News-Record.com

As a means of answering factual questions, it is more than a "satisfactory replacement" -- it is a vital upgrade.

As a means for providing meaning in life, it could never do that, anyway. All science is meant for is the discovery of facts. As always, I wonder why anyone would attempt to place other, completely unnecssary burdens on it.

“So we need to get E.T.'s view of what we are as a species, by understanding what puts us together and what makes us work with the environment the way we do.”

So we’ve come to this!? E.T. now replaces God as the ultimate authority as to who and what we are as a species. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, since we’ve been monkeying around with origins for a long time now. I had a friend a few years ago who commented, after I told him of my new-found relationship to God through Christ, that he was certain that extraterrestrials would intervene soon and bring about a new world, and that this God stuff was old hat. Perhaps he and Wilson were members together of this once secret cult that believed this schlock. Now it’s science! Well, of course, I know what he means here, but it still sounds a bit telling.

“I find it far more interesting and satisfying to explore beyond, within the constraints of what we find out ourselves about how the real world works, the fuller explanation of what humanity is, where it comes from and its meaning.”

Wilson’s views are nothing new or unique; it’s the new science-based worldview, which puts its trust in what it can “see,” test and analyze. Anything beyond this is primitive human speculation born of vegetatively-deprived, paternalistic, observationally-challenged dessert nomads chasing after father figures and foreskins. Now, the new lab-gods and dirt-diggers have figured it all out – well, sort of.

He admits elsewhere in his article that there really is no meaning, in the traditional religious sense. Meaning is “figuring it all out” (mine): writing astute academic papers on it and achieving tenure and making lecture circuits – and plenty of money in royalties and fees. In the beginning of his article he makes it clear that he still likes the “meaning-full” values of the Bible and Christianity (wherever they came from – ignorant nomads I suppose).

As usual atheistic scientists, humanists and birds of a feather, borrow profusely from these primitive values sources: they don’t rob banks, commit adultery (well), kill people or lie in court, etc. And they like love and peace and all that good stuff from the Bible; but don’t talk about transcendence or supernatural entities, mystical visions, or alternative explanations for how the first cell could ever possibly have just popped into being. Just give me test tubes, rocks, fossils, digs, genes, and red shifting. Somewhere ‘neath all these things has got to be meaning, passion, bliss – SOMETHING to satisfy the deepest longs for …………………………………………………………?

“This freedom (to explore observable phenomena) is not open to believers in traditional religions.”

Now the science cult is EXCLUSIVIST – O horrors, we thought only Christians were THAT!

“That search, which may never be fully satisfied or found with success, is one of the best intellectual and spiritual endeavors of which the human mind is capable. That is essentially, if you would like to call it that, my religion”

So, his “religion” is the may-not-happen search for who-knows-what. With all due respect for the insights and achievements of science, it WILL NEVER satisfy the deepest regions of the human soul, for it was created in the Imago Dei and only when that divine garden of bliss and total being is filled with God’s glorious presence does it repose in sure rest and peace – not indolence and intellectual catatonia, but a joyous exploration of the Creator’s magnificent universe, microcosmic and macrocosmic. The kicker is that only then does man have Someone to praise and thank and worship. Test tubes and fossils just don’t cut it.

You're right, Eric. "All science is meant for is the discovery of facts."

"So we’ve come to this!? E.T. now replaces God as the ultimate authority as to who and what we are as a species. "

LOL!

I wouldn't take any E.T.'s word as the final say on the subject -- but it sure would be interesting to know what the ultimate outsider might think of us, all things considered. You never know what we might hear.

"I had a friend a few years ago who commented, after I told him of my new-found relationship to God through Christ, that he was certain that extraterrestrials would intervene soon and bring about a new world, and that this God stuff was old hat."

You know, years ago when the movie "E.T." came out, I took my Dad to see it. When we came out, he shook his head and said, "It's sad to think that some people expect aliens to come down and fix our problems for us." I was surprised that he got that message from the movie, but the more I see of people who think this, the more I tend to agree. It's sad.

We may not agree on much, Nikos, but I think we can agree on this, among a few other things. Cheers!

Cheers!!!!

There, I did it! I wrote a short blog entry. Yeah, I guess we're stuck with trying to fix this mess ourselves. Our debate concerns where the answers lie: in God or Goo (the primeval sort).

It's weird that he seems to imply that Christians and religious sorts generally, are alien to science and discovery, when some of the greatest scientists of human history were Christian, Muslim, Jewish or some other variety.

The sphere of science that would be even remotely troublesome to some Christians is age-of-the-earth issue. Altho, personally, I’m an old-earth creationist, which accommodates billions of years, micro-evolution and fossils, etc. I won’t go there now; but I thought his points were unfounded, myopic and highly prejudicial. Perhaps if all he were looking at were Jerry Fallwell or Elmer Gantry, he might have some justification; but the theistic (Christian, Jewish etc.) science community is widespread, ancient, much accomplished and highly regarded.

Just because young earth creationists are at loggerheads with evolutionists, does not justify such vituperative, across-the-board and condescending commentary. In fact, there are ardent Christians, etc. in all areas of science. And just because cosmic antiquity shrouds many inscrutable mysteries - even for paleontologists and astrophysicists - does not mean that other issues are not easily observable and testable: like the value of fathers in the nuclear home, the efficacy of socialism, or the absurdity of killing babies in the womb (or out of it), the sociological and physical dangers of sexual promiscuity among teens, etc. etc.

Well, here I go. My point, succinctly: Science is by NO MEANS the exclusive domain of materialists, humanists and atheists. As a matter of fact, there could be no science at all if it weren’t for the fact that the universe is orderly, predictable and intelligently designed!

My wife is plaintively calling me away from the mists of the blogosphere. I’m prying my fingers off the magic keys. I’m exerting all my will power. There, I’m free. Well, at least I wrote one short one.