Anent Sean’s succinct acknowledgement that the purpose and content of …

Comment on The Full History of La Sierra University vs. Louie Bishop by Wesley Kime.

Anent Sean’s succinct acknowledgement that the purpose and content of this site and specifically this thread have again been redirected by regulars Pauluc & Kent with Sean actively joining, like retroviruses commandeering and redirecting the host’s expression, to an ostensibly inapposite topic, namely evidence-free faith vs. evidence-empowered faith, and David Read’s gentle slap of Sean’s hand for letting it happen.

I get the drift. I think it is especially apposite. I’m always on the lookout for this particular sub-thread, which not infrequently is woven into a fine fabric adorning the site. If annoying it’s because of gratuitous codas to otherwise informative and scholarly posts, like, “Sean, dude, you are a demonic threat and insult to inquiring minds and to our church, and everybody is laughing or cringing.”

With diffidence, then, may I insert a one-time bolus into this ongoing dialog?

To what shall I liken blank faith (calling it blind faith is a hate crime) stripped of all reason or evidence? It is like unto an ascetic, cachectic holy hermit, fasting many days, self-stripped of all possessions and tools, thus to disencumber his soul for spiritual journey. It is like unto the Asian mystical mental states, in celebrity and academic circles increasingly yearned and trained for, to wit, nirvana, satori, samadhi, and finally moksha, and, in the West (especially the West Coast), emergent “centering and clearing, labyrinthine spiritual formation,” all being degrees of blankness of mind (“liberation”), states of oblivious bliss that achieve direct connection with the god within you, shunting the God in heaven. After untangling himself from the lotus position and slapping his head to regain consciousness, the now even more open-minded scientist may resume his evidence-only posture and stride back to his lectern.
More like this: www.iessaythere.com

Recent Comments by Wesley Kime

Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
@Bob Helm: Dr. Sanford is very familiar to most of us. He was invited to speak at LLU several years ago and I and a great many were privileged to hear him.


Evolution from Space?
Hats off yet again to Sean for pursuing this topic as a scientist should, no nonsense, and in it’s proper setting — as a revival of one of the ancient ideas recently upgraded as a desperate alternative to the increasingly compelling intelligent design data. I had occasion to review panspermia a few years ago and as is my wont I found it more amusing than scientific. If you would like what was intended to be a satirical response to panspermia and other related curiosities you could check out: http://www.iessaythere.com/black-hole-humor.html
Meantime, Sean’s article is of far more cogent worth.


The Sabbath and the Covenants (Old vs. New)
As he has done on this site many times, Sean in his line-by-line-item response to C. White (not EG or EB) has, to my mind, clearly enunciated the issue and resolution.

When all the hermeneutics, quoting, and arguing and inordinately judgmental riposte are over, it comes down, as I understand it, to two things: 1) Whether the 7th day Sabbath (whether enunciated in the famous 10 commandments or otherwise) is still valid, and 2) Does the grace obtained by the vicarious sacrifice by the shedding of Christ’s blood or other divine process too deep for us to understand in this life, cover every sin automatically and without ado, altogether passively on our part, or is it only on condition that we first totally and deeply accept it? Other details always hassled forever are distractions.

I accept that I must accept it, wholly, actively, even with agony, with my whole being.


Nobel Prize Winner “Blinded by Belief”: Retracts 2016 Paper on RNA Self-Replication
The confession that Szostak made is boggling! If anybody has been on a “journey”, Szostak has! And this analysis by Sean of that journey and its implications is truly awesome. It should be published widely… I’m surprised nobody has commented on it yet. No comment could do it justice.

I’m reduced to being simply curious. Was there talk of rescinding Szostak’s Nobel? I propose another Nobel category: a prize for most honest scientist, and Szostak would be the first winner. Few other scientists would be eligible, particularly among evolutionary scientists, who collectively seem to have suffered a blindness mutation. He should be TIME’s Man of the Year.


The Creator of Time
@george: At the risk of seeming to celebrate your leaving more avidly and perhaps graciously than your familiar presence and participation, I always feel disposed, when one of our agnostics finally grows weary of going in circles and drawing everybody else into the dreary orbit and decides to move on to other ontological badlands, to bow my head and recite the mizpah, a Biblical farewell peculiarly apt because it was recited at a departure reconciliation of two individuals one of whom had just conned the other in a peculiarly stressful way, whereupon he had reacted in an especially objectionable way. (Genesis 31:49). “The LORD watch between me and thee, when we are absent one from another.” I’d put it in cowtalk, ole pard, but somehow the KJV sounds more poetic. Hope to see you again, friend. Beware of all those tumbleweeds, which, if you squint your eyes, look strangely like busts of Plato rolling and tumbling over each other.
.