"Christianity - Does it Depreciate the Natural World?"

Christians Depreciating the Natural Word

Although this is the title of the article (see background below), there is a break down between the title and the article.  What the article really postulates is that because of the Christian’s belief that there is a future beyond this life, they have little concern about the natural world.

Of course even a cursory view of the history of scientific study, inquiry, and discovery will reveal a very different story.  The reality is that with the coming of the Protestant Reformation and the Roman Catholic Counter Reformation, the theological groundwork was laid for there to be magnificent scientific discoveries. (See articles at http://alviesthots.blogspot.com/2012/11/christianity-is-it-opposed-to-science.html along with two accompanying articles).  

Truth of the Matter

In sum, the truth of the matter, genuine Christians deprecate the world as presented by the naturalist who presents either a less than complete verifiable scientific narrative or an unverifiable scientific narrative born of bias.  Because genuine Christians give truth an unequalled priority, they indeed cannot be comfortable with the secular naturalists views of the science.

Generalizations Abound

Those who hold this position must resort to anecdotal example and generalization to make the point.  The reality is that any argument that relies heavily upon these two sources for information is certainly to be suspect.  Even if the conclusion were true, the lack of factual data and the innuendo discredit the notion and especially so in this case.  Of course such characterizes much of the material that this and other postings call into question.

Fact Check

The problem with the anecdotal evidence presented in this argument is that the writer is presenting out of bias and not out of fact.  For example he wrongly attributes a quote to former Interior Secretary James Watt which if he would have fact checked would reveal it was wrongly attributed to him (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1339686/posts).  As well the fact that there are Christians who are involved, rightly or wrongly, in the environmental movement is not mentioned.  Such is the behavior of one who writes out of bias and not fact.

Reality, Science, and Theoretical Conjecture

There is a basic process to be considered.  One becomes more and more convinced of that with which one feeds one’s minds.  That is to say if one fills their thinking with the theoretical it soon becomes reality. 

The problem that the secularist brings to the science table is that they are so filled with the notions of secular naturalism that they cannot see other possibilities for reality.  Consider the following quote.

Dinesh D’Souza in a debate with Christopher Hitchens regarding the notion that everything has a cause observes, “…In the weird world of the quantum, we can find exceptions to that rule.  But quantum effects cancel out when you come to macroscopic objects and whenever you hear someone say ‘consciousness I really don’t know what that is but perhaps it is a quantum thing’ what he is basically saying is that he does not know.  …The quantum is invoked to explain things that are unexplained.” (see debate at  www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V85OykSDT8&feature=g-hist).

Such suggests that there are dead ends in naturalism.

Dead End Science

The point is that because genuine science constantly runs into naturalistic dead ends they have created a whole field of theoretical conjecture to include quantum physics, theoretical mathematics, etc.  Sometimes it is just plan difficult to do science in a closed system scenario when there are constant signs pointing to the fact that genuine science must include. 

The whole area of first causes is an example of such a scientific dead end.  The question that mystifies secular science is what precipitated the “Big Bang?”   Since it is not possible to postulate that nature big banged nature into existence and since it is an inconvenient truth to acknowledge the supernatural, science then resorts to quantum physics in which there is much speculation and theoretical conjecture.

Biases Exposed

The reality is that most of what passes for secular science today is an atheist bias or philosophy which then calls upon other more empirical studies to support the position.  This is not science, this is simply bias which grasps at science, physics, mathematics, etc. for support.  Of course genuine science cannot provide such support so we arrive back at the theoretical.

Faith in Fact or Theory

Now before one runs to the conclusion that one places faith in God, Religion, and Creation as a fact, consider the following.

Not one person alive today was there when it all began.  So no one really knows for sure so the prudent person is left with a choice.  It is as follows.  Should one place their faith in a closed system theory which constantly leads to dead ends or should one place their faith in an open system theory that answers many of the questions posed by the previous theory?

Should one place their faith in a closed system that is founded more upon the mores of a particular social system that proposes relative, secular, humanistic truth or in an open system that postulates transcendent, universal, and objective truth?  While one can make that choice the outcomes of that choice are beyond one’s control and should be considered very carefully.

Background

To see the list of subjects to be discussed in this series see my blog (Christianity – Is it a Faith Driven by Fear? http://alviesthots.blogspot.com/2012/11/christianity-is-it-faith-driven-by-fear.html).  Contained within that blog is a reference, 20 Reasons to Abandon Christianity and in that reference is a list which is the springboard from which this subject has been discussed.

"Christianity - Is it a Hierarchical Authoritarian Organization?"

Hierarchical Authoritarian Organization?

Where in reality is there not organization and order?  Even in and among those who decry order, there is some degree of organization.  Perhaps one would posit such things as certain diseases that disrupt the order found on a cellular level.  Or maybe one could cite certain disorderly mental processes as examples but overall the universe and all that is in it is only possible because of order.

