This is a continuation of a discussion I am having with a local Pastor. Part 1 can be found here.

“Intelligent design isn’t about religion Andrew.”

Perhaps not, but Ben Stein seems to think ID is about God, which is why he scolds Richard Dawkins for humouring him and proposing aliens did it.  Of course, Prof. Dawkins goes on to explain the aliens themselves would have had to come from somewhere and proposes a Darwinian evolutionary method for this.  Mr. Stein personally believes god is responsible for creation, but fails to provide any evidence this is actually the case.  So far no one has shown me that creation of anything is required in the first place (and no, the big bang is not creation ex nihilo).

“Religion is man’s attempt to explain God – it can be true or it can be false.”

I say god is man’s attempt to explain why there is something rather than noting.

“God stands outside of religion as the creator – in that sense Ben Stein is correct when he says that ID isn’t about religion.”

But Ben Stein or yourself are not talking about a creative force, or some designer.  You are talking about a specific creator god, with specific behaviours, wishes, actions, desires, and plans.  A god who intervenes in human affairs and tinkers with reality when required (miracles).  These are all claims that require even more evidence than ID provides. So not only do you inherent all the problems of ID and creationism, but also the additional burden of demonstrating your deity in particular.

“If you take God’s existence as fact then scientists are being incredibly blind to leave him out of the classroom just as they would be considered silly to leave out anything else that exists and effects our existence.”

That’s not the way science works.  Science proposes hypothesis which are tested against reality via prediction, experimentation and observation.  The results are given to your peers where they can investigate your methods, reproduce the results, look for flaws, and criticise your data and conclusions.  If your idea pass this phase you will be published in reputable scientific journals.  Is the process perfect?  No.  Do people make mistakes?  Yes, but the only way to find those mistakes is through the application of more science.

ID proponents (and their creationist brothers) want to bypass all of that and go straight to the class room.  They do not want to make predictions using their hypothesis of design (what are they again?), or test their ideas against reality by running experiments, nor submit their work for peer review.  It is far easier for them to claim some international, decades long, global conspiracy to suppress “the truth” of a god, sorry, intelligent designer.

It won’t work.  It is doomed to fail.  If you want to teach science, then go through the scientific process like everyone else.  However, no one is preventing you from personally believing Yahweh created the universe (whether is 6 literal days, or interpreted billions of years), or the Aboriginal Dreamtime stories, or any other of the available creation myths to choose from (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_myth).

“ID isn’t creationism but it does point to a designer behind life – a guiding hand. It’s only the start not the end but we ignore it to our detriment.”

Sorry?  To what detriment?  Is it too much to ask that we stick with what we know is actually real, or should we entertain all possible creation stories in the science class room – just in case?

“I saw a politician recently get trashed by the media – do you know what they did? They took grabs from interviews with him, wove them altogether and made him look like a total douche. Did they present the truth? Yes and no. Technically they were correct in what they presented but what they ended up presenting was a total caricature. I see people doing this with the teachings all the time and it does no-one any good.

Take the first story you’re quoting about giving all your money away. Jesus told a rich young ruler to do this – someone who on the outside looked squeaky clean. After the young man wandered off he then turns to his disciples and says how hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God. His disciples are amazed because they think that the rich are the privileged, the smart, the lucky ones in their society so if they can’t get into the kingdom then who can. Jesus then goes on to say that with God all things are possible. MOST people stop reading here but Jesus isn’t finished yet. One of his disciples then says to him Jesus we’ve left everything to follow you. Jesus replied that those who give up family, homes, land etc for the gospel will receive 10 fold in this life and in the next eternal life. The point that Jesus was making with the rich young ruler and subsequently had nothing to do with money. Having money doesn’t make you a bad person or a good person. Money is irrelevant – it’s the state of your heart – does your money have you?”

Sure you could interpret the verse to say that, or you can simply read what the text says.  I sometimes wonder why god (wanting to save as many of his beloved children as possible) encoded his message is parables and double talk which required theologians to decode, digest, and understand so they could tell the rest of us what it *really* means.

