist, their problems with depression went away.
I think it just has to do more with finding what's right for you. If you're living under a system or a belief that is contrary to your personal nature, it'll mess with your moods.
"My testimony is leading the humanist path until the dead-end. Luckily for me Christ came knocking and I accepted."
Hawk, now you're talking more about yourself, and this is the stuff I can learn from.
You talked about being a humanist and atheist and then coming to ID while being an atheist. Was the argument from design strong enough to convince you that God existed and Christianity was true? Or was it a spiritual experience with Christ?
Can you describe what this change was for you, and what this time in your life was like? -
Hawk wrote:
"I look at our communications and I believe they have been kept civil. Even with CITIZEN, did I revert to name calling and character assassination attempts?"
I agree, the conversation was very civil. It's not that I don't think we can have a civil conversation.
The problem is that I have no desire to change your mind. I've joined the evolution vs. ID wars in the past, and I've had science discussions with ID proponents in the past. Here's what I've learned: When the other person is acting a certain way, you can be as brilliant a science teacher as ever wrote, and you'll be talking to a brick wall. I've written pages and pages and pages of beautifully written science lessons, to have someone come back with what they feel is a pithy bible quote that tells me that they didn't even take the time to read it.
On the other hand, I've had wonderful conversations with ID supporters and creationists who aren't looking to battle, just looking to understand, and the conversations go wonderfully and my point of view is appreciated. Even when they don't come around to accept evolution, they come to UNDERSTAND it, just a little bit more. And they say, "okay, well that at least does make some coherent logical sense. It's not what I believe happened, but it certainly sounds plausible." And during those discussions, I have had a number of Christians tell me that I was the reason they changed their mind from strict literal creationism or ID to theistic evolution... God creating through a process rather than in an instant.
I have years of arguing this stuff under my belt, and about a year of "discussing, not arguing" under my belt. You know which works better? Discussing.
So I've begun to budget my time with people, dependent on how they're holding up their end of the discussion. I can tell pretty early which way it's going to go with them... are they listening and questioning? Or are they girding up for battle.... (even civil, friendly battle)?
I've got no time for battle. I learn nothing in battle, and trust me, neither will you. -
Hawk,
It looks like you're girding up for a battle here, and as I said before I have no taste to battle with someone.
Read the books we recommended. All of your answers are there, if you care to find them.
I don't shout at brick walls. Read one or more of those books Citizen recommended, and then I know you're inquiring in good faith. Until then, sorry, I have Christians I'd rather learn from, rather than ones who just want to argue with me.
Take care, Hawk. When you're done scrapping for battles, maybe you and I can share a conversation over a cup of coffee someday.
Take care,
Siamang -
Hawk wrote:
"Your response was a great tap dance around the question."
I don't think it was. You asserted "evolutionist scientists and philosophers are abandoning evolution" I pointed out that in overwhelming numbers, they aren't.
I cannot enter their minds to find out why.. but I will point out that such small numbers is mere decimal dust. You'll be likely to find far more scientists who believe in flying saucers than believe in Intelligent Design... and yet the flying saucer theory isn't being pushed into grade schools by zealous parents.
I get the impression that you're backwards guy, Hawk. You'd much rather look at the hair on the snowflake on the tip of the iceberg, and say, "Look at the size of that HAIR! What a threat to evolution that hair is!" What's more significant, the 0.1% of scientists who deny evolution, or the 99.9% of them who accept it? Talk about a losing theory... this one got completely flunked out of kindergarden.
(see wikipedia for factual backing on that claim. It really is 99.9%.)
I refuse to speculate on why ID supporters haven't jumped ship.. ask them not me. They're so rare they would be hard to find if they weren't on speaking tours taking cash from the faithful flock.
I can name you a large number of Christian scientists who support evolution, some very famous and well-regarded indeed.
Can you name me one scientist who is non-religious and embraces intelligent design even if they don't believe the designer is God? Hey, name me one mathematician in the WORLD who is non-religious and yet thinks Dembski's math is rock-solid.
