Creationist Wisdom #933: Lots of Evidence

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Mountain Mail of Salida, Colorado. It’s titled Why God matters, and the newspaper has a comments feature.

Unless the letter-writer is a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name — but today we’ve got a preacher. It’s John Myers, pastor of the Temple Baptist Church in Salida. We’ll give you a few excerpts from the rev’s letter (it’s a column, actually), with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Here we go!

There seems to be an increasing movement in our world to reject the idea of a sovereign God, specifically, to reject the idea of the God of the Bible, Yahweh. … I tend to think the discussion and the consideration of the reality or the nonreality of a sovereign God is paramount to how we live our lives. Even “why” we live our lives the way we do. I’ve come to believe that answering that question of “is there a God?” instructs everything else in my life.

Okay, that’s the big question. The rev says:

Ultimately as I sought out the truth of this matter in my life, I kept coming to the conclusion that there had to be a sovereign God, and even more convinced that it is the God of the Bible. Perhaps one of the strongest arguments that I had to wrestle with came from science and the belief that all that there is exists as a result of the development over billions and billions of years from a single cell.

Ah yes, the theory that the whole universe developed from a single cell over billions and billions of years. The rev explains why he rejects that:

But the development and advancement of scientific tools and instruments continue to allow us to see deeper and deeper into the material world and see more accurately how things are constructed. We are discovering that the complexity of all matter is so great that to develop to this current point would require time frames that fly in the face of current theories. In other words, the more we look at creation the more it points to a creator. Just way too much engineering and design in all things and how they work together.

Good thinking! He continues:

The greater argument that I struggled with was “if there is no God, then what is the origin of morality? That is, where do right and wrong come from?” I had difficulty understanding why it wasn’t “every man for himself” or to put it in Darwinian terms, natural selection – survival of the fittest.

Your Curmudgeon has given that some thought, and we’re satisfied that there can be A Secular Source of Morality. The rev thinks otherwise. He says:

This finally began to occur to me that there must be a being outside and greater than myself that is the creator of all things material and moral. I have found that the best description and understanding of such a being is found in the Bible. In this book is a description of a sovereign creator God that has created the universe as well as the moral principles by which we are called to obey.

And he has proof, which he gives us at the end of his letter:

As a Christian I am called to live by faith but God’s chosen to give me and everyone else obvious evidence for his existence. The evidence is plain to see, it is his very creation around us, the very operation of the universe is so engineered to sustain our life … The fact that I have a conscience and the ability to understand the difference between right and wrong. We also have the capacity to help others when it’s not to our advantage. All of this points to a sovereign God. And I’m convinced that God really does matter.

So there you are, dear reader. You’ve seen the rev’s evidence. Impressive, huh?

Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

15 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #933: Lots of Evidence

  1. Evidence for WHAT?

    Hs God is so weak that he couldn’t create an evolving world of life? OK, if that’s what he wants to believe in.

  2. “if there is no God, then what is the origin of morality? That is, where do right and wrong come from?”
    Some of us think that morality involves the consideration of how we can best live together as a social species: or, to put it another way, how can I maximise my happiness and evolutionary success in the context of other organisms who, for the most part, have the same selfish aims that I have. I suspect, however, that when pastor John Myers speaks of morality, he is mainly concerned with the consideration what body parts come into contact with other body parts when two or more people interact.

  3. Michael Fugate

    What does biblical morality entail? Is it kill your enemy or love your enemy?

  4. Holding The Line In Florida

    The Right Good Reverend muses, “Ultimately as I sought out the truth of this matter in my life, I kept coming to the conclusion that there had to be a sovereign God, and even more convinced that it is the God of the Bible.” He left out the next thought, however. “Otherwise I would have to get,” gasp “a real job!”

  5. “the theory that the whole universe developed from a single cell over billions and billions of years”
    To be fair: this is the terminology of another rev, the catholic Georges Lemaitre. it’s called the Primeval Atom.

    “would require time frames that fly in the face of current theories.”
    Despite our dear SC’s enthusiasm, who exclaims “Good thinking!”, this is rather non-thinking. It’s hardly a coincidence that Rev John (related to PZ?) doesn’t provide any reference, no source; there is no serious one.

