Re David’s Quote “I’m with Kurt Wise in that I’m going …

Comment on The God of the Gaps by Ken.

Re David’s Quote

“I’m with Kurt Wise in that I’m going to follow the Bible regardless what my senses appear to tell me. I’ve made an a priori decision (comparable to, but opposite of, science’s a priori decision) that the Word of God is more trustworthy than unaided human reason.”

Hello David

Even though my rational mind cannot fathom this, i respect your faith in this regard. As an agnostic, i acknowledge the possibility of a Super Reason that may trump human rationality. But to understand that would require me to be God like, or adopt faith without personal circumspection. I’m afraid my agnosticism gets in the way of that.

David, I always enjoy your posts and hope you continue to do so.

Your agnostic friend
Ken

Ken Also Commented

The God of the Gaps
Re Sean’s Quote

“I agree with everything you’ve said, except, perhaps, for the part about there not being enough evidence in hand right now that strongly suggests well-defined limitations to the creative potential of mindless naturalistic mechanisms to produce life or its diversity beyond very very low levels of functional complexity.”

Hi Sean

This poses an interesting question. Why would an Intelligent Designer allow for any degree of non design by mindless naturalistic processes. What would be the purpose of that? Care to speculate?

Your agnostic friend
Ken


The God of the Gaps
Dear Wes

Those old ontological bleachers are a bit hard on my hind quarters. Every so often I have to get up, stretch and cheer for the good guys/gals. πŸ™‚

I am much at peace these days with your heartfelt friendship. To me, apostate that I am, that is the malleable essense of Christian fellowship, not entrenched doctrine.

Your agnostic friend
Ken


The God of the Gaps
“@BobRyan:

The notion that the Theory of Evolution (ToE) violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (2LoT) is mistaken. There simply is no violation of this law since there is plenty of thermodynamic energy around to drive the work necessary to produce living things and their diversity.” – Sean Pitman

Hi Bob

Is it fair of us to presume that your degree in science, hence expertise, is niether in biology or physics? πŸ™‚

Your agnostic friend
Ken


Recent Comments by Ken

Supreme Court Decision on Church Employment Case
Hi Bob

I asked once before and I’ll ask again: what is your background and expertise in biology?

Your agnostic friend
Ken


Creeds and Fundamental Beliefs
Re: What every human being on the planet believes?

Empirically, as i don’t have blind faith I could know this, perhaps it could only be a divine being that could do so. πŸ™‚

Always open to correction though to those that know the absolute truth,

I remain,
Your agnostic friend
Ken


A “Christian Agnostic”?
Re Bob’s Quote

“But we can “observe” that the making of complex systems (and books, and works of art and science) is done by “creators” every day – observable, repeatable, testable. A mechanism proven to work.”

Hi Bob

Thanks for your comments.

This may surprise you but I’m actually intrigued by the design argument. My Dad is a Deist although I’m not of that bent, at least not yet! The laws of nature, i.e. gravity, that even allow the universe to exist are pretty marvelous. Did they arise as a result of a random quantum fluctuation or was their Grand Designer behind it all. If so what is or was the nature of such designer based on what we empirically observe about our universe?

The problem I have with intelligent design within our universe and especially regarding life on earth is theodicy. I do understand how the concept of original biblical sin accounts for the loss of perfection, but I have a very tough time understanding why a God would cause such destruction of his creation based on the disobedience of the literal eating of an apple. I just can’t rationally fathom how the eventual and natural demise of our solar system can be based on Man’s fall. Empirically, through science we can now view the death, and birth, of stars. Was this all caused by eating forbidden fruit?

Thus one must ask: why would a good, compassionate God create a Universe, and sentient life, that suffers and dies? Age old problem, that in my estimation has been allegorically resolved through the Genesis narrative.

Let’s move on to evolution. Micro evolution does not seem to be a problem for anyone. Life does adapt to its environment through genetic change. In my mind the issue becomes what happens over billions of years. After considering everything I have read to date I cannot honestly see an overwhelming case for a young earth. Moreover I have not read or heard anything yet that such a view can be scientifically supported by anyone without a biblical creationist bias. Given enough time great change will occur as evidenced by the vast diversity of life spread over every niche of our planet. Were there kangaroos on the Ark, or did they evolve in an isolated part of the world from whence they could not spread?

I don’t think evolution is a fraud or a hoax. Too many educated people of faith believe and accept it for it to be an atheist conspiracy. Have their been mistakes made and will they continue to be made? Are there dishonest scientists? Certainly. They are fallible humans, just like you and I, after all. But the issue is what does the weight of all the multidisciplinary evidence indicate?

Hope that helps

Your agnostic friend
Ken


Dr. Ariel Roth’s Creation Lectures for Teachers
Re Sean’s Quote

“Yes, I am suggesting that our scientists should also be theologians to some degree. I’m also suggesting that our theologians be scientists to some degree as well. There should be no distinct dividing line between the two disciplines…”

Hello Sean

First of all, thank you Holly for your comments. You have always treated me with civility and charity for which I am most grateful.

Secondly, on reflection, I do hope I was not strident or offensive in my recent remarks. I am a guest here and should behave with the utmost respect regarding my Adventist hosts. After all I was proposing the Chair of ID at an ‘Adventist’ institution! What gall and temerity from an agnostic!

However something Dr. Kime said struck a very strange chord in me: that a Chair in ID at Harvard would be a quantum leap ( forward – my edit) while such a Chair would be a step backward at LSU. I’ m very sorry Wes, but for me to honestly investigate reality such double standard is not acceptable.

I am sad today, because I think I’m coming to the end of my Adventist journey. I really did see ID as a sort of bridge between your faith and objective inquiry about a ‘Grand’ Design. (apologies Mr. Hawkings). Oh Wes , perhaps I am ontological Don Quixote after all, comically tilting towards immovable Adventist windmills. πŸ™ .

However all is not forlorn because I’ve made excellent friends of the heart here. ;). I won’t forget you.

Good luck in your pursuit of God.

Goodbye
Your agnostic friend
Ken


Dr. Ariel Roth’s Creation Lectures for Teachers
Re Sean’s Quote

“Public association is one thing. Private association is another. While many do not feel at liberty to publicly associate themselves with our work here (for obvious reasons), most who still believe in SDA fundamentals (and who are aware of the longstanding situation at LSU and other places) feel that our work in providing enhanced transparency for what is being taught to our young people in our schools was/is necessary on some level.”

Hi Sean

The irony here is that those that are supporting institutional enhanced transparency are hiding behind cloaks of anonymity. That’s not how you, I, Wes, Bob Ryan, Wes, Bill Sorenson and many others here behave. Imagine if Jesus hid behind a cloak and didn’t proclaim his nature. What legacy of respect would he have left?

Conviction requires courage period.

Your agnostic friend
Ken