Oh, and download "breve creatures" or "Darwin at home" and watch your computer do things that Dembski and his cronies say is impossible. It's fun, and makes a great screen-saver! -
"Can you explain then why, if ID is so ridiculous, that evolutionist scientists and philosophers are abandoning evolution or Darwinism and no ID’ers are reverting to evolution if evolution is so substantially grounded and irrefutable as you portray it to be?"
There's not as many as the ID proponents claim. 99.9% of scientists accept evolution. Millions and millions and millions of them worldwide. There aren't enough "ID scientists" to fill your local church.
Contrast the 700 signatures (most from non-biologists) that the DI has on their "Dissent from Darwinism" petition with the 10,700 signatures on the"Clergy Letter Project." I can name ten-thousand more evolution-supporting clergy than you can name ID supporting scientists.
ID is a crackpot scheme cooked up by a big right-wing think-tank to smuggle God into public school. Read the Dover opinion, they got caught in their lies, including some lies they swore on the Bible. I seem to recall that being a no-no. -
” To hold a religious worldview Vs membership are two different issues."
Well, it's you that maintain that I hold a religious worldview. That depends on your definition of "religious worldview". I'd have to know more about your definitions, for example, in you definition, is there any such thing as a non-religious worldview? What worldview, if any, do you see in the world that is nonreligious?
"So, what is your worldview? "
Eat when hungry, sleep when tired, when the baby cries, give her a bottle. It's nice to be nice. It's bad to be bad. And try not to be a jerk. That's most of it.
"From a Christian Worldview that is where humanism started....everything is measured to man’s standards rather than God’s standards."
Which is exactly what we should expect the high priests to say to their flock about the competition. Whether theism turns out to be true or not, religion thrives when the flock is taught not to consider the alternative. Not because it's a more or less accurate view of the world we find ourselves in, but because of another reason entirely: it's the dark fruit of the garden.
"I see one error that doesn’t materially affect his argument for the article. It’s more of an aside."
How is the centrality germane to the question of whether or not Colson misrepresents the words of others?
Would it be okay if I misquoted you in a talk that wasn't primarily about you?
"I doubt that it was an intentional error. "
Nevertheless, he clearly chose to attack chapter two of The God Delusion without reading it.
"Did you write directly to Colson to point out his error so he could have a chance to make the correction? "
No. Clicking on his name only pulls up an error message.
"Now, if you look upon your line of questioning would you not consider this rather abrasive since you know I am neither responsible for Colson or CP?"
Yes, I guess you could. But I didn't ask if you were responsible... I asked if this happens a lot here. I'm new here, I don't know. You seemed to notice a problem with the Dawkins quote independent of me coming here and pointing it out... perhaps you notice these kind of fact-challenged posts cropping up from time to time. -
"I don't pretend to know what your worldview is; I have only taken a stab at it from what information you have divulged."
My question is then, why take stabs at it? I'm here, ask me if you have a question. But really, you seem to be wanting to attack, and any answer I give is a set up for a punch, like this one:
"You're right that humanism started much earlier than Darwin.......it actually started in the garden with the deception. "
Okay, I think I might know what you're referring to. It seems like a (pardon the pun) fruitless path to start arguing the merits of the talking snake theory of philosophy.
Instead I'd like to ask you a question: Do you ever consider the idea that saying someone else's beliefs spring from the source of all evil might not be the best possible way to get them to listen to you and seriously consider what you're saying?
Just salesmanship 101, if you ask me... If you want a guy to buy some makeup for his wife, you don't start by telling him his wife is ugly.
"And to answer your so pressing question I remember reading Dawkins discuss the probability of God and he did come up with much lower odds than the 1 to 7."
Good. So what is your opinion on how well or poorly this reflects on the honesty of Colson's argument... especially in the light of them letting the misrepresentation stand for so many days without comment?
Is this kind of thing the normal level of intellectual honesty here at the ChristianPost? Or is this the kind of thing that most folks here let slide? -
Today is Thursday. I pointed out the misrepresentation in Mr. Colson's article on Monday.
