Category Archives: Bizarre
One of the blogs I enjoy reading is God of Evolution.
His latest post is entitled 10 Theological Questions No Young-Earth Creationist Can Answer. While I think the word “no” in the title might be slightly off — in his blogpost, he does mention some YECs attempts at some answers — the article is pretty spot-on. Perhaps a more accurate title would be: 10 Theological Questions No Young-Earth Creationists Can Answer Satisfactorily.
If you are not familiar with Tyler Franke’s style of writing, be prepared for some pithy humour which may, or may not, border on snarky depending on your tolerance level.
In summary, here are the questions:
1. What was the point of the tree of life?
2. If human sin is the reason animals die, why can’t they be saved?
3. If physical death is part of the punishment for sin, why do Christians still die?
4. Why was Eve named “mother of life”?
5. How did Adam and Eve know what death was?
6. If the punishment for eating from the tree was that Adam and Eve would physically die … why didn’t they physically die?
7. Can you name any other piece of literature in which the existence of a talking snake and trees with magical powers would suggest to you that it was meant to be taken literally?
8. Why do Genesis 1 and 2 contradict?
9. Why is incest wrong?
10. And finally, if it is so vitally important that Christians take Genesis literally, why did Jesus never once instruct us to take Genesis literally?
First there was defrauding,
now, apparently, a woman can cause a man to ‘freak out’ and be ‘damaged spiritually’ simply by staring at him through the TV screen with her large eyes.
I first heard of the Duggars when they appeared on a television special. There they stood all in a row in age order, smartly and modestly dressed, saying their names one by one for the camera. The youngest one or two at the time were too young to say their names, so one of the parents spoke for them and Michelle ended the lineup by putting an affectionate hand on her belly and said, “…and this is Jackson!”
They looked like such a sweet, adorable, Christian family! And they home schooled!!
What was there not to like?
Quite a bit, as it turns out.
At first I thought they looked so nice. A bit weird in the fashion department, but okay.
Later, I learned that they home schooled with Bill Gothard’s Advanced Training Institute materials. Warning bells. And that they subscribed to Christian Patriarchy and all that entails. Huge warning bells. And then the television show that put them in the limelight. You know the tune.
“They’re a clean, wholesome family,” people said.
“The Duggars are upholding good, conservative, Christian values,” people said.
“I’d rather watch the Duggars than all that other junk that is on TV,” people said.
“The children are modest, well-behaved, role models,” people said.
Let’s talk about that. (Cue the “Good Mythical Morning” music. Or the “Twilight Zone” theme. Take your pick. I recommend the latter.)
Interesting articles around the web this week:
I am a lucid dreamer. Many times, while dreaming, I have become aware of being in a dream. Sometimes I do things I wouldn’t normally do in real life. Sometimes I wake up. Mostly, I get really interested and step back from the action and see what unfolds.
In which Ken Ham falsely claims that there are two different kinds of science … again.
Before watching God’s Not Dead, Newsboys was only a very small blip on my radar. After watching God’s Not Dead, they became a bigger blip.
A fatwa, y’all! A religious ruling, but not universally binding on all Muslims.
Asked on a religious website if it was permissible for fathers to build snowmen for their children after a snowstorm in the country’s north, Sheikh Mohammed Saleh al-Munajjid replied: “It is not permitted to make a statue out of snow, even by way of play and fun.”
That someone feels the need to ask for clerical input for an activity such as building a snowman boggles the mind.
Quoting from Muslim scholars, Sheikh Munajjid argued that to build a snowman was to create an image of a human being, an action considered sinful under the kingdom’s strict interpretation of Sunni Islam.
It is not only the Prophet’s image that is not allowed to be recreated in any way, shape, or form; it applies to all human beings. Since that is the case, many things should be banned. Portraits, of course, are out. Statues, movies (particularly historical documentaries) and anything like that should all be banned.
Not all Muslim countries follow this edict, of course.
We are one week into the new year already. How’s it going for you?
To ring in the new year, Answers in Genesis bought advertising space in Times Square to air a video.
