Sounds to me like you’re just being rude
Biologists helping bookstores:
My Mission: To correctly shelve pseudo-scientific junk to the appropriate parts of bookstores.
When it comes to “Intelligent Design”, booksellers seem especially confused. I aim to help bookstores as much as I can in my capacity as friendly, local biologist.
The guy reshelves intelligent design books in bookshops and puts them in categories like “Religious Fiction”. Cute. Even funny. But what about the poor librarians and bookstore employees who have to constantly reshelve this stuff? Isn’t he just dumping work on other people to get that warm fuzzy self righteous feeling? The poor schlub at Borders who has to cart these books around the store certainly doesn’t make up the shelving categories.
Honestly.
Why doesn’t it occur to the foes of intelligent design that if it’s just a bunch of shit, maybe they should ignore it and get on with something more meaningful? I mean, I don’t spend huge portions of my day thinking about ways to refute the contents of my toilet bowl. The whole ID debate is like this vast intellectual garbage dump, with both sides hurling offal at each other. Neither side listens to the other or makes any attempt to see things from the other side’s point of view.
When I say “vast intellectual garbage dump” I’m not making any judgments on whether one side is right or not. I’m just saying the whole ID debate is useless. Yes, the truth matters, but I have yet to find an ID debate on the internet (or off it) where anyone cared about the truth. No, everyone cares about bludgeoning the other side with facts and invective, trying to wear the other side down into agreeing with them.
It never occurs to the intelligent design folks that maybe, if God created the world, then scientists who are investigating the created world might be revealing some truths about how God created the world, and how the created world works. Maybe the scientists aren’t wrong, maybe it’s my understanding of scripture. Perhaps I should brush up on my ancient Hebrew and take another look at Genesis with a fresh ontological perspective.
But the central, fundamental problem with the current generation of intelligent design folks is that they feel the need to inject God into Science. Hello! That’s the whole point of science! Science is all about repeatable experiments, testable hypotheses, unbiased observations of the physical world. Let’s use our senses (and rigorously designed lab equipment) to see what we can learn about the physical world. Once you bring a higher power into it (especially a higher power with a personality), you lose the repeatable, testable, and unbiased bits — the most important bits.
Likewise, it never seems to occur to the evolutionists that describing how the world works doesn’t mean that one understands how it came into being. Even if scientists could specify a complete set of chemical reactions that could lead from a pile of chemicals to a simple bacterial cell (something that science is woefully far away from), all they would have done is demonstrated one possible way that God could have created life.
The biggest flaw my evolutionist friends have is their eagerness to paper over holes and flaws in their theories. I hear much conjecture about an overarching (from the evolution of life to the present day) theory of evolution, but when I look at actual facts and proven theories, there’s some pretty big gaps to swallow. When I point out the gaps to my friends, they bluff and bluster but rarely address the real issue.
In reality, neither side is willing to budge, because both sides really need either for God to exist or for God to not exist (as if God had nothing better to do than sit around and exist!) For them, much more is at stake than mere science. And the more polarized each side becomes, the louder everyone yells, and the less room there is in the middle for people like me. In fact, I’ve run across people (on both sides) who think it’s impossible for people like me to exist. “Either you believe in evolution, or you believe in God. Which one do you believe in? JUST MAKE UP YOUR MIND!”
At any rate: Evolution vs Intelligent Design, bah. Far too much heat and not enough light. Go out and plant a garden, make love to your partner, write a letter to your parents, or go looking for a new really good restaurant to eat at. Just put down that keyboard and go do something meaningful.
August 13th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Beautiful! Fantastic and clear post. Of course, I can say that since I agree whole-heartedly.
I also think this whole debate doesn’t really matter. Does it feed the poor in 3rd world coutnries? Does it clothe the homeless? Are orphans protected and loved? Will it save lives? Is it really life or death? No. Then who really cares?
