Religion

Photographer-philosopher Laszlo Bencze offers us this prayer, for spiritual Darwinists, Christian or otherwise, reflecting on one of their recent conferences:

We believe in Darwin, the father all-sovereign, explainer of all things visible and invisible, and in one Thomas Henry Huxley, the bull dog of Darwin, begotten from the substance of Darwin.

We believe in his son, Julian Huxley, of one substance with his Father. Read More ›

Here. The Nature of God // Zonderkidz from ColdWater Media on Vimeo.

From “Does religion rot teenagers’ brains?” (MercatorNet, 25 July 2011): Recently, we looked at a claim, published in a serious science journal, Intelligence, that belief in God correlates worldwide with lower IQ. From the same journal in the same year, we learned that religion correlates with lower IQ among American teenagers. [ …] If half of the Catholics and Baptist teens are sporadically observant and doctrinally indifferent (no unusual state of affairs), religious orthodoxy collapses as a predictor of IQ. So it is not clear just what Nyborg is measuring. Social class is a possibility. More. Follow UD News at Twitter!

In “First Person: The Bible as a Source of Testable Hypotheses”(Biblical Archaeology Review (Jul/Aug 2011) Hershel Shanks tells a story from Biblical arachaeology that explains more than I ever could about how materialism stifles science: In his new book Excavating the City of David, Ronny Reich of Haifa University treats archaeologist Eilat Mazar of the Hebrew University “dismissively” and accuses her of acting “unethically.” What did she do? She used the Bible as a guide to where to excavate.

Let me unpack this: As Eilat read the Bible, it seemed to indicate just where King David’s palace might be buried in the City of David—at least, it did to her. On this basis, she decided to dig there.

This was highly improper and unscientific, according to Ronny. When he heard that Eilat was using reasoning like this to find King David’s palace, he knew immediately that, proceeding in this way, “she would certainly find that building” (emphasis in original).

If she found the building, using the Bible, she did wrong. Shanks adds, Read More ›

Warmup act: The sky is falling.

In “From The Kentucky ‘Ark Park’ To Back-Door Creationist Legislation, Religious Right Forces Are Demanding State Support Of Fundamentalist Dogma, Rob Boston (Americans United for the Separation of Church and State Newsletter, July/August 2011) dispenses with nuances,

Attacking evolution means big money for the Religious Right. In Kentucky, a creationist ministry called Answers in Genesis opened the Creation Museum in 2007 at a cost of $25 million. Three years later, it had logged its one millionth visitor.

So is it any wonder that Kentucky, smelling more jobs and tax revenues, is eager to do business with the forthcoming Ark Park? Would Kentucky be better or more fairly governed if – absent of crime, sedition, or ethics issues – the government made the principals’ religious beliefs an issue? Read More ›

This vid is a comic rip on the theme of Darwinian atheist Richard Dawkins framed as coward for refusing to debate Christian apologist William Lane Craig, on a United Kingdom speaking tour:

Voiceover: “It’s not often that one atheist accuses another of cowardice for refusing to debate a Christian; it’ even rarer when both are Oxford dons. Richard Dawkins is facing that accusation because he has turned down an offer to debate a man regarded by many as the world’s leading defender of Christian belief.”

The vid comes from sources partial to Craig, of course, but features many voiceovers from Dawkins, giving his reasons, as well as links below. Read More ›

Some participants were flagged down at the airport afterward. Here are some great interviews (vid) at Ricochet (Claire Berlinski, editor), a “secret” conference of prominent idea people who are fed up with the cult. These feature Robert Marks and Rabbi Moshe Averick. Read More ›

Here:

The leaders are divided on evolution. Slightly more reject the idea of evolution (47%) than believe in theistic evolution, the notion that God has used evolution for the purpose of creating humans and other life (41%). Few (3%) believe that human life has evolved solely by natural processes with no involvement from a supreme being.

Did the 3% understand the question? Read More ›

In “A Testimony of Grace and the Plasticity of the Brain” (Trinity International University, July 2, 2011), Heather Zeiger reflects on one striking case: We never know how God is working in someone’s life, even as they are in the twilight of their lives or in a coma or navigating through the fog of Alzheimer’s. We know so little about how the brain actually works, and to say that someone is as good as dead when he or she is in advanced stages of Alzheimer’s or in a coma is short-sighted. There are still many mysteries about the mind/brain connection and just how plastic the brain is. The mind makes up its mysteries as it goes along, and the brain Read More ›

In “’Belief’ in evolution? It may be the wrong word” (06/27/2011), Faye Flam, Philadelphia Inquirer staff writer, allows us to know that we really shouldn’t say we “believe in” evolution because, as Larry Krauss puts it,

“I have attempted, largely through spurring on from several colleagues . . . to never use the word belief in talks,” said Arizona State University physicist and writer Lawrence Krauss.

“One is asked: Does one believe in global warming, or evolution, and the temptation is to answer yes,” he said, “but it’s like saying you believe in gravity or general relativity.”

“Science is not like religion, in that it doesn’t merely tell a story . . . one that one can choose to believe or not.”

Ms. Flam typefies the legacy media in decline because she cannot Read More ›

Yesterday, one of our top stories was “William Lane Craig is disingenuous, and he ‘shocked’ Larry Krauss” [his materialist atheist opponent].

The oddest thing about the story is that Krauss is, as it happens, a multi-awarded physicist, hailed by Scientific American as “one of the few top physicists who is also known as a “public intellectual.” Yet his post-debate comments sound like the circular rants of a sore loser.

The really interesting question is why such behaviour is so widely admired. Why do Krauss’s friends not discreetly suggest he quit talking like this? Read More ›

… as usual: Despite the many changes that have rippled through American society over the last 6 ½ decades, belief in God as measured in this direct way has remained high and relatively stable. – Frank Newport, “More Than 9 in 10 Americans Continue to Believe in God: Professed belief is lower among younger Americans, Easterners, and liberals,” Gallup (June 3, 2011) The new atheists have played a central role, sources say, in strengthening belief in God.

In “Does Islam Stand Against Science?” (June 19, 2011), Steve Paulson tells us that

We may think the charged relationship between science and religion is mainly a problem for Christian fundamentalists, but modern science is also under fire in the Muslim world. Islamic creationist movements are gaining momentum, and growing numbers of Muslims now look to the Quran itself for revelations about science.

Interesting how doubting Darwin in the Muslim world if evidence of lack of advance in science, just as it is in the scientifically backward United States. (Scientists who doubt Darwin, for whatever reason, are just ignoramuses, of course.)

“If evolution gets associated with atheism, Read More ›

One of the most common objections to design thought is the idea that it is about the improper injection of the alien  supernatural into the world of science. (That is itself based on a strawman misrepresentation of design thought, as was addressed here a few days ago.)

However, there is an underlying root, a common distortion of the origins of modern science, which Nancy Pearcey rebutted in a  2005 sleeper article as headlined, that deserves a UD post of its own.

Let’s clip the article:

Read More ›