This article and it's dishonest misrepresentation of the arguments of Professor Dawkins have been blogged about widely in the atheist community from the day it was posted.
And yet, still no correction. Will ChristianPost do the right thing? Or is lying okay when it's for Jesus?
I'm also interested in the fact that no Christians posting here on this thread have even mentioned this "honesty problem" in the main post. It's kind of glaringly obvious to me the silence with which my condemnation of Colson's dishonesty has been met here. -
"Still, is there any evoltionist that has satisfactorily answered the quandries of irreducible complexity, how the DNA information self generated, etc that the ID community is questioning?"
Hi hawk,
Is that a question, or a challenge?
The reason I ask is, often I answer what appears to be a question about evolution, but then when I answer it, it turns out that the person I answer it to is merely trying to pick a fight.
I am happy to answer questions about evolution. Evolution and the science behind it is one of my many hobbies. But I only answer questions, I do not fight battles.
All the answers you seek are available. Actually, those are some VERY good books that Citizen recommended. The Zimmer book I like quite a bit, because it's very readable, it's got nice big color illustrations, which makes reading it fun. It's not in the least bit "dry reading" and you can usually pick a used copy off of amazon for just a few dollars.
Zimmer's got a great blog I like as well... he's an excellent science writer.
But the brief answers to your questions are:
Irreducable complexity: This depends on your definition of IC. IC structures still can come about by incrimental evolutionary change, and do not rely on a one-jump evolutionary leap, as ID supporters like Behe falsely claim. This was shown by Brown University's Kenneth Miller in the Dover trial, and he can be seen on Youtube giving that exact talk showing the bacterial flagellum. Incidentally, Dr. Miller is a Christian.
"how the DNA information self generated,"
There's a little playing fast and loose with definitions in ID-speak. They use the word "information" to mean a different thing than "complexity" and a different thing from "randomness". They use these words sometimes interchangeably and sometimes specifically. They always seem to use them self-servingly and they do not define them, so it's difficult to see where they're playing a shell game.
Simple answer? Complexity forms from chemical interactions. The entire universe is a complex, chaotic place. If there is a stochastic filter that consistantly selects some types of variation over another, then given time, certain variations will dominate.
Economists talk about "the wisdom of the marketplace". Game theorists show that complex interactions can emerge from simple rules. The mathematics of chaos theory show, and if you have a computer (which I'm guessing you do), that random variation, COMBINED with throwing out the garbage and keeping the good stuff, and adding the good stuff of each generation, produces positive evolutionary change. And you can do this yourself with your computer. You can run alife sims, and see the complexity evolve. You can run neural nets and expert systems and see the complexity evolve. You can download and run Breve Creatures for example, and genetically evolve "creatures" on your screen which "grow" the ability to walk. -
Hi Hawk,
"Actually, this discussion doesn't have to become a fight, it can go quite civilly. But if you are uncomfortable with that then I guess this will end our discussion."
I don't care if it'll go civilly or not. I have no desire to change your beliefs, so it's just wasted energy on my part.
"Humanism is built on the truth claim that the belief in evolution is real."
That sounds completely mixed up to me. Humanism is a philosophical system that has roots thousands of years before Darwin. Heck, some of the Greek humanists predate Christ. I don't know how they were able to base it on evolution. Instead of telling me what I supposedly believe and why, how about asking questions? It's exactly this problem why I don't like getting into these types of discussions. Everyone assumes they already know the other person, and makes judgements about them, then tells them what they supposedly think. I might as well not even be here.
"Actually the founders of Secular Humanism, the Supreme Court and the IRS have define humanism a religion."
Well, since I've never been baptized by them, I've never given them money and I've never so much as bought a magazine subscription from them, these people hold no more authority to speak for me than your church does.
"So I suppose what you are saying here is you believe that my belief system is in error."
Let's just say I have not seen evidence sufficient to compel me to believe that the supernatural exists.
"I don't see it that way. The various Humanist Manifestos appear to define it this way."