August 13th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
As a scientist I should add that anyone who absolutely believes in what some scientists treat as fact is just as crazy as someone who believes whole heartedly in the bible. There are massive holes, contradictions, and extremely vague points in both the bible and modern science. Science in some ways has become so faith based that is can be considered a religion unto itself and, just like the Christian religion, there are so many denominations that contradict each other that it is just plain silly. There’s no point in taking a side because there is no way of knowing anything for sure. If a God can do anything, God can lie (just like science). Anything is possible.
August 14th, 2007 at 9:56 am
You almost had me until you said “God can lie”. More like “We can’t always comprehend” - just like science.
August 14th, 2007 at 10:48 am
“Can” doesn’t necessarily mean “does”. I guess that’s where that thing called faith comes in to play.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:27 am
Bravo. I’d like to think this is a lot like what I would write if I could still write clearly and coherently. I’d probably be lying, but, er, I guess the point is that I’ve never been able to understand people who can’t imagine a gray area here.
August 14th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
I suspect a reasonable likelihood that everyone is wrong.
August 14th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
My belly-button suspects the same thing but it’s usually wrong itself.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
(Finally responding..) I’ll give you that “can” obviously is not equal to “does”, although I do not feel that God “can” lie, either. But, as you said, that is a matter of personal faith (Hebrews 11:1). It is funny, though, that as I peaked at biblegateway.com to look up references, the two verses that stick out most don’t say “can” or “can’t”, but say “should” and “does not”… (Numbers 23:19, Titus 1:2 (NIV)), although I think “should” in Numbers 23 might also read “can”. Aah, Bible and grammar - my two favorite subjects.
But my belly button seems to be disappearing. I need to eat less.
August 17th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
Grammar in an english bible is pointless. Especially when talking about subtle differences like that. you’re stuck with best translations of meaning that the individual doing the translating can produce rather than actually intended meaning.
not exactly relevant but the mad hatter popped into my head
“you might just as well say that ‘I see what I eat’ is the same thing as ‘I eat what I see’”
its amazing how much change a subtle difference can make. I wonder what the mad hatter would be saying after he was translated a couple times.
August 17th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
You are assuming that a mere mortal could translate accurately from a god in the first place and that the said mortal didn’t make his own omissions, additions, etc.
you might just as well say that I see what I eat is the same thing as I eat what I see
English to Dutch and back via Babel Fish:
you also only are able say that I see what eats I is same the thing which I eat what I see
To French and back:
you are also only the able word which I see that what eats I is even the thing that I eat what I see
To Greek and back:
you are also only the capable word that I see that what eat the I it is even the thing that I eat what I see
To Russian and back:
you will be also only capable word I I see that they eat I will be even thing I I eat I I see
Apparently if you translate things too many times, you start to stutter.
August 19th, 2007 at 12:16 am
Computer aided translation is going to give you almost gibberish no matter what you throw at it.
Christian tradition holds that the original authors were divinely inspired — meaning that God was working in the biblical authors to make His message known through their words in the original text. There’s no “translation” from God’s original words, because we have God’s original words.
And that’s also the point of studying new testament Greek: if I’m going to translate the new testament into French, I’m not going to use an English translation to translate from. The bible doesn’t get translated from language to language to language — it gets translated from the original language to the target language.
In my opinion this is a much better way to go than the Muslims took. Muslims say you cannot translate the Koran, because any translation will be a corruption of the original. So in order to truly understand the words of the prophet Mohammed, you have to learn Arabic.
But language changes over time, no matter how much the French try to keep it from happening. As language and the meanings of words changes over time, new versions of the bible are translated into the modern vernacular.
How do we know that our translations are accurate? One of the most important aspects of biblical translation is hermeneutics, which (very roughly) is like getting into the heads of the original authors. What were some of the societal pressures at the time the book was written? What were the main political concerns? Asking these types of questions and learning about ancient history and cultures help us gain a better understanding of the original meaning of the biblical texts. Many difficult texts in the bible become not difficult at all when one stops looking at them from a modern perspective.
