Today’s letter-to-the-editor — like so many others recently — appears in the Midland Daily News of Midland, Michigan. The letter doesn’t have much of a title — Issues. The newspaper has an active comments section.
The letter-writer was also featured in Creationist Wisdom #516: The Scientist. She isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, and although she has previously claimed to be a scientist, she never provided any details — at least none that we’ve seen — so we won’t use her full name. Her first name is Barbara. Excerpts from her letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!
She starts by criticizing an earlier letter in the newspaper’s seemingly endless series on The Controversy, and she says:
That letter referred to comments previously made by me about scientists who freely spoke of problems they had with evolution. It is interesting that, in the short time that she had, she claims she researched these 3,001 scientists individually and also searched all available scientific literature to determine that their thoughts had not been published. I submit that she did not do that, but was well aware that evolutionists will not allow anything but evolution to be published. She rejects Creationist websites as being biased. Aren’t there evolution websites and aren’t they biased?
You can see what we’re dealing with. It would be futile to debate with Barbara, but her letter is wonderfully entertaining. She then says this:
[T]here should be no need to prove that the Bible is the inerrant, inspired, complete word of God. If one believes in God, there should be no problem with believing the Genesis account of creation.
Right. No problem at all. Nor is there any problem with the details in Genesis, because:
If it is believed that God created the world he surely had the ability to create everything he said he did, when he said he did it, as he said he did it. Why let the world direct itself for millions of years?
Convinced yet? Stay with us, you will be. Barbara goes on:
It is said that the only Bible books that don’t refer to the opening chapters of Genesis as literal are the books of Jude, Philemon and Second and Third John. Under just the heading “Creation” in Naves Topical Bible I found about 80 references, in 23 different books. Of particular interest are [bunch of bible references]. Creation is constantly mentioned.
Isn’t that amazing? The later parts of the book refer back to the earliest part. That means Genesis must be true! Barbara continues:
If Genesis one is not to be taken literally man did not sin and the purpose of the rest of the Bible, redemption, and the coming of Christ to die for our salvation are useless.
Egad — we can’t have that! Here’s more:
Is Christ mythical also? He was there and assisted in the creation of the universe and everything in it.
Okay. Moving along:
If man is created, which the Bible proves, he owes his allegiance to his creator.
Can’t argue with that. Another excerpt:
Creation is the only available option that adequately answers the question: From whence came man?
Uh … doesn’t evolution have an explanation? Barbara doesn’t think so, and she tells us why at the end of her letter:
Evolution cannot explain the origin of the universe or of life, conscience, or morality.
Wow — what a letter!
Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.