Since I didn't write any of the humanist manifestoes, I cannot be held accountable for claims they make. -
Continued post to Hawk:
"And how do you decide that there is no God to be an atheist?"
I don't have to decide there is no God to be an atheist. I merely have to decide that religion is either false or not sufficiently proven to be true, or so far off the mark as to make adherence to any of them worthless for me in my life.
A religion/worldview, which you do have, starts from the answer to creation.
I don't think mine does. Mine starts with humility. Mine starts with the honest statement "I don't know, and I suspect that others don't know either, especially the ones who pray loudest and drive the biggest limousines."
" Atheistm is just one aspect to the religon/worldview of Humanism. "
I don't see it that way. I see humanism as an attempt to put together a moral system that doesn't necessarily depend on any one particular religion, and so can be shared across cultures, faiths and indeed people of non-faith. Christians can also be humanists, as can people of any faith or nonfaith. -
Hi hawk,
"What trauma????? I only proposed a starting point for reasonable discussion. That would be the foundations of our different worldviews."
Sorry, I'm not interested in that discussion here. There are lots of other people willing to try and take apart your beliefs or fight you over theirs. I'm not gonna do that.
"I can name you a hundred Christians who became atheists. You missed my point. Can you name any scientists or philosophers who sided with Intelligent Design then went over to evolution belief?"
Yes. I've been instrumental in changing a few minds in that direction myself. I haven't made people leave their faith in Christianity, but I have changed their minds about the sheer weight of scientific evidence undergirding evolution. None of them are of the stature of Flew... but then again, Mr. Flew is quite senile at this point in his life, so it's unclear exactly what his criteria for proof is. All of that is irrelevant to the truth of the matter, which is that evolution happened, the modern synthesis is absolute bedrock hard science, and Intelligent Design is fringe crackpottery that has utterly failed to make its case and trades in lies, liars and snake-oil salesmen making a tidy living off of separating the faithful from their money.
" Not an insult, just the fact that it is a functional religion as it is based on beliefs, not facts."
Are you asserting that your religion is not based on facts? I thought everyone believed that their religion was fact, and all other religions and beliefs were based on falsehoods. Is that not what you believe?
If you call it a religion, that's up to you... though you may have to expand your definition of religion to accomodate it, which is fine. But it is based on a fact... one fact, in fact. My beliefs are based on the fact that I don't believe your beliefs. And that's a simple fact.
Anyway, if it is a religion, it is happily a religion where I don't have to worry about my loved ones going to hell. Already an improvement, if you ask me.
"Most Humanists seem to have a difficult time coping with this."
Beliefs are fine. I have nothing against beliefs. It's actions I have a problem with. -
Okay, well it's been two days so far and no correction by Chuck Colson or ChristianPost.com.
Any Christians here want to respond to the fact that Colson misrepresents the work of other writers? Is this setting a good example?
Holy Bible: Mosaic
On our own we are little more than bits of stone and glass. Together we are the Body of Christ. Holy Bible: Mosaic is an invitation to experience Christ in His Word and in the responses of his people. Each week, as you reflect on guided Scripture readings aligned with the church seasons, you will receive a wealth of insight from historical and contemporary writings.
- Own your Own Christian Business
- Need Health & Travel Insurance? We Provide Best Service For You
- Moving Companies - Receive Multiple Moving Quotes from Movers in your area!
- Liberty University Online - Master of Science in Management MSM : Online
- Christian Gifts from The Jerusalem Gift Shop
- new york web design
- LeTourneau University - Online and On-Campus Degrees with a Christian Perspective, designed for Working Adults
- Prophet CRM - Easy CRM Software for Outlook
- Help with Debt Consolidation Loans and budgeting your way out of debt with medical bills and credit cards
- Shop for: Special Occasion Gifts, Wedding Accessories, Kid's Personalized Music CDs & DVDs & Adoration Jewelry
- Financing for your Church Construction Needs - Darra Consulting
HOME
CP SPECIAL
CP NETWORKS
WAYS TO GET CP