Overall, there is more order to be found in reality than there is any other notion such as randomness and theoretical science.  In fact without an overwhelming predominance of order, there would be no reality and certainly no foundation to postulate the theoretical.  In other words for there to be the existence of anything in the field of reality, there must be some sort of order and then as well consider in social systems that where there is order there is authority.

A companion to this discussion is found in the article, “Christianity – Is it Authoritarian?” available at http://alviesthots.blogspot.com/2012/11/christianity-is-it-authoritarian.html.  It too is based upon the discussion found in the pamphlet from which come many of these questions.  It is to be noted that the pamphlet treats the subject of authority two times and so shall these writings.

The Christian Church Reflects Creation

To decry Christianity for it being hierarchical and authoritarian is inconsistent with what is known about nature.  Any number of systems found in creation function based upon order and authority.  For example the human body is made up of cells which would not function without authority and order.

In particular for cells to function they must have a nucleus which via enzymes then guides the function of that cell.  Thus on a micro level, there is organization and authority.

Another example is described as “pecking order” or the social order among chickens and other animals.  Such order and authority is found even in the most “laissez-faire” family.  Add to nature such things as a country’s economy, government, business, charity, and the list goes on and on as to where one finds authority, hierarchy, and organization!

Servant Structure

The source mentioned below is also naïve in its treatment of the function, roles and relationships, and other elements of the group.  Every group will develop either a formal or an informal organization and such organization simply means that there are differing roles with various levels of responsibility.  The Christian Church as a social organization is no different than any of a number of social groups. 

In any group both formally or informally someone will rise to the fore as leader and other position will fill behind that leader.  However, here the similarity disappears as in almost all other social organizations there is a top down authoritarian influence.  Properly understood in the Christian Church the pyramid is turned so that the organization is based upon a bottom up servant structure.

The Christian Church

One might ask, being that man is so surrounded by order and authority why would the Christian Church be singled for criticism?  At best one reading the criticism tendered concludes that it is because of a misunderstanding of what constitutes ecclesiastical authority.

It is as if the Church, Roman Catholic and otherwise, has some mysterious power over its adherents which through threat and coercion keep the faithful, faithful.  Such takes a very low view of man.  The reality is far different for if that were the only force at work then such groups that have no authoritarian threat structure would cease to exist. 

Take for example service clubs such as Rotary or Kiwanis, or fraternal organizations like the Elks or the Eagles, or veterans organizations such as the VFW or the Fleet Reserve Association.  Each of these groups has standards for membership, standards by which members function, mores, and agreed upon purposes.  None of these groups employ coercive authority yet they function and have functioned for years.

Excesses

To be sure there have been excesses in the Christian Church.  However, to judge all by the mistaken behaviors of a few is both illogical and unfair.  Once again the criticism laid at the doorstep of the Christian Church is unfounded by reality and ignores the capacity of the individual to make decisions and as well the mental-emotional-social needs of the person individually and people corporately.

Unifying Purpose

Another element missing from the discussion is that of a unifying purpose.  Groups both long term and short term form around mutually agreed upon purposes.  Such would be so for a labor union, neighborhood group, humanitarian relief groups, and the list goes on and on.  Even those who claim that they are against organized religion and against government may not realized it but they too have joined together because of a shared and unifying purpose.

Of course, when it is a positive purpose such as feeding the homeless, the Red Cross, Farm-aid, or some other humanitarian purpose such groups form and exhibit certain qualities and characteristics that keep it unified and purposeful. 

When groups form for negative purpose such as the Occupy Wall Street, the Anarchists, and the like their unifying purpose is negative and thus they tend to be more dysfunctional, fail to grow beyond a minority of malcontents, and eventually disorganize.

Abusive Leadership

To discount all leadership based upon the manipulation, excesses, and errors of a few is a most serious mistake.  Such denigrates those who genuinely serve with not greater purpose than that of care for the destitute, the homeless, the poor, and the defenseless. 

Most pastors, priests, rabbis and the like who provide care are much more concerned with the care they offer than the materialism they might receive.  In fact, many die in poverty after a life spent sharing in the needs of others.  Indeed there is abuse in Christian Church leadership and it is in and among those religious leaders who deprive and abuse themselves to serve others.

Low View of Man

The article takes a very low view of people referring to them as "unwashed masses."  In doing so it seems a bit condescending toward such people.  Additionally, it sees man as being at the mercy of hierarchical authority and organization. 

However, there are two issues that are not given consideration in taking such a position.  First, the incidents in which people move from one faith group to another or even give up on church attendance all together suggests that such a “control” perspective is in most cases not true.

Second, even the author’s background as an Anarchist is at variance with the whole notion that one is inextricably controlled by the larger and more dominant social group (e.g. Church, Business, or Government).  That is not to say that there is not or cannot be manipulative control but most often