Another question to ask is does the new translation jive with the older translation? If not, why not?
Another big one that most people overlook is this: the Bible is (must be!) internally consistent. I can’t just make an eensy little change over here or over there to try to edge in my own point of view, because then the text starts contradicting itself. These internal checks and balances make it hard for sects to issue their own translations advocating their own idiosyncratic beliefs.
And finally (most unconvincingly to the non-believer, I realize), the Holy Spirit working in our lives will help us confirm or deny sketchy translations and teachings. The Holy Spirit, coupled with a good intuition and a finely tuned bullshit detector, is going to catch nearly all of the rest of the crap.
To give an example: I was on a road trip through the deep south once, when we stopped at a gas station somewhere in the middle of Texas. The bathroom walls were FILLED with Klan graffiti. Really nasty, vile stuff. I’ve never read anything more disgusting, nor have I ever been more afraid of my life than I was at that precise moment. One of the things on the wall right above the urinal was a single bible quotation: Ezra 10:10.
Here is what Ezra 10:10 says: “And Ezra the priest stood up and said to them, ‘You have broken faith and married foreign women, and so increased the guilt of Israel.’” (ESV)
The Klan doesn’t know (and doesn’t care) about hermeneutics. Ezra was speaking to the Israelites at a specific point in their history, not uttering a command for all mankind to follow forevermore. This much is obvious from a cursory reading of the text. Furthermore, the Klan is totally ignoring Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” And, of course, the Klan totally fails the bullshit test, but anyone reading this already knows that.
Most of the abuse of the bible stems from people ignoring hermeneutics and ignoring the parts of the bible that contradict their pet beliefs. The bible is not a biology textbook. Biology (and science in general) do not (cannot!) “disprove” the first couple of chapters in Genesis, for that reason.
Here’s another example. A literalist interpretation of the bible would lead us to believe that fat people can’t get into heaven. Why? Because Jesus said that in order to be saved we need to pass through the narrow gate, and fat people can’t get through a narrow gate. Ridiculous! Arguing that the earth was made in literally seven days is equally ridiculous.
August 19th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
I was wondering how long it would take to taunt John into a response like this. If you haven’t noticed, that’s one of the things that amuse me.
Let’s examine this Holy Spirit thing for a second. So the Holy Spirit helps you confirm or deny sketchy translations and teachings. What about the people that whole-heartedly believe a different way on a sketchy translation or teaching based on what they feel from the Holy Spirit? Is this the same Holy Spirit? Step outside the Christian world for a second. What about other religions? They have different viewpoints that they believe are confirmed by something equivalent to the Christian Holy Spirit. Is this again the same Holy Spirit? With so many diverse views on the same subjects, it would seem that the Holy Spirits of the world are just as confused as we are.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:05 am
another choice is that it is the same holy spirit across all the religions and the differences are due those under this holy influence being merely human and imperfect. Of course each different religion is quick to say that their guys were the ones that got it right. which make perfect sense really. anyone believing themselves to be absolutely right will find it very hard to imagine someone else could be right too and that they might be a touch wrong.
in my view one of the most absurd notions in christianity is that something like what they describe god as being would choose one very small group of people to communicate with and ignore all the rest of the world. why couldnt it commune with all the peoples of the world, though due to their different cultures and thing happening in the world around them (hermeneutics?). from that you end up with all sorts of different religions. all of them a bit wrong and all a bit right?
and I thought from the christian standpoint fat people had a hard time getting into heaven because gluttony and sloth were 2 of the deadly sins each transgression of which would have to be truly repented
is john thoroughly taunted now?
August 20th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
Well, John, at least they didn’t argue about translations some more. I think your argument is very well-stated.
I’m sure John can (will?) give a better response, but here’s mine anyway. Ignore at will. (And I don’t expect to sway the cynic or the skeptic, but I love to argue theology.)
