Falling From Cloud Nine

"Maybe now that it's summer, I'll write hear more often," he says, full of hopes and most likely excrement. I will really try to make this one shorter than a book though. I am positive that I get twenty tl;drs every post. A quick glance at posts past reminds me that I never wrote about the ridiculous evolution scandal on Taylor's campus last year. Seriously, how could I not touch something like that? If you are unfamiliar with aforementioned scandal, it revolves around a VERY poorly written article in our newspaper basically saying that Taylor shouldn't teach evolution in any capacity because it is in direct opposition with the Bible. He was responded to in vehemence in the next issue and so it went back and forth a few times. That's the gist at least. Now let's move into a section called (that's right, you guessed it):

The Beefs

Jedna) This kid was obnoxiously ignorant in his article on a public platform. I don't recall exactly, but I think he was either a philosophy or theology (or one of those other exceedingly pragmatic) majors. He was honestly just extremely uneducated on the subject matter he was writing about. Ergo, he should not have written about it. Yes, I understand free speech and editorials, but ignorance breeds further ignorance in a society of blind followers. I'm not saying our society fits that generalization, but there are undeniable evidences in recent politics, not to mention some of the protesting that has gone on, that a portion of our population can be described thusly. I know people generally always think they are right, but before embarrassing yourself publicly, wouldn't it make sense to talk to someone who actually understands the terms you are going to butcher in your article? At least then you could be wrong, but keep your dignity. Which brings me to:

Dva) This will probably be the most fun of anything I've written about so far. He was just flat out wrong. This was partially because he used some terms incorrectly. He used evolution and darwinism interchangeably. If you really want to know the differences, become a better person and go learn. Evolution is an accurate description of many real phenomena in our universe, plain and simple. Viruses adapt and mutate. If you've ever had the cold more than once, you are living proof of evolution. That being said, what most Christians have a problem with is the concept of evolution "on a scale of separated gene pools." If you really want to argue with me about it, we can. I'll probably win. That's really not what I want to get into...although:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

fun fun. Seriously though, I want to address a couple specific arguments. A lot of Christians will say God could have created the world with fossils like ^those already underground. This is the same argument as God manipulating our perspective to see stars being billions of lightyears away. Like many of my other responses, my response to this is, "sure, he could." On the other hand, did he? Probably not. 

Oh wait, crap. I'm getting to the interesting point without addressing another kind of boring one...

Tři) Should professors at a Christian school be allowed to teach what they want or should they conform to the opinions of a select few humans? Uhh...well, short of "the devil is really cool, guys! Let's all dance naked around a fire and cover ourselves in the blood of a goat!" I think that's a pretty easy one, but it merits mention. Students are at school to learn and learn they should. If they are being taught to learn correctly whilst learning, the burden of whether specific ideas fit into their perspective and worldview is out of the professors hands, as it should be.

Čtyři) Well, this isn't really a fourth point, but damn just look at that word! Isn't it cool? Ahem. As I was saying, there is a part of being an intelligent Christian that is the ability to say it doesn't really matter in the long run. God did what he did and our faith doesn't necessitate understanding of his methods. However, the previous statement is also unfortunately lacking for one very important reason.

The Point

The pursuit of truth ultimately and absolutely is the pursuit of God. 

I mean, one of the names Jesus used for himself was "the truth." That statement should not be that much of a stretch. So why is it important? It is important because it means that science is never going to disprove God. Period. The only reason Christians generally frown upon scientific findings (other than the ridiculous hate perpetuated since The Age of Enlightenment) is because scientists have generally been in opposition of the church (see previous parenthesis). Atheist douchebaggery aside, I have said before that people only see what they want to see. If I want to look at the fossil record or the stars and see proof of God's lack of necessity and therefore probable non-existence, that's what I am going to see. But seriously, look where they have ended up: Our universe is one of an, let me emphasize again, infinite number of universes. That is how a portion of the scientific community has decided to explain away God with chance. They are using the word "infinite" in their theory! It is literally a tiny hop in perspective away of being theism. 

I want to be very clear though. This whole entry is written because Christians are guilty of the exact same thing: unwillingness to admit they don't have all the answers. There is no reason for any follower of God to fear science. The only thing to be wary of is the disillusionment that can be attained through limited perspective.

Eff. This is really long again. Oh well, people never change, right? I hope I made a good point somewhere in there. If not, sorry for wasting your life. Thanks for hanging on my every word.

E.