Christian Theological/Philosophical Book Club discussion
The Forum - Debate Religion
>
Have we allowed idolatry to slip back into the faith?
date
newest »
newest »
message 51:
by
Robert
(new)
Jan 28, 2014 09:05AM
Ned - please elaborate further - as a scientist, you've perked up my ears.
reply
|
flag
Where to start? Science, in the true sense, does not insist on strictly naturalistic / materialist causes. As soon as one does that, one has crossed the threshold of science and entered the realm of religion and philosophy. The modern, self-appointed guardians of science do just that, thus setting themselves in opposition to God from the outset. In this vein, read this revealing quote from Richard Lewontin:"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen."
The professor speaks the truth. His statement is quite mystic in itself. It is no accident then, that the modern scientific philosophical paradigm has devolved into rabid, unapologetic, aggressively proselytizing anti-humanism that fits the description in Romans 1 to a tee:
"For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things."
The idea that matter in effect created itself and evolved by itself could hardly be more unscientific. Objectively, surely one can recognize the inherent mysticism in such a proposition. The notion that a materialist universe is self-creating and self-sustaining leads inexorability towards, pantheism. It can hardly do otherwise. Pantheism is the direct cause of the inherent Malthusian bent in AGW, the Gaia hypothesis, and the modern environmentalist movement. The widespread "liberal" view is that mankind is an enemy of the planet that must be subdued, contained, limited in his activities, and reduced in population, directly contradicting the teaching of scripture that creation is for the benefit of mankind, rather than mankind existing to serve the planet.
What do you call it when humans are reduced to "walking on eggshells" in fear of what they might do to the planet? I know what I call it: Mother Earth worship. Idolatry. Regression to paganism of the very sort practiced by the Canaanites of old. Therefore it becomes self evident why the adherents of the philosophy I just described are so very hostile to Christianity, since it liberates people from such enslaving, idolatrous mindsets.
In closing, I referenced Ashtoreth because the Israelites, as described in the old testament, disobeyed God in "combining" the worship of YHWH with the worship of Ashtoreth by setting up Asherah Trees. This attempt to combine the holy with the pagan was idolatrous then as now. Christians who think they can combine the vain philosophy of this world with worship of God to form some kind of "super religion" are fooling themselves. As I have described, Idolatry is not difficult to find. It is in fact rampant. But it is difficult for some to see because our culture is so steeped in it that people fail to recognize it for what it is. They are told to defer to the "experts" (scientist-priests) and not to open the holy books (look at the data) for themselves since they are too lowly to understand; let their priests interpret and instruct them in how they should live. These observations are not original with me, many others, such as Michael Crichton, have noted them.
Yikes. Ned, if the end result of your philosophy is the destruction of the earth, it cannot be condoned, whether under the guise of religion or not. In the long run, that's little different than extremist Islam. Here's the typical verse quoted by this sort of misguided religion:
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
In this verse, just after God creates humankind on the earth, he grants us dominion over all the animals and tells us to “subdue” the earth. What does this mean? There are two main ways of reading this, and I’ve heard both sides preached.
On the one hand, utilitarian readers interpret this verse as permission to use the earth as they wish, to their own end. Knowing that God will one day destroy his creation anyway, they reason that there’s no point of preserving it, and gladly accept the call to dominate all that lives.
On the other hand are those who see this verse as a call to care for the earth. They read the story of Adam and Eve in Eden, placed there to care for God’s garden, and see the verse as a similar call for responsible stewardship.
My own opinion? Logic dictates that we hedge our bets and come down on the “responsible stewardship” end of the spectrum, just in case God does want us to save the whales.
Lee,You will certainly find no disagreement with me on that score. However, the next question becomes, what is good stewardship? Not Malthusianism, IMO. The "threat" supposedly posed by mankind, as though he were an invasive organism, is exaggerated, usually for the purpose of suiting a larger agenda. Humanity's condition, and its impact on the environment, is ameliorated by the use of technology, not the shunning of it.
ok, that's cool. I'll leave the question of proper stewardship to our most capable researchers...topics like global warming are indeed complex. For now, I do have my little part ... the cans go in the recycle bin and the gas guzzlers stay in the garage.
Actually Ned (msg.52), so too has the scientist Robert Core in Creation Strikes Back. I like mentioning myself in the same vein as Michael Crichton!
Robert,Nice to make your acquaintance. I must sheepishly admit that I had no idea who I was talking to, or where you were coming from. I just decided to jump in since the topic interested me. I will put your book on my reading list.
Ned, Ned - slow down, I'm NOT an established author. True, my book is still new and holds promise, but I'm certainly not regaled as an authority and it is purely circumstance that we share, along with your quoted sources, the same view of science vis a vis religion. Likewise, I will put your book on my reading list. Jumping right in there is the only way to approach this board, but might I suggest you do so with freshly sharpened spurs!
They actually found a pottery shard with Yahweh and Asherah together. The inscription said, "Yahweh and his Asherah". It seems, at least based on the archeological evidence, that idolatry was quite common among the ancient Israelites and the "Yahweh only" movement might have been a much later religious movement, perhaps realy taking off around king Hezekiah.
Guillermo wrote: "They actually found a pottery shard with Yahweh and Asherah together. The inscription said, "Yahweh and his Asherah". It seems, at least based on the archeological evidence, that idolatry was quite..."I am aware of the discoveries, and they bolster my point. I suppose your take is all very well, provided you take a pottery shard as the definitive starting point of history and the guide for man's relationship to God. Seems like a flimsy thing to stand on to me.
Yes Ned, I base my entire world view on one piece of pottery. You have me entirely figured out. On a separate note, is their some sort of commandment in the bible that I'm missing that says all fundies need to be condescendingly smug and arrogant in their beliefs? And Jesus wept.
And before any fundie jumps in to correct me, yes I know, it just says "Jesus wept".
Why, yes, Guillermo there is: "Jesus is the way, the truth and the light." Fundies, as you dub them, take that to heart so they don't wander about ruddderless, tugged in a thousand different directions by competing claims from wannabe moral authorities.
Robert, sorry if you find my life rudderless simply because I need more proof then a scripture passage.
Thank you for that thought, Guillermo - maybe it will lead (finally) to some common ground. The Scripture passage is just icing on the cake, a minute affirmation of what Christian's believe. I wanted "proof", too. Instead, I got a calling. Naturally, I ignored it and went on about my sinful, self-centered life. It took several more callings over the years, and a whole bunch of shattered dreams from doing it Robert's way, before I was broken enough to respond. Have you been called, Guillermo? It's not very loud, but it's specific to Jesus and unmistakable in it's summons. If you haven't, then perhaps you must carry on in your current vein for awhile. In that case, we are just talking past each other to no one's benefit. But, if you were called and didn't respond at least you've been considered for the Kingdom. MANY are called, but...........not all, few are chosen. I might worry a little about that statement from the perspective of the life you're leading.