As for there being holy “spirits”… hmm… the Bible does say something about Satan posing like an angel of light (he was, after all, originally second-in-command), and he’s the Deceiver, so of course there could be multiple “spirits” posing as “of God” while truly passing out lies. (Ephesians 6:12)
Yes, God determined to use one small group of people… to bless the entire world. He did not pursue the children of Abraham to the exclusion of other cultures. After all, he saved a harlot and her household when Jericho fell. He blessed and promised a nation to Ishmael, the child of Hagar (and the father of Islam, no?). And he took the persecutor of the Christ-ian Jews, Saul, transformed him and sent him to Rome to minister to the oppressive ruling party of caesars.
Also, the Bible doesn’t talk about “7 Deadly Sins”. How is a Messiah who hung out with thieves, prostitutes, drunkards, and lepers (let alone fishermen) going to turn away the obese? And the God who wrestles with, then blesses a polygamist?
Yet it is so funny how Christian and non- (or anti-) Christian alike tend to ignore culture (when pointing to or questioning the Bible, respectively) that polygamy was occasionally tolerated in some cultures, that fishermen were vital to social services and to the economy, and that everyone, even a poor, broken, deformed widow with a fugly skin condition, could be accepted, loved, and even healed by this man named Jesus (Wow, a paragraph-long sentence! Am I Falkner?)
And I don’t have to be right or wrong… except that if “I’m” right, then I go to heaven after this world. But if “I’m” wrong? I guess there’s nothing after death, so… we all lose. But it’s not me that is right or wrong. It is God and the Bible that would be wrong.
Yet, getting back to what Keir and I both said, it is by faith - that I accept God, Jesus and the Bible as truth. And I can’t make you do the same, but I can try to love you anyway.
“For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him” (John 3:17).
August 21st, 2007 at 12:08 pm
You can’t just say that if you are right, you are going to heaven and if you are wrong, there is nothing. There is an infinite amount of possibilities. There could be multiple gods each trying to get the most souls. The Christian god could be in fact a soul eater and is just using a clever deception to get a good hearty meal. In that case, you’re screwed if you’re a Christian. It could be that the Christian god is actually the devil and he is suppressing the real God. It could be that there are just a couple of aliens playing with the stupid humans to see what silly things they will do. Anything is possible.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:43 am
argue about translation more? my point on translation was about subtle differences like that between “can” and “should”. they dont necessarily even effect meaning but could have vast effect on an individuals interpretation. John didnt address it and you pretty well conceded it prior to my mentioning it.
A person here and there outside the group hardly makes the group much bigger. Even if you expanded the group and claimed everyone in any region of the world covered in both the old and the new testament was chosen by god as his people to communicate with yo still end up with a tiny group compared to all the rest of the world. why would god have no interest in asia, most of africa, australia, north/south america? why leave them leave them all to learn their religions from other spirits or as you put it the devil? why would you rather believe that the native americans worshiped the devil rather than believe your own god might be that much bigger and more complicated than you give him credit for?
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Wow. If this god were truly a souleater, it technically wouldn’t be the god that Christians purport to believe in, and yes, indeed, Christians would be screwed. As would Muslims and Jews, Buddhists and Hindus, and, it seems, pagans, Wiccans, atheists and nearly everyone else, too, since possibly all these beliefs are based on lies according to this scenario. (Satan cannot be both “god” and anti-god; a house divided against itself cannot stand, especially not for thousands (or millions) of years. If Satan is “god” then the church of Satan is actually worshipping something else - perhaps God?)
But yes, hypothetically, there are infinite possibilities. Yet does actual life and thought allow all of these hypothetical possibilities to stand as equal and truly probable, without any challenge?
My real question, Keir, is, “Which is it?” What you you believe? John and Corey might know this one, and I have some obvious hints, but I don’t have a very clear picture of your worldview.
