An editorial in Nature began, in bold print, “With all deference to the sensibilities of religious people, the idea that man was created in the image of God can surely be put aside.”
Comments;
- The person who wrote this doesn't seem to know what deference is.
- Deference; [Webster's]
1. Deference marks an inclination to yield one's opinion, and to acquiesce in the sentiments of another in preference to one's own.
2. A yielding in opinion; submission of judgment to the opinion or judgment of another. Hence, regard; respect. We often decline acting in opposition to those for whose wisdom we have a great deference.'
- so where's the deference? I guess it's missing; like all those billions of missing links. (But as we're aware, being able to write and think isn't necessary for getting published in popular science magazines :=)
- Contra the editorial, it's not 'religious' people who believe man was created in the image of god, but only Christians. (As far as I know, few 'orthodox' Jews believe this in our day. Buddhists, Hindus, New Agers, etc. don't believe this.)
- the author doesn't merely say 'can be put aside' but says 'surely can be put aside.' (e.g. like the old photos of grandpa on the farm, holding a shovel and pointing to the cow.)
- and why should we put aside the 'idea' man is made in the image of God? Well; it's obvious; life emerged from non-life during the age of miracles; and a fish became a lizard that became a rat that became a pig that became a boy; and the boy grew up and wrote Origin of species. And who in their right mind can argue with that? The fact that it's impossible isn't nearly as important as the fact it's true :=)
- but, as ever is the case, natural man 'puts aside' truth for his own delusions. Clearly man should defer to his Maker, but this goes against the (fallen) grain.
Notes;
1. this is yet one more 'argument' that depends on creating a dichotomy between Darwinism/Materialism (which is Not a religion) and Christianity which Is a religion. i.e. The block letters spell out for the whole class to see; evolution good; creation bad. (The word 'religion' is meaningless in our day. Finite beings can only act in terms of faith; whether that faith is in Materialism, Theism, or something else.)
2. If we want to converse rationally on the subject of Origins, we must exchange the obsolete term religion, for the the term world view. (A term that can be defined precisely.)
- if Christians keep using the term religion, they have no way of making progress in this debate; they will lose before they begin.
Notes;
1. Reference; Science Journals Make Dogmatic Atheist Statements Creation/Evolution Headlines 08/08/2007
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
