Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in an unnamed newspaper at the Sauk Valley website from Sterling, Illinois. It’s titled Science does not disagree with the Bible, and they have a comments section.
Because the writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name. His first name is Ralph. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!
After starting with a bible quote about the Resurrection, he says:
I assume Mr. Welty and Mr. Bauer are willing to risk that is an absurd, primitive story.
Ralph doesn’t link to what Welty and Bauer wrote, but we found an earlier letter which is undoubtedly part of what got him agitated enough to respond: Literal belief in Bible is ‘dangerous’. Then he says:
I can’t help but wonder what they don’t understand about more evidence for the resurrection of Christ than any event of ancient history.
What? Oh, he has an authoritative reference — a book by Josh McDowell. Ralph continues:
Science does not disagree with the Bible, but it is true that many scientists disagree with the Bible, the same as factory workers and others who are willing to risk it is an absurd, primitive story.
We have no idea why Ralph mentioned factory workers along with scientists, but let’s read on:
Thousands of fully qualified scientists, representing every field of science, studied the scientific evidence and were convinced the biblical record of Earth history is precisely correct.
Don’t laugh, dear reader. Ralph has an impressive reference for that claim — Defender’s Study Bible (Amazon link) by Henry Morris, founder of the Institute Institute for Creation Research. Here’s another excerpt:
I suggest unbelief is dangerous, not belief. Today the views of God’s word have not switched. There have always been those who understand it is true, and those who reject.
Ralph is among those who understand The Truth™. Here’s more
Either God created everything, or in the beginning, nothing became something and exploded. All logic and laws of science predict if you have nothing, nothing will happen.
Very impressive argument! Here comes another:
Evolutionists won’t find the missing links because there are no links connecting kinds of creatures in the fossil record. Variation is observed only within kinds; zero evolution from one kind to another.
Ralph references something by ol’ Hambo as support for that statement. And now we come to the end:
We don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see how unscientific is the theory of evolution.
Verily, Ralph is no rocket scientist. But he writes a great letter!
Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.