[And John, I’m sorry I hijacked your comments roll and I’m sorry if I’m an embarrassment. I’ve always loved these discussions and don’t get too many of them here in the Bible-belt. I am trying to get up the nerve to start my own blog, though.]
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:06 pm
btw, Keir, my point of “a house divided against itself” is that if God is really a souleater, why wouuld the message to people be to honor and love and cherish this souleater-god and each other? How can a souleater spend thousands of years pretending to be something it’s not without actually becoming such?
Seeing this as a competition among gods also leads me to think that there has to be some ultimate end to the game. When is this end? What will it be like? Are these gods infinite? Are we merely unloved pawns, expendable when useless? Why, then, do I bother with living? Are we in some warped mix of Highlander and the Matrix in a literal way? (Although even those displayed two sides - good and evil.)
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:39 pm
What do I believe? I’m pure agnostic. I did the Christian thing for a while and finally got sick of it because of all of the hypocrisy. I was born again but, thankfully, I died again. I think there are all kinds of good things about the Christian religion, but there’s seems to be a lot of bad stuff as well. If there is a Christian God and a Satan, you can be sure that Satan is the strongest in the church because that’s where he could work the most mischief. If you assume Satan is not in the church, then you have to assume that lots of Christians are evil. Either way, there are too many ifs. There is no way of knowing without dying and even then we probably won’t get any answers.
I do believe in morals and most of these morals I’m sure come from Christian influence on our culture. Most of these morals are probably in most non-Christian cultures as well though. One of the biggest things I have a problem with is that some Christians claim you have to be “saved” to go heaven and if you are not, you will go to hell. These same Christians seem to generally be the most immoral ones as well. Assuming that a god would send immoral believers to heaven and a bunch of good people to hell, in my mind, makes that god evil and I would rather go to hell than support such a god. If it’s not true, then it doesn’t really matter does it?
Bible-belt huh? I drove through there shortly after George said something about starting a new Crusades. I saw several billboards down there saying that they were with George and ready to take back the Holy Land. Woo hoo! Lets go murder a bunch of innocent people in the name of Christ! If those people get in to heaven, I don’t want to go there.
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:42 pm
As far as the soul-eater question goes, maybe souls full of love taste better.
As far as an endgame goes, try reading Piers Anthony’s Incarnations of Immortality series. It has yet another interesting possibility.
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:02 am
as soul eaters go, maybe in order to eat the souls they have to willingly give themselves to the feast? What better way to get souls to be willingly devoured than to teach them to honor, love, and cherish you? and if you teach them to do the same to each other you’ve created a food base that will take care of itself and continue to grow. seems a perfect way to ensure you’d never run out of food. hardly a house divided against itself. more like a house in good order with a well stocked fridge.
August 24th, 2007 at 9:48 am
(going over-the-top)
You know, that’s true, the church is full of hypocrites. Why would anyone worship a god who puts up with them?
And I just realized that my favorite restaurant is full of people who just eat their food, they don’t enjoy it or think about what they are putting in their system. I think I should stop eating there.
And the other day I was by an apple tree and was picking a few apples. While doing this, I found a bunch of them that had bad spots, were bruised, or even had worms. I dropped the ones I had picked and decided I’ll never eat another apple again.
And I love sports - basketball, soccer, football, baseball even - but a lot of people at the games get drunk and spit at and taunt opposing players. I don’t agree with that, so I think I’ll give up on sports.
And work! WTF!! Frank does the same work I do (half-assed, though) and I know for a fact he gets paid almost double what I get! And the boss? How the hell did he get that position? I pretty much have to tell him how to do his job, he’s such an incompetent dolt! And Sally, the office gossip. She does nothing at all. I think she keeps her job by pleasing the boss… knowwhatImean?! I love my job and get paid well with good benefits and gcould get a promotion, but I really have to quit. I can’t deal with people like this.
Plus I have to leave this area anyway. I know there are people here who want to steal my stuff. I think there’s even people who wouldn’t care if they killed me! I can’t stay in a place like this!
