Time Immortal

Inigo Montoya’s phrasing just never gets old, does it? In this particular case, I’m applying it to a list of 20 “reasons” why evolution and the Bible are not compatible, published by Apologetics Press. The list seems, at first, to be quite persuasive…but as will become obvious, it should only be persuasive to those who know very little about both evolution and about the Bible.

I confess that such lists amuse me, if only because they again prove right the Augustinian teaching that “[u]sually, even a non-Christian knows something about the Earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the Sun and moon, the cycles of the years and seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men…. Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by these who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.”

Most lists of this nature are comprised of entries that reduce to one (or both) of two basic fallacies: ignorance of Scripture or ignorance of science. As we move through the list, then O Reader, let’s see if we can spot which error is the more prominent in each entry.
Read the rest of this entry »

“Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by these who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.” — St. Augustine of Hippo

There’s an interesting study one can do in the Book of Genesis, if one has a few minutes to spare and the inclination to copy, paste, and then read a few passages of text.

First, open a text editor window (Notepad on Windows, Text Edit on Mac OS X, whatever…). Now, find your preferred online version of Genesis, and copy the following verses into the text editor window:

Genesis 6:5-8, 7:1-5, 7:7-8, 7:10, 7:12,7:16b-17, 7:22-23, 8:2b-3a, 8:6, 8:8-12, 8:13b, and 8:20-22

Once that’s done, open a new text editor window (keep the first one open too), and copy the following verses into the second window:

Genesis 6:9-22, 7:6, 7:9, 7:11, 7:13-16a, 7:18-21, 7:24-8:2a, 8:3b-5, 8:7, 8:13a, 8:14-19, 9:1-19

Once that’s done, read the contents of the first text editor window through in their entirety. Then read the contents of the second window through, also from start to finish.

Now…what do you see?

Well, if you followed the instructions properly, you’ll see that the first window contains something like this:

Genesis 6

[5] The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

[6] And the LORD was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.
[7] So the LORD said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the ground, man and beast and creeping things and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”
[8] But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.

Genesis 7

[1] Then the LORD said to Noah, “Go into the ark, you and all your household, for I have seen that you are righteous before me in this generation.

[2] Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and his mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and his mate;
[3] and seven pairs of the birds of the air also, male and female, to keep their kind alive upon the face of all the earth.
[4] For in seven days I will send rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground.”
[5] And Noah did all that the LORD had commanded him.

[7] And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives with him went into the ark, to escape the waters of the flood.
[8] Of clean animals, and of animals that are not clean, and of birds, and of everything that creeps on the ground,

[10] And after seven days the waters of the flood came upon the earth.

[12] And rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

[16b] and the LORD shut him in.
[17] The flood continued forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bore up the ark, and it rose high above the earth.

[22] everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died.
[23] He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the ground, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the air; they were blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those that were with him in the ark.

Genesis 8

[2b] the rain from the heavens was restrained,
[3] and the waters receded from the Earth continually.

[6] At the end of forty days Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made,

[8] Then he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters had subsided from the face of the ground;
[9] but the dove found no place to set her foot, and she returned to him to the ark, for the waters were still on the face of the whole earth. So he put forth his hand and took her and brought her into the ark with him.
[10] He waited another seven days, and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark;
[11] and the dove came back to him in the evening, and lo, in her mouth a freshly plucked olive leaf; so Noah knew that the waters had subsided from the earth.
[12] Then he waited another seven days, and sent forth the dove; and she did not return to him any more.

[13b] and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and behold, the face of the ground was dry.

[20] Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

[21] And when the LORD smelled the pleasing odor, the LORD said in his heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done.
[22] While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.”

This is a complete flood account, one of two that are actually present in the Book of Genesis. Note that it is a complete account, giving an essentially unbroken narrative of the events of the flood, from the first moment the Lord noticed the sinfulness of humanity and elected to blot it out, to the final blessing and promise, to Noah and his family, from the Lord.

Note, also, the prominent use of only one name by which God is referred to: the LORD. This is an important stylistic device to consider, and we’ll look at why that is shortly. First, though, let’s look at a few other stylistic devices in the text. We note that the Lord expresses regret for having made humanity (6:6), and that His heart aches (6:6 as well) at their wickedness. We note, also, that he smells an offering (8:21) and that within His heart, He speaks (8:21 as well). These are very anthropomorphic statements, and present the Lord as a very personal, present God intimately involved and interested in the life and doings of His creations.

Note also that there are distinctions made between clean and unclean animals (7:2,8), and that there is a significant, repeated ordering of the animals in this account — from man, to animal, to crawling things, to birds (6:7, 7:23).

Finally, note that the numbers 7 and 40 percolate through the text (7:2,3,4,10,12,17; 8:6,10,12).

Biblical scholarship attributes this flood account, which presents a personal and present image of Go, to an author that is called the Jahvist (Yahwist). Principally, the author is called by this term because he only ever refers to God by means of the tetragrammaton, YHWH, which is translated into English as “the LORD” in these passages. However, it should also be noted that this author focuses on the ritual significance of animals in the order of creation, so much so that he even distinguishes between clean and unclean animals (although it should be noted that until the time of Moses, who came well after Noah, it had not been strictly defined which animals were considered unclean).

So that’s one account. In contrast, here is what the Reader should have ended up with in the second text window:
Read the rest of this entry »

Speaking of atheists telling me that my faith has no basis in reality (Robert, why haven’t you written? I miss you…):

Britons are losing their grip on reality, according to a poll out Monday which showed that nearly a quarter think Winston Churchill was a myth while the majority reckon Sherlock Holmes was real.

The survey found that 47 percent thought the 12th century English king Richard the Lionheart was a myth.

And 23 percent thought World War II prime minister Churchill was made up. The same percentage thought Crimean War nurse Florence Nightingale did not actually exist.

Three percent thought Charles Dickens, one of Britain’s most famous writers, is a work of fiction himself.

Indian political leader Mahatma Gandhi and Battle of Waterloo victor the Duke of Wellington also appeared in the top 10 of people thought to be myths.

Meanwhile, 58 percent thought Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s fictional detective Holmes actually existed; 33 percent thought the same of W. E. Johns‘ fictional pilot and adventurer Biggles.

What does this demonstrate?

Well, for starters, it goes to show a couple things. Yes, it does go to show that people can believe that people who never did exist were, in fact, real people, as in the case of Sherlock Holmes. But it can also go to show that, in spite of any weight of evidence to the contrary, people can mistakenly think that people who did actually exist were nothing more than cultural myths.

47% of Britons think King Richard is just a thing of fantasy, and almost a quarter of Britons think of Winston Churchill in the same way. Maybe Jesus was just a myth — even I can admit that is a possibility. But then, what if Jesus wasn’t a myth, but was in fact everything the Gospels say He was? Atheists who assert that Jesus never existed couldn’t possibly be…what’s the word?…wrong, eh? They might not be making the same mistake a quarter of Britons are?

(In Soviet Russia, hat tips you: Vox Day)