    “I had difficulty understanding why it wasn’t “every man for himself” or to put it in Darwinian terms, natural selection – survival of the fittest.”
    Because Rev John isn’t exactly completely familiar with Darwinism or he would have mentioned Mutual Aid as well. Symbiosis isn’t exactly a refutation of Evolution Theory. Neither is cooperation within a species; still I wonder why the social structures in ant colonies (which resembles marxism) never is brought up (not by our dear SC either, who needs to keep on fooling himself that only survival of the fittest in economy is compatible with Evolution Theory).
    However I can’t help to notice that Rev John only on one point qualifies as a creacrapper: “science can’t explain where morality comes from, hence God.” That’s not nearly enough.

    “This finally began to occur to me ….”
    Yeah, yeah, Rev John undoubtedly started out as an agnost cough cough ….

  6. The rev was chosen by God to do His explaining for Him, pointing out everything the “unchosen” refused to see. It made the rev feel all warm and gooey inside. He heard from astronomers about stars going supernova and thought to himself: “Stars exploding! Jeepers: just think of the engineering and design that must have gone into that!”

    The rev went and examined all the religions in the world. Christianity stood out clearly head and shoulders above all the others: “Jeepers! It’s just like Darwinism! Survival of the fittest!”

    The rev was predisposed already to believe in origin myths, but he brought his considerable acumen to bear on the origin of morality. How did it come about? Surely it didn’t come from nowhere? And it couldn’t have evolved because — let’s face it: what can?– and then suddenly: the explosive realization! “Jeepers! Morality must have been plumped down here — just like that!– by some all-powerful being who must reside outside of the physical universe!”

    Feeling pretty chipper about himself by now — after all his labors– the rev sat down to write his column. He smiled and tsk-tsked at the thought of bumpkins like Ray Comfort who resorted to bananas to advance their arguments. No: apologetics is a subtle art, and only some are worthy enough to explain its intricacies.

  7. I’m always amused by creationists’ contention that, as rev Meyers says “…the very operation of the universe is so engineered to sustain our life” when humans can live on a relatively small volume of our own planet, which occupies a small fraction of our solar system, which is a tiny outpost in our galaxy that is one of more than 10^12 galaxies. If that arose by the handiwork of some great designer who wanted to sustain our life, rather than fairly well understood physics, he/she/it was bloody inefficient or incompetent. I’m rather glad he/she/it didn’t design my car.

  8. Not only that – the idea that some great designer created the entire shenanigan exclusively for us (specifically Rev John) displays a breathtaking arrogance, totally contradicting the humility Jesus preached. Adams’ puddle analogy doesn’t do any justice to it. Better is Philipse’s “The White House is such an excellent resting place for me, fly, that some higher power must have build it specifically for me” – but even that proportion dwarves.

  9. “…I’ve come to believe that answering that question of “is there a God?” instructs everything else in my life….” Translation…I’m a bigoted, intolerant, ahole!

  10. “Translation…I’m a bigoted, intolerant, ahole [and very proud of it]!”

  11. If their gawd is limited to “design”* then it sure isn’t omnipotent! Bad designs result from making bad tradeoffs, so we end up with willfully ignorant priests and preachers. Neither gawds nor evolution are perfect or else these fools would not exist.

    *Design involves making tradeoffs.

  12. @Zetopan
    Design involves making tradeoffs.
    The end of ID.

  13. Like so many others, the rev prefers to accept biblical contradictions, inconsistencies and falsehoods over the evidence and logic of science.

  14. @Scieentist
    So many not only accept some of the contradictions, inconsistencies and falsehoods … or evil or ugly ..
    But they also reject some of them … Even stuff which is not a contradiction, inconsistency or falsehood …
    If that were not enough, they also make up stuff … Regardless of whether it is a contradiction, incosistency or falsehood …

  15. I am constantly in awe of the believers who point to “God’s Creation” as evidence for the existence of their god … and then ignore all that that creation tells us. That creation tells us that we evolved from simpler animals. We ourselves have bred animals to be very different from what they were before in very short time frames, so it doesn’t take absurdly long periods of time as the creationists claim. Also, according to their mythology, we are all descended from a single family (Noah’s) less than 6000 years ago but they are completely comfortable with all of the variations we now have from the very, very small gene pool in just 6000 years.

    Basically all this guy did was point out that he was very, very comfortable with his prejudices. He didn’t (obviously) actually study the scientific aspects of his claims, otherwise he would have understood them better, and realized that what he is saying is nonsense.

    It seems that seminaries are selecting from the worst and dullest, rather than the best and brightest and then dumbing them down.