Category Archives: Christianity

Darwinism Vs. Intelligent Design

Christianity, Pseudoscience, Reason, Religion, Science

C-Span broadcast a book forum at the Cato Institute, featuring the author Michael Shermer, Director of the Skeptics Society, with comments by Jonathan Wells, Senior Fellow at the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute. Wells is also the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design. That tells you all you need to know about his position.

It’s probably safe to say that I come down on Shermer’s side. I’ve always admired his work. However, evolution is one topic I’m agnostic about. Joy! I love a good intellectual debate (although this one was a tad short)—all the more so when I have no dog in the fight.

Both men are extremely bright and cordial. I question Wells’ inability to come up with a theory that’ll fill the lacunae he finds in Darwinism. He claims he is not obliged to fill in the gaps. My knowledge of the theory of science is limited, so I can’t tell you whether the onus is on him to furnish a competing, overarching explanation.

Send Us Your Con Men and Women

Christianity, Europe, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Morality

What do you know, a day after The Decider (Bush’s nickname for himself) praised millions of illegal immigrants for heroically forging documents and lying to employers about their status in the country, The American Enterprise Institute has opened its arms to a prominent Dutch counterfeiter, and is, evidently, sponsoring her immigration to the United States.

She’s the Somali-born Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whom I’ve mentioned—favorably—before. Ali’s an outspoken and brave critic of Islam. She assisted Theo van Gogh, the slain Dutch filmmaker, in exposing the enslavement of women in Muslim countries. It goes without saying that followers of the religion of peace want to kill her.

Little did I know that she is liberal only with respect to views she endorses. According to Lawrence Auster, Ali has sought to ban conservative, Christian, and immigration restrictionist parties in Europe. Writes Auster:

She was also among the 12 signers of a leftist anti-Islam manifesto in March 2006 that said, ‘It is not a clash of civilisations nor an antagonism of West and East that we are witnessing, but a global struggle that confronts democrats and theocrats.’ The clear implication is that Christian ‘theocrats’—which by contemporary standards means anyone who actually believes in Christianity—are Ali’s enemy as much as jihadists are.

Ali, moreover, lied on her Dutch asylum application. Duly, after being a Dutch citizen for 14 years, and a member of that parliament, to boot, immigration minister Rita Verdonk has revoked her citizenship.

I’m not saying I support this ruling. The details are sketchy, and Ali claims to have “admitted lying to win asylum in the Netherlands when she was vetted as a candidate for parliament in 2002.” What makes me even more suspicious is that “a Dutch court ruled that she must leave her home in The Hague because neighbours felt she was a security risk.” That’s preposterous! What right has the court to evict her from her home because thugs have threatened her life? Let the court banish the thugs from the country!

I’d say that Ali is a candidate for asylum in the United States, although I’m not sure she’d be better protected here than in Europe. What I question is her candidacy for a fellowship with an American think tank.

Wait a sec, what am I thinking? Having no coherent political philosophy or lacking veracity—even talent—are not always impediments to being hired by such places. For example, Rachel Marsden, a convicted Canadian stalker, worked for Paul Weyrich’s D.C. think tank, the Free Congress Foundation, which is dedicated to fighting America’s “long slide into cultural and moral decay.” I’m sure there are other examples—of lack of talent, at least, if not of out-and-out wrongdoing.

* Image courtesy Point Of Inquiry.

‘Christianity Vs. Islam: No Reconciliation,’ says BAB Contributor

Christianity, Islam

Like many converts to a faith, Barbara Grant is a serious student of Christianity. She has had a lively, if polite, disagreement with Barely A Blog’s Catholic contributors, here, here, and elsewhere on BAB. She writes:

