The Addictive Blogger, Part II
Thought I'd post again, here in the blog, so soon after the last post, simply because I guess I have to. Juuust to be out there in the blogosphere, you know, have the presence, all that. Sorry, but I don't have a comments section. I'd love to, but when I've tried to re-enable it, it just doesn't. So, hey, still, if you like my take, email me from my webzine. I'd love to hear from you.
Anyway, felt like I needed to just add some thoughts about some thoughts in my latest blog, thoughts that I thought would surely get some to go "Whoa Nelly that's kinda dicey there Dave!"
There was this, if you recall:
The Bible is a science textbook.
I know why so many go "NOW-WAIT-A-MINUTE-THERE" so readily. They've been seduced by two of the greatest World operative grunts in the history of philosophy, David Hume and Immanuel Kant. When you get right down to it, here's what each has said.
Hume: "There aren't miracles because there can't be miracles."
Kant: "I know that you can't know something, anything."
Really, that's them for you. Tell me I'm wrong. But if you are intellectually honest, through all the erudite elaborate intellectual folderol, that's their stuff. That's it, right there.
And it is deeep inside the psyche of your typical Catholicized individual.
Please, look at those two statements. Look at how silly they truly are. But you hear very smart, thoughtful, and most likely very nice and kind people say these things to others all the time.
"I know you can't know that." "That simply couldn't have happened." "I don't believe it." "You're so wrong about that I'm not even going to give you the time of day."
Pretty authoritative words from people who rely on anti-authoritativeness to comprise their world view.
"Oh but you're twisting the definition of science."
Not. Who said you get to make the definition of science? You know the one, it essentially states, as it does today in popular culture: "Science is the pursuit of truthful things as long as they don't involve God." Really, that's it. Tell me I'm wrong.
And the Bible, not a science textbook? I checked out the 104th Psalm after my last post, just to soak it up again, and here're just two small verses, just two: "He makes springs pour water into the ravines; it flows between the mountains. They give water to all the beasts of the field; the wild donkeys quench their thirst."
Hmm. Looks pretty scientific to me. There're mountains, there's water, there're animals, there's some kind of flowing and some kind of thirst-quenching going on. Really, tell me, what's the only thing there that disqualifies that very statement from being science by today's completely benighted secular definition?
I know what it is. Who is that "He" there?
Funny, I've seen science shows on National Geographic or Animal Planet or anything like that that say exactly the same thing, but instead of "God" they say "evolution." "Evolution did this" and "Evolution did that." It'd be comical if it weren't so contemptibly stupid.
What is this stuff that is thriving in people's minds?
That's kind of the second thing I said in that last post. Here it is, again:
The Roman Catholic Church drives all that, deliberately, purposefully.
You see, David Hume was effectively trained by Jesuits in this perverse love-hate thing he had going with them. Immanuel Kant had his work widely disseminated throughout an elite educational system that has been practically administered by Jesuits.
Of course, the deer-in-the-headlights look appears on the faces of so many, a lasting "Guh?" hanging on their tongues, always followed immediately by some loud fierce gibberish that only amounts to some convoluted version of "IT CAN'T BE BECAUSE IT CAN'T BE" and "YOU DON'T KNOW BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW."
::Sigh:: Just tired of it. It is just so idiotic, it really is.
But you know? Here's the kicker.
It is indeed perfectly rational.
You see, I don't censure or rebuke or challenge Rome at all in any of this. It is what they do. They are supposed to do that stuff, and they do it exceptionally well I might add. God even told them to, as much as they themselves haven't a clue who this God fellow is. Check it out, right there, very scientifically described in the 4th chapter of Genesis.
It is just, if you want something better, greater, more beautifully wonderful than rationality, then you want righteousness. That's very different.
And you can have that only by the One Who Is Righteousness Himself.
He's the One who died to clear away the idiotic folly of pretentious philosophers and scholars, to make it so people could see clearly enough that they can indeed love with a sacrificial love just like He did. And celebrating Easter as we are today is merely about rejoicing that He very scientifically, verifiably, falsifiably, and truthfully rose from the dead so we could know we'll have eternal life as well, drawn to Him and His rich, bountiful love.
