TheologyWebsite: sdf Archives

January 27, 2006

Chicago Sunrise

Here's the colorful view I was greeted with this morning...

Posted by sdf at 07:01 AM | Comments (1)

October 16, 2005

sunday sunrise

I guess I stayed up a little too late last night. When I looked out the window it was already getting light outside. So I decided to take a walk and watch the sun come up. Here are some of the photos I took.

(BTW: Here's where I took these pics..)

Posted by sdf at 06:34 AM | Comments (2)

September 27, 2005

Intelligent Design: Science or Philosophy?

The merits of "Intelligent Design" (ID) are being decided this week in the State Courts of Pennsylvania due to a local school board's attempt at introducing science textbooks suggesting an alternative theory to Darwinism.

Intelligent Design posits an external unnamed creator/agent which is responsible for the seemingly unexplainable complexities or "design" in nature. Proponents see this as an equally plausible theory in light of gaps in evidence supporting Darwin's claim of trans-species evolution. Opponents view ID as merely a revamped version of biblical Creationism.

Though hardly quite as dramatic, the trial commencing this week inevitably conjures up images of the 1925 Scopes/Darrow trial which resulted in the scientific monolpoly of Darwin's evolutionary theory.

Theory is theory, and it is undoubtedly true that hard-core proponents of Darwinism often treat his theory as indisputable fact (and is that not that crux of the upcoming judicial decision?). But allow me to ask the following question despite such exclusive allegiance to evolutionary theory:

How can reference to a Creator possibly function as a scientific theorum?

Science by definition focuses primarily upon material causes which can be experienced and repeated. Theories of course apply, but only to the extent that they can be proven true.

Science, for example, cannot accommodate "metaphysics" since there is no tangible access to anything outside the physical realm. There is no debate on this point by anyone. How then can a Creator/agent outside of nature possibly be referenced by science? It simply cannot.

Thus let's imagine that the Pennsylvania courts allow Intelligent Design to be taught as an alternative to Darwinism. Where would such a theory be introduced? Would it simply be used to support the possible cause of evolutionary theorists' hypothesized Big-Bang? If so, how has ID counteracted the theory of evolution? Or would it suggest the logical/scientific plausbility of the creation account in Genesis 1? Then how in the world do we "scientifically account" for the fact that Genesis suggests vegetation on the Earth (Day 3) grew prior to the existence of the Sun (Day 4)??

Where exactly does Intelligent Design fit into even contemporary Christian conceptualizations of Science? Does it even fit in?

It seems to me that Intelligent Design is merely being proposed as an alternative to the Holy Grail of Darwinism. Simply look at how Darwinists hysterically convulse at the mere suggestion of an alternative theory. But that convulsion IS NOT scientific either. It is simply ideological. For example, they can posit only a "spaghetti monster" juxtaposed their presumedly unassailable theory. What close-minded fools.

Thus ID is simply set up to FAIL against the culturally assumed ivory tower of a mere theory wholly advocated by society. ID is not and can not compete with "science". It can only presume to compete with the irrational allegiance given Darwin's theory. And if this merely boils down to a vote between a popularity of theories, LET ME PREDICT the outcome.

So be it. ID is not science, nor is Darwin's theory. Darwinism is wholly incapable of explaining the "Big Bang" and I presume the only question this politically-correct version of ID can possibly hope to answer is "how" the Big Bang was caused. (It's answer is: an unnamed Intelligent source.).

So God Caused the Big Bang? Great. Now what?

Updates:

Posted by sdf at 08:15 PM | Comments (5)

September 24, 2005

Gravity Is An Act Of God

There seems to have been a recent plethora of sermons suggesting that God somehow wielded hurricane Katrina as a weapon of judgment against the bOOb-fest playground of New Orleans. That no doubt makes for an interesting and fiery speech on Sunday morning, but think twice before buying into the premise.