There can be no theological “kum-ba-ya” sessions in which both Christians and Muslims can joyfully participate—there can be no theological reconciliation between the two faiths. Those who suggest this is possible have strayed from scriptures. With reference to Catholics, they should rely more on reading the Bible and less on Church authority.
The Bible clearly refers to Israel and the Jewish people as God’s Chosen, and Christian believers as those grafted onto the tree (of belief, and therefore, salvation) and does not make accommodation for those of other faiths who appreciate Jesus, but do not regard Him as their Savior. In short, the Bible doesn’t accommodate Islamic belief.
Nor does the New Testament invalidate the promises made by God to the Jewish people in the Old.
Paul writes: “I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means!” (Romans 11:1). “…But through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous.” (Romans 11:11). These passages can hardly be referring to the Church, as many Catholics aver. They refer literally to the Jewish people.
Ezekiel 37:21 states: “…Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all sides, and bring them to their own land.” Ezekiel is not referring to the Church, but to the re-establishment of Israel in its own land. [By the way, the American affinity for Jews—and for Israel—is said to be rooted in Protestantism, more oriented towards the Hebrew Testament than Roman Catholicism.—ILANA]
Nor is he referring to the Church in Chapters 38 and 39 when he describes how Israel’s would-be invaders will come from “the uttermost parts of the north” and ally with the nations surrounding Israel. The recognition of Hamas by Russia, the fact that Russian technologists now work at Iranian nuke plants, among other factors, make it difficult if not impossible to believe that there is any “Israel” in prophecy other than the nation state re-established in 1948.
Biblical Christians will adamantly reject any compromise between the Christian and Muslim faiths, no matter how ardently some Catholic, Muslim sympathizers may try to initiate interfaith dialogue. That is because biblical Christians believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, and refer to both Old and New Testament Scriptures as the basis of their faith. We do not rely on a “Church authority,” (a ruling pontiff) to tell us what’s what: instead, we argue our points directly from the Bible. I recommend that those who do not appreciate this point, re-read Scripture.

'Christianity Vs. Islam: No Reconciliation,' says BAB Contributor

Christianity, Islam

Like many converts to a faith, Barbara Grant is a serious student of Christianity. She has had a lively, if polite, disagreement with Barely A Blog’s Catholic contributors, here, here, and elsewhere on BAB. She writes:

There can be no theological “kum-ba-ya” sessions in which both Christians and Muslims can joyfully participate—there can be no theological reconciliation between the two faiths. Those who suggest this is possible have strayed from scriptures. With reference to Catholics, they should rely more on reading the Bible and less on Church authority.
The Bible clearly refers to Israel and the Jewish people as God’s Chosen, and Christian believers as those grafted onto the tree (of belief, and therefore, salvation) and does not make accommodation for those of other faiths who appreciate Jesus, but do not regard Him as their Savior. In short, the Bible doesn’t accommodate Islamic belief.
Nor does the New Testament invalidate the promises made by God to the Jewish people in the Old.
Paul writes: “I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means!” (Romans 11:1). “…But through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous.” (Romans 11:11). These passages can hardly be referring to the Church, as many Catholics aver. They refer literally to the Jewish people.
Ezekiel 37:21 states: “…Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all sides, and bring them to their own land.” Ezekiel is not referring to the Church, but to the re-establishment of Israel in its own land. [By the way, the American affinity for Jews—and for Israel—is said to be rooted in Protestantism, more oriented towards the Hebrew Testament than Roman Catholicism.—ILANA]
Nor is he referring to the Church in Chapters 38 and 39 when he describes how Israel’s would-be invaders will come from “the uttermost parts of the north” and ally with the nations surrounding Israel. The recognition of Hamas by Russia, the fact that Russian technologists now work at Iranian nuke plants, among other factors, make it difficult if not impossible to believe that there is any “Israel” in prophecy other than the nation state re-established in 1948.
Biblical Christians will adamantly reject any compromise between the Christian and Muslim faiths, no matter how ardently some Catholic, Muslim sympathizers may try to initiate interfaith dialogue. That is because biblical Christians believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, and refer to both Old and New Testament Scriptures as the basis of their faith. We do not rely on a “Church authority,” (a ruling pontiff) to tell us what’s what: instead, we argue our points directly from the Bible. I recommend that those who do not appreciate this point, re-read Scripture.