And hospitals! Oh, don’t even get me started! They claim to be for the health and well-being of people, but they’re just full of sick people, many of whom die while there! And I’ve heard of people who went to get their appendix removed and left missing an arm and with a scalpel in their intestines! And the hypochondriacs who just waste precious time and money!
You know what? That’s it! I am going to build a tower in Antarctica and move there where bad people can’t mess with me. But it’s awfully cold here in my perfect world… and lonely… and quiet….
Yes, indeed. It’s always good to judge a book by the people who claim to read it but never really have.
August 24th, 2007 at 11:16 am
I hear Antartica may eventually get really nice if the global warming thing keeps going. Of course then you’ll have to put up with the penguins. You can’t trust anyone who wears a suit, you know.
August 27th, 2007 at 10:00 am
oh, btw, Corey, I’ve been meaning to write about your earlier statement about people selection and translation. I had something written, but it was long-winded and not focused and I just got tired of the argument. Here I will try to summarize.
“Subtle differences” would be one major reason there are so many denominations. Of course, that subtlety has also led to wars, shunning, and diverticulitis (perhaps). But is all that really necessary? I don’t think so. All that truly matters at the heart of the gospel is the individual acknowledgment that Jesus Christ died for the sins of all (African, Australian, Native American, or even Antarctican (yeah, yeah, I’m already Christian) population)) and then rose from death to life. Just about everything else is food coloring and sweetener.
The ancient Jews were the “chosen” people, but did that necessarily limit salvation and “heaven” only to Jews? Only to Christians? No. Job was not a Jew and probably lived around the time of Abraham, if not before. Paul went to Athens and found a temple to an “unknown God” and introduced them to the story of Jesus. Stephen shared the gospel with an Ethiopian. In the present, there are numerous stories of tribes and clans in Africa and elsewhere who had been praying to an “unknown” god and who prayed for someone to come to them and were then introduced to Jesus. Much like Keir, a big reason Mohandas Gandhi wasn’t Christian was because of Christians, not because of Jesus.
“The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians. They acknowledge Jesus with their lips, then walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. This is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable.” - Brennan Manning
I’m stopping here. And yes, this is much shorter than what I originally wrote.
btw, Antarctica is beautiful this time of year, but man these penguins are whacked out! I think I gotta move.
August 28th, 2007 at 10:11 am
Like I wrote above, the penguins are really getting nuttier as time goes by. Those shifty eyes - and they won’t look at me. The hushed tones. And the singing and dancing! Way too much freakin’ dancing!
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:01 pm
no one will argue with you that christians have done a great job going around converting people from unknown/known gods. Thats still what your limiting it to christians going out and spreading their faith. God it self still delivers his message to a amazingly small demographic. How about this; your christian god is the same as the greek gods, the same as the norse gods, the chinese, and so on and so forth across the world. the differences in the religions come about do to differences in culture and interpretation. along with numerous mere mortals guiding the religion on its way (for power/charity/good of all/maybe even some divine) for whatever reasons are in their hearts.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Corey, I think it is time you start checking through your posts before you submit them. Grammar and spelling are quite important if you want people to have any idea of what you are talking about. Unless, of course, you are doing it on purpose to show that gods and godly people like yourself are only vaguely comprehensible. If that’s the case, you are succeeding very well.
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:31 pm
vaguely comprehensible? works for me. I do manage to understand myself at least part of the time. but as I said at the beginning of all this, everybody is wrong. so does it really matter that much if I make sense if I’m wrong anyway?
September 6th, 2007 at 1:26 pm
http://www.parryandcarney.com/archives/article/2005/11/easy-way-to-disprove-biblical-creationism.html#comment-36723
Whoa. Yikes. Wow. Oh my. Phew. Yeesh. Yowza. Um… I think my head is going to explode.
I’ll have to do some research sometime somehow, but enjoy, all!