Uncritical journalists piss me off. Uncritical religious people piss me off, too, but it’s their natural state at least. When the two converge, as they typically do on the religion pages, I turn purple and start shredding newsprint (which is why I usually avoid reading the religion pages). Today, the Star Tribune has an interview with Lee Strobel.
Q You mentioned Darwinism. Do you question the theory of evolution?
A Evolution is defined as a random, undirected process. But even scientists say the universe had to begin somewhere. Then you look at genetics, cosmology, physics and other fields. From there we can extrapolate that there had to be an immaterial, powerful, intelligent cause to the universe coming into being. The evidence defies a coincidental explanation. And random, undirected evolution precludes a creator calling the shots, so there’s an intellectual disconnect for me. Also, Darwinism offers no explanation for human consciousness. The gaps in science point to a creator.
Strobel is one of those dead-boring, dishonest apologists for Christianity, but if he’d confined his remarks on the religion page to just their shared delusion, I’d let it slide…but as usual, these guys can’t help but babble about stuff we can evaluate.
No, that’s not how evolution is defined, except maybe by creationists. If that kind of mangled nonsense is acceptable, I’m going to define Christianity as the belief that people are too stupid to think. Strobel can’t complain; he gets to invent definitions and pretend they’re accurate, I get to invent definitions.
I know genetics, and there’s nothing in it that can be extrapolated to suggest the existence of ghosts. I’ve read enough physics to see that there is no evidence there for his super-being, either. Well, except for the stuff that proves the existence of Hanuman, the monkey god. (I don’t need to tell you what that is, of course, just as Strobel doesn’t need to spell out how he derives Jesus from physics.)
That a guy desperate to find scientific evidence to support his tribal superstitions has an “intellectual disconnect” isn’t evidence for much of anything. Especially when he’s saying that his evidence for a god is that he’s uncomfortable with the fact that science doesn’t provide evidence for his belief.
“Darwinism” isn’t about consciousness. He might want to consult a neuroscience text instead.
Oh, man…God of the Gaps. Don’t you love a theology that makes shrinking ignorance a heretical assault against the gods?
In one short paragraph, Strobel upchucks all that amazing creationist stupidity, and what does the interviewer, Pamela Miller, do? Moves on to ask him what he believes about Christ. Even if I were disposed to care about Jesus, I wouldn’t consider the views of a demonstrably ignorant fraud to be worth considering.
Pamela Miller, I know you’re writing empty-headed fluff, and you must know it, too. But if you ever hope to write something more substantial, you might want to try engaging your brain in an interview, and actually question the assertions of your subject.