Was it to wish everyone a Happy New Year? No, guess again.
Was it to tell of God’s gift of His Only Son to save mankind? No, guess again.
Was it to apologise for the redundant of on this billboard?
Nope, your three guesses are up.
In case you’ve missed it, a conservative Christian home-schooling mom (CCHSM) named Megan Fox visited a museum and audited it for bias. (Being somewhat culturally illiterate, I didn’t know there was another Megan Fox.) CCHSM Megan Fox posted a 30-minute video of herself going around the museum critiquing the signs and boards.
It is a very long 30 minutes and I watched the whole thing! (I feel I should get a medal or something. Maybe a paracetamol tablet would be better. Or two.)
The description of the video says it all if you don’t/can’t bear to watch the whole thing:
In this episode (“Field Museum”), Megan Fox toured the Chicago Field Museum’s “Evolving Earth” exhibit to audit it for bias. She found many examples of inconsistencies and the Field Museum’s insistence that people support opinion as fact without proof. The Field Museum pushes certain theories as if they are absolute proven law when that is not how the scientific method works. She found enough bias to show that the people who put this exhibit together at the Field Museum pushed an agenda with quasi-religious overtones: the cult of “science” where the “scientists” are more like high priests pushing a religion instead of using the correct scientific method. Aside from having time machines, there is no way these people can be this certain about things they speculate happened millions of years ago before recorded history.
Continuation of Panda’s Thumb series on Understanding Creationism.
Many creationists assume as self-evident that evolution precludes the existence of God, not because of any qualities intrinsic to evolution, but because their concept of God is dependent on creationism. Officially, creationists usually teach that the Bible is our only infallible revelation of God’s existence, but in practice the “fact” of special creation is treated as a primary basis for belief in God. The “testimony of nature” is implicitly held up as proof of God’s existence. Every time a particular piece of purportedly creationist evidence is described, the underlying implication is that God’s existence depends on six-day special creation. Thus, to even propose that evolution could be true is automatically a “challenge to the evidence” for God’s existence.
The assumption that “evolutionism” and “secular science” denies God’s existence applies not only to the suggestions that evolution might be possible, but more generally to any challenge to creationist arguments. While some creationists take pains to discard the more outlandish arguments, others will fiercely defend obsolete and ridiculous theories simply because of their perceived apologetics value. This stubbornness is the source of animosity and division between the various creationist movements; each group points to “concessions” and “compromises” the other groups make, because any compromise is considered a tacit admission that maybe the evidence for God isn’t quite as strong as it would otherwise be. Such arguments are all God-of-the-gaps arguments, of course, but this fact goes unnoticed.
The idea that evolution is a religion (among YECreationists) is a rather baffling one to me. I once was told, “If you believe in it, then it is your religion!”
Ken Ham also promotes the idea that ‘evolution’ and ‘millions of years’ is a religion. This is puzzling, because he also equates them with atheism.
A couple of news items regarding developments with regards to the National Center for Family-Integrated Churches (NCFIC). For the uninitiated, the NCFIC is an organisation set up, as their name suggests, to promote family-integrated churches. A family-integrated church is one where there are no age- and/or gender-segregated ministries. That means, no Sunday School for children, no Women’s Bible Studies, no Over-50s group, and most importantly, NO YOUTH GROUPS.
Read the rest of this entry
My last post was a link to an article about the Shift in the Homeschooling Movement. While I greatly enjoyed the article and agreed with much of it, I am more than a little dismayed to discover that Mr Israel Wayne is part of the movement that he says is becoming a minority. In other words, he is not welcoming the shift as I originally thought, rather, he is encouraging other like-minded Christians to not be too critical of the newcomers who do not subscribe to their conservative views.
This weekend, there will be a Conference (the kind with Capital ‘C’) where Mr Wayne will rub shoulders with RC Sproul Jr, Marshall Foster, Scott Brown and Ken Ham. Oh, and Kelly Crawford. These are BIG, BIG names in Conservative Christian Homeschooling circles. You get introduced to one, and before too long, you know the others.