If we want to talk about a theologically coherent view of the world wherein God acts and responds according to His Word, then please know this. You and I (thankfully) live under a "new covenant" delineated over 1500 years ago (by Jeremiah) wherein we are all individually judged by our own conscience. (see Jeremiah chapter 31) It makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER for Christian pastors to suggest that God causes collateral damage upon communities in which sin exists.

Can you imagine God punishing you for the crimes of your neighbor? Or how about being punished for the ineptitudes of your local and state government? If that logic actually held true, don't you think God would more whole-heartedly be punishing the congregations of shallow and immoral pastors/priests who commit atrocious and abominable acts?

Let's please not presume to suggest that the victims of Katrina experienced a divine retribution due to perennial nipple-fueled bead tosses.

God no longer punishes "unto the third and fourth generation" let alone the "approximate geographic location" of evildoers. Right?

Posted by sdf at 02:18 AM | Comments (5)

September 22, 2005

Paul Was A Convicted Felon

Sometimes life takes a strange and sudden turn, dropping us in the middle of circumstances we thought utterly impossible. And then we believe that the chaotic and humiliating experiences we find ourselves in somehow separate us from God's divine plan for us. But in such situations it is wise to remember that in Judeo-Christian history human/societal criteria have ALWAYS deemed the noblest of souls as mere convicts and riff-raff.

We often judge ourselves by our standing or accomplishment in society, but in the grand scheme of things such an evaluation might be wholly incorrect. The Apostle Paul, for example, was thoroughly familiar with the Roman prison system and was routinely incarcerated, belittled and stripped of his freedoms.

Incarceration is itself a humiliating and demeaning experience which leaves an indelible imprint on the consciousness of the criminal. Once labelled "convict", many souls deem themselves irrevocably on the periphery of meaningful social life. But what a shame that is.

Even the world's most honorable souls have fully experienced the humiliation of enforced reprimand.

Posted by sdf at 01:12 AM | Comments (0)


