Eden Hill Journal

Comments, dreams, stories, and rantings from a middle-aged native of Maine living on a shoestring and a prayer in the woods of Maine. My portion of the family farm is to be known as Eden Hill Farm just because I want to call it that and because that's the closest thing to the truth that I could come up with. If you enjoy what I write, email me or make a comment. If you enjoy Eden Hill, come visit.

My Photo
Location: Maine, United States

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Reply to big "A"

This is a reply to the comment on yesterday's post titled "Whimsical Creationist."
First, if the theory of "Intelligent Design" and the belief in Creationism are not the same thing, then do creationists believe in intelligent evolutionary design? Are creationists supporting the teaching of intelligent design in schools or are they opposed to it because it involves evolution? Intelligent design as a theory is a foot in the door for Creationism. You and I both know it.
Second, in Genesis 9:11 and 9:15 the Bible states that God promised not to destroy the earth or "all flesh" by flood. II Peter 3:10 says, "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up."
The thing is, big "A," Christians don't have a clue what is to become of the earth, but there is a tendency for Christians to think that the end is near, that the "rapture" and everything following it is near, and that things like conservation and sustainable living don't make a lot of sense considering all the destruction that is soon to come. That was my point. The concepts of survival, conservation, and sustainable living are foreign - almost to the point of being atheistic and/or demonic - to religious people who hold dear the belief that the rapture of the believers and the end of the world is near.
I read Genesis 1:28 and I don't find in it the concept of maintaining anything or of living a sustainable lifestyle or of conservation or even of survival. If the Bible supports those concepts - something I have never heard preached from a pulpit - it must be someplace else. It clearly isn't in Genesis 1:28.
While Biblical literalists long for the Rapture where they make their escape from the terror to come and begin their eternity in paradise, many evolutionists long for a peaceful future, a sustainable world, and sanity. Those who believe the end is near see no need of passing a sustainable world on to future generations, but those of us who do see the need for survival realize that for mankind to survive, the earth must survive, the environment must survive, and all of life on which our own survival depends must survive. Even those who subscribe to Darwinian "survival of the fittest" know that the key word in that term is "survival." While the religious have their mystical heaven and thus don't need this earth, realists know that without the earth, at least for the time being, mankind is lost.
I sense a certain confusing duality in big "A"'s arguments. If big "A" is Christian, which does appear to be the case, then he or she knows that "intelligent design" implies a creator and a creator implies God and God in a Christian nation implies Biblical creationism. Yet, big "A" denies this fact. II Peter tells us that the earth and the heavens will be destroyed by fire, yet big "A" denies that God will destroy the earth based on a false interpretation of Genesis 9. In general, Biblical literalists live as though there is no tomorrow because in their view there aren't many tomorrows left before the rapture, yet big "A" falsely cites a verse in Genesis 1 claiming it commands Christians to "maintain" the earth. What are we to make of these contradictions? Are we to take big "A" at his or her word, or are we to realize that these right-wing "pro-life" Christians have no problem at all with sending other people's sons and daughters off to war, no problem at all with killing thousands or even millions of innocent people in war, no problem at all with building and sustaining nuclear arsenals capable of destroying life on earth, no problem at all with driving gas-hogging SUVs miles from home to church or miles from home to work or miles from home to take their kids to school or miles from home to WalMart or the nearest NASCAR race while innocent people are dying in the U.S. effort to secure the world's oil supply for American corporations.
And big "A" has the nerve to call us hypocritical and Godless. Go figure, huh?


Anonymous Anonymous said...

"First, if the theory of "Intelligent Design" and the belief in Creationism are not the same thing, then do creationists believe in intelligent evolutionary design?"

I would say no. Let's be clear, you were talking about 7 day creationists in your Whimsical post. I would say they do not believe in evolution. One who believes in Intelligent Design may incorporate evolution into their belief of a supreme creator.

"Intelligent design as a theory is a foot in the door for Creationism. You and I both know it."

Perhaps so, but then couldn't you say evolution is a foot in the door toward teaching there is no God? Why is one view superior to another?

You suggestion that Christians don't care about the environment is wrong and you have provided no facts to back up your crazy assertion other than your own crazy hair brained theory. The religious people I know see this entire planet as God's creation and feel a duty to maintain it in a responsible manner. I would appreciate if you could find a quote from a prominent Christian telling us we don't have a duty to maintain this planet. I suspect you can't.

I'm pressed for time so I can't respond to your comments about war right now. I will have to come back later.

5:00 PM, September 28, 2005  
Blogger Bill said...

"I would appreciate if you could find a quote from a prominent Christian telling us we don't have a duty to maintain this planet."
That's a good request. I'll see what I can find. Meanwhile, would you please provide us with a thesis written by a prominent evangelical Bible literalist explaining the responsibility of all Christians to maintain sustainable life on earth? I would appreciate it. I would suggest that you don't use the Bible for this since you don't seem to have mastery of its contents. A recently written book on the topic would do just fine.

8:17 PM, September 28, 2005  
Blogger Bill said...

By the way, big "A," are you suggesting that it is evolutionists who are behind the drive to get the theory of "intelligent design" into America's science classrooms? If that is not the case, then why are you arguing as though it is? On the other hand, if that is the case, can you cite some evidence to support that claim?

8:22 PM, September 28, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here are two links I found with a quick google search.



I am not suggesting evolutionists are trying to get Intelligent design into the classrooms. I am saying there are some people who believe God created the earth and created man through evolution. Some people have an open mind to the possibility that God and evolution can both exist.

And let's be clear that nobody is suggesting Intelligent Design be taught in a science classroom. It has only been suggested as an elective. The misconception that it would be taught as a science class is widely spread by the left in order to stir up hysteria.

9:21 AM, September 29, 2005  

Post a Comment

<< Home