Evolution, the Bible...why bother?

(from crowhill.net weblog)

Evolution Discusssion/Debate

Comment:
It would seem that the overal consensus of the Christian users on the blog I've linked to (and I've noticed this of many otherwise "conservative", but not "fundamentalist", Christians) is that the evolution of the species, an old earth, etc. is a matter of fact. This ostensibly contradicts the plain import of the ancient history of man and this world provided by the Bible.

Said Christians get around this snag, by discussing that the "offending" passages are allegories, or of a poetic genre of Biblical literature, and were not meant to be taken literally - their spiritual/moral import is what is important.

However, this raises some questions for me...

1) Since there is nothing more "poetical" about these passages (pertaining to the "six days of creation", age of the human race, etc. etc.) that I can see than there is about other Biblical narratives, what's not to stop the reader from taking them allegorically as well?

2) Conservative Christian types persuaded by scientific observation to believe in an "old earth" and the evolution of the species, still maintain a surprising sense of superiority about their creed, and it's claims. Yet, is how they do all of this allegorizing that different than what many many contemporary Hindu pandits would say about the Puranic mythos pertaining to their various deities? I've noticed it's typical for Christians to point to the falsity of religions like Hinduism on the grounds that their mythos is so "obviously" at odds with mundane reality as we know it. "Oh, a god having an elephant's head...absurd!" Isn't this attitude a tad hypocritical?

In short, if we can "de-mythologize" the Bible (which is really what these folks are doing) and yet still hold it's import in reverence, why not with other religious traditions/mythos? What's good for the goose...

How wujja know?

Here's a puzzle I came across in a book I was browsing at a local bookstore (sorry, I don't remember the title)...

The Puzzle

Let's say you beheld this and heard a booming voice telling you that it was your Creator speaking, the "Lord of the Universe", etc.	Is it not possible that if you looked closer, past the radiance, you'd see this?

No, my purpose isn't to sell books for Erik Von Daniken or even to promote the "Ancient Astronaughts" theory. Rather, I pose a basic question - if "God" somehow sensibly communicated with you, how would you know it was really God? "God", as in the supreme being, the absolute, etc. Could it not just be some far lesser being, passing itself off as "your God"? Maybe a space alien with sophisticated technology...or some kind of disembodied spiritual intelligence that conventional science is currently unfamiliar with? I think you understand what I'm getting at.

The only answer I could come up with, is that we'd have to have some reference of comparison - something to compare with what this apparition/theophany said and/or did. The only reference I can think of though, would be an appeal to reason. In other words, does this intelligence say or do things which are consistant with being "the Supreme"? Does it ask us to do anything manifestly immoral?

These points of reference, while helpful, are problematic. For one thing, what "reason dictates" can be totally wrong. Second of all, if the "morality test" were any guide, than Abraham ought to have told יהוה ("Yahweh") to take a hike when He ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son upon Mt.Moriah. Yes, we know in hindsight it was a test of of Abraham's loyalty (indeed, unflinching loyalty even when asked to do that which is ostensibly immoral, IMHO), and יהוה had no intention of having Abraham actually slaughter and offer up his first-born as a sacrifice. But Abraham could not have known that (he obviously did not). So, if the "morality" test is valid, then there is a basic problem in the Judeo-Christian-Islamic narrative in this regard.

I have some opinions beyond this, but I think I'll have to sit on them for a little while longer.

Old interview, but still funny because I still delight in mocking those who are 'retarded' by choice

"cuz, like, freedom 'n stuff is too hard 'n everything"

Britney Spears on feigned lesbianism-for-profit and "Dubya"

excerpt:
The pop star exchanged a prolonged, open-mouth kiss with the Material Girl during MTV's Music Video Awards show last week.

"I didn't know it was going to be that long and everything," said Spears.
...
"Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that," she said.

"Iraqi prisoners 'treated no worse than cheerleaders'"

One for the "f**kin' a**hole" file...



Iraqi prisoners 'treated no worse than cheerleaders'

excerpt:
The lawyer for Charles Graner, the alleged ringleader of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, yesterday compared heaping naked Iraqi prisoners in a tangled pyramid to choreographed displays by high-school cheerleaders.

"Don't cheerleaders all over America form pyramids six to eight times a year? Is that torture?" Guy Womack asked a 10-member military jury in Fort Hood, Texas.

Comment/Response:
Yes Guy, they do, but usually it doesn't involve the little prisses being bare-ass naked with sacks over their head - unless your highschool cheer team specialized in 'snuff-style' routines chaulked full of sadistic homo-erotic subtext... ya' dickhead.

You've got to be CRAZY not to like Dubya!

Opposing Bush: A Form of Mental Illness?

excerpt
“When the 109th Congress convenes in Washington in January, Senator Bill Frist, the first practicing physician elected to the Senate since 1928, plans to file a bill that would define ‘political paranoia’ as a mental disorder, paving the way for individuals who suffer from paranoid delusions regarding voter fraud, political persecution and FBI surveillance to receive Medicare reimbursement for any psychiatric treatment they receive,” writes Hermione Slatkin, Medical Correspondent for the Swift Report. “Rick Smith, a spokesman for Senator Frist, says that the measure has a good chance of passing—something that can only help a portion of the population that is suffering significant distress.”