discussion forum study guides ministry news reviews church history new testament theology sermons online quizzes e-texts online internet resources theoweb newsletter quodlibet journal about theoweb foutz.net	January 27, 2006 Chicago Sunrise Here's the colorful view I was greeted with this morning... Posted by sdf at 07:01 AM \| Comments (1) October 16, 2005 sunday sunrise I guess I stayed up a little too late last night. When I looked out the window it was already getting light outside. So I decided to take a walk and watch the sun come up. Here are some of the photos I took. (BTW: Here's where I took these pics..) Posted by sdf at 06:34 AM \| Comments (2) September 27, 2005 Intelligent Design: Science or Philosophy? The merits of "Intelligent Design" (ID) are being decided this week in the State Courts of Pennsylvania due to a local school board's attempt at introducing science textbooks suggesting an alternative theory to Darwinism. Intelligent Design posits an external unnamed creator/agent which is responsible for the seemingly unexplainable complexities or "design" in nature. Proponents see this as an equally plausible theory in light of gaps in evidence supporting Darwin's claim of trans-species evolution. Opponents view ID as merely a revamped version of biblical Creationism. Though hardly quite as dramatic, the trial commencing this week inevitably conjures up images of the 1925 Scopes/Darrow trial which resulted in the scientific monolpoly of Darwin's evolutionary theory. Theory is theory, and it is undoubtedly true that hard-core proponents of Darwinism often treat his theory as indisputable fact (and is that not that crux of the upcoming judicial decision?). But allow me to ask the following question despite such exclusive allegiance to evolutionary theory: How can reference to a Creator possibly function as a scientific theorum? Science by definition focuses primarily upon material causes which can be experienced and repeated. Theories of course apply, but only to the extent that they can be proven true. Science, for example, cannot accommodate "metaphysics" since there is no tangible access to anything outside the physical realm. There is no debate on this point by anyone. How then can a Creator/agent outside of nature possibly be referenced by science? It simply cannot. Thus let's imagine that the Pennsylvania courts allow Intelligent Design to be taught as an alternative to Darwinism. Where would such a theory be introduced? Would it simply be used to support the possible cause of evolutionary theorists' hypothesized Big-Bang? If so, how has ID counteracted the theory of evolution? Or would it suggest the logical/scientific plausbility of the creation account in Genesis 1? Then how in the world do we "scientifically account" for the fact that Genesis suggests vegetation on the Earth (Day 3) grew prior to the existence of the Sun (Day 4)?? Where exactly does Intelligent Design fit into even contemporary Christian conceptualizations of Science? Does it even fit in? It seems to me that Intelligent Design is merely being proposed as an alternative to the Holy Grail of Darwinism. Simply look at how Darwinists hysterically convulse at the mere suggestion of an alternative theory. But that convulsion IS NOT scientific either. It is simply ideological. For example, they can posit only a "spaghetti monster" juxtaposed their presumedly unassailable theory. What close-minded fools. Thus ID is simply set up to FAIL against the culturally assumed ivory tower of a mere theory wholly advocated by society. ID is not and can not compete with "science". It can only presume to compete with the irrational allegiance given Darwin's theory. And if this merely boils down to a vote between a popularity of theories, LET ME PREDICT the outcome. So be it. ID is not science, nor is Darwin's theory. Darwinism is wholly incapable of explaining the "Big Bang" and I presume the only question this politically-correct version of ID can possibly hope to answer is "how" the Big Bang was caused. (It's answer is: an unnamed Intelligent source.). So God Caused the Big Bang? Great. Now what? Updates: Michael McGough: The theology of intelligent design Christians must ask: What sort of creator is the creator? Theologian says intelligent design is religion Posted by sdf at 08:15 PM \| Comments (5) September 24, 2005 Gravity Is An Act Of God There seems to have been a recent plethora of sermons suggesting that God somehow wielded hurricane Katrina as a weapon of judgment against the bOOb-fest playground of New Orleans. That no doubt makes for an interesting and fiery speech on Sunday morning, but think twice before buying into the premise. If we want to talk about a theologically coherent view of the world wherein God acts and responds according to His Word, then please know this. You and I (thankfully) live under a "new covenant" delineated over 1500 years ago (by Jeremiah) wherein we are all individually judged by our own conscience. (see Jeremiah chapter 31) It makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER for Christian pastors to suggest that God causes collateral damage upon communities in which sin exists. Can you imagine God punishing you for the crimes of your neighbor? Or how about being punished for the ineptitudes of your local and state government? If that logic actually held true, don't you think God would more whole-heartedly be punishing the congregations of shallow and immoral pastors/priests who commit atrocious and abominable acts? Let's please not presume to suggest that the victims of Katrina experienced a divine retribution due to perennial nipple-fueled bead tosses. God no longer punishes "unto the third and fourth generation" let alone the "approximate geographic location" of evildoers. Right? Posted by sdf at 02:18 AM \| Comments (5) September 22, 2005 Paul Was A Convicted Felon Sometimes life takes a strange and sudden turn, dropping us in the middle of circumstances we thought utterly impossible. And then we believe that the chaotic and humiliating experiences we find ourselves in somehow separate us from God's divine plan for us. But in such situations it is wise to remember that in Judeo-Christian history human/societal criteria have ALWAYS deemed the noblest of souls as mere convicts and riff-raff. We often judge ourselves by our standing or accomplishment in society, but in the grand scheme of things such an evaluation might be wholly incorrect. The Apostle Paul, for example, was thoroughly familiar with the Roman prison system and was routinely incarcerated, belittled and stripped of his freedoms. Incarceration is itself a humiliating and demeaning experience which leaves an indelible imprint on the consciousness of the criminal. Once labelled "convict", many souls deem themselves irrevocably on the periphery of meaningful social life. But what a shame that is. Even the world's most honorable souls have fully experienced the humiliation of enforced reprimand. Posted by sdf at 01:12 AM \| Comments (0)
© Scott David Foutz / TheologyWebsite.com 1998 - 2005