Anyway, felt like I needed to just add some thoughts about some thoughts in my latest blog, thoughts that I thought would surely get some to go "Whoa Nelly that's kinda dicey there Dave!"
There was this, if you recall:
The Bible is a science textbook.
I know why so many go "NOW-WAIT-A-MINUTE-THERE" so readily. They've been seduced by two of the greatest World operative grunts in the history of philosophy, David Hume and Immanuel Kant. When you get right down to it, here's what each has said.
Hume: "There aren't miracles because there can't be miracles."
Kant: "I know that you can't know something, anything."
Really, that's them for you. Tell me I'm wrong. But if you are intellectually honest, through all the erudite elaborate intellectual folderol, that's their stuff. That's it, right there.
And it is deeep inside the psyche of your typical Catholicized individual.
Please, look at those two statements. Look at how silly they truly are. But you hear very smart, thoughtful, and most likely very nice and kind people say these things to others all the time.
"I know you can't know that." "That simply couldn't have happened." "I don't believe it." "You're so wrong about that I'm not even going to give you the time of day."
Pretty authoritative words from people who rely on anti-authoritativeness to comprise their world view.
"Oh but you're twisting the definition of science."
Not. Who said you get to make the definition of science? You know the one, it essentially states, as it does today in popular culture: "Science is the pursuit of truthful things as long as they don't involve God." Really, that's it. Tell me I'm wrong.
And the Bible, not a science textbook? I checked out the 104th Psalm after my last post, just to soak it up again, and here're just two small verses, just two: "He makes springs pour water into the ravines; it flows between the mountains. They give water to all the beasts of the field; the wild donkeys quench their thirst."
Hmm. Looks pretty scientific to me. There're mountains, there's water, there're animals, there's some kind of flowing and some kind of thirst-quenching going on. Really, tell me, what's the only thing there that disqualifies that very statement from being science by today's completely benighted secular definition?
I know what it is. Who is that "He" there?
Funny, I've seen science shows on National Geographic or Animal Planet or anything like that that say exactly the same thing, but instead of "God" they say "evolution." "Evolution did this" and "Evolution did that." It'd be comical if it weren't so contemptibly stupid.
What is this stuff that is thriving in people's minds?
That's kind of the second thing I said in that last post. Here it is, again:
The Roman Catholic Church drives all that, deliberately, purposefully.
You see, David Hume was effectively trained by Jesuits in this perverse love-hate thing he had going with them. Immanuel Kant had his work widely disseminated throughout an elite educational system that has been practically administered by Jesuits.
Of course, the deer-in-the-headlights look appears on the faces of so many, a lasting "Guh?" hanging on their tongues, always followed immediately by some loud fierce gibberish that only amounts to some convoluted version of "IT CAN'T BE BECAUSE IT CAN'T BE" and "YOU DON'T KNOW BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW."
::Sigh:: Just tired of it. It is just so idiotic, it really is.
But you know? Here's the kicker.
It is indeed perfectly rational.
You see, I don't censure or rebuke or challenge Rome at all in any of this. It is what they do. They are supposed to do that stuff, and they do it exceptionally well I might add. God even told them to, as much as they themselves haven't a clue who this God fellow is. Check it out, right there, very scientifically described in the 4th chapter of Genesis.
It is just, if you want something better, greater, more beautifully wonderful than rationality, then you want righteousness. That's very different.
And you can have that only by the One Who Is Righteousness Himself.
He's the One who died to clear away the idiotic folly of pretentious philosophers and scholars, to make it so people could see clearly enough that they can indeed love with a sacrificial love just like He did. And celebrating Easter as we are today is merely about rejoicing that He very scientifically, verifiably, falsifiably, and truthfully rose from the dead so we could know we'll have eternal life as well, drawn to Him and His rich, bountiful love.
Comments
Post a Comment