But I am being flippant.  Are you rich?  In comparison to much of the world we are incredibly rich.  I watched a show last year where an African boy saved for a month to buy his first ever light bulb.  He was so happy to finally afford one and be productive of an evening.  I could not help thinking about the number of lights I had around me, and the fact if one blew I could simply duck down to the shop and replace it.

Also, many of the richest people in the world have not put god first in their lives.  Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet, and many others are self confessed non-believers.  I guess they would be even richer if they believed.

And what about the other passages where Jesus calls for you to shed everything you own?  It’s not just a single line, he spoke of it many times.

“One thing that Jesus was very good at doing was getting people to think. He often said things that shocked his listeners in order to get them thinking. You need to see Jesus’ in his entirety to understand the context of what he says just as I need to know you to understand you. What would justify Jesus saying we need to hate our parents? On the surface nothing. But if we add into the mix his command to love each other even our enemies you have to then ask what was he really saying here? How important is it to place Jesus before family? So important that maybe there will be times where your family will accuse you of hating them because you no longer participate in practices with them that God says are destructive.”

This is pretty much a parallel to what I was saying, although (naturally) I have a slightly different slant on it.  Perhaps Jesus was saying that your family may hate you for what you are doing int he name of God, but that’s not important because God is all that matters?  Sell all your possessions, by a sword, follow Jesus.  Sure your family may not like it (who would), but that just further proves his prophecy and cements his position of power.

“As for your question about what would have happened if I hadn’t prayed? We don’t know. But are you going to tell me that those two specific answers to 2 prayers were purely coincidental?”

Perhaps.

“Seems I would need more faith to believe that than the alternative.”

You have more faith in Jesus than in co-incidence?  In that case, are there any co-incidences in your life?  Do you have free will, or is Jesus directing your life behind the scenes?

“Jesus had a saying for that – straining at gnats but swallowing camels. :) ”

Eww.

“I agree she could have overcome her grief without God’s intervention and moved on with her life. But that’s not the question here. The question is did she see what she said she saw.”

Only she can really know that for sure.  Even then, hallucinations (both visual and auditory) are well documented.  We also dream and many people experience lucidity at these times (quite an experience I am told).  The mind is an illusion generator, but an imperfect one.  Easily tricked which optical illusions and clever videos easily demonstrate.

“She had an experience that’s unquestionable but you’re asking was it of her own making. The girl in question was as sane as I am. She didn’t have any psychiatric issues, she wasn’t bi-polar, she didn’t suffer from depression. In other words she didn’t display any of the symptoms that are associated with people who have have psychotic episodes.”

These things are not necessary for people to have strange experiences.  I have personally experienced hallucinations and experienced events I cannot explain, but I do not automatically attribute them to the supernatural.

“The question I asked at the time was why didn’t she see Buddha or Mohammad and how did she know it was Jesus? She was a totally unchurched girl who grew up in a secular society but she says she saw Jesus.”

She have not been religious herself, but she in immersed in a primarily Christian society (according to the census data).  Plus she had already spoken to you (“I will pray for you”) so the idea was in her head, and the contemporary images of Jesus are all around (blond hair, white skin, blue eyes, beard – strange for an Arab Jew).  She was under emotional stress.  Is it any wonder she had some experience and attributed it to Jesus?

Nevertheless, I do not know what she saw, or experienced.  I was not there, nor were you.  You have no idea what she saw either, but see relayed see saw something and together you concluded it was Jesus.  Is you vision of Jesus exactly like hers, or are they all different?  If so, how can you tell they are one and the same?

I cannot share my experiences with you, except via the hopelessly inadequate medium of language (and expression if we were face to face).  I cannot share her experience either, so (again) what we are left with is what can be demonstrated to be true.  Science is the best method we have come up with so far for doing this (see above), but I doubt you can give me this experience in that format.

Part 3 of this conversation can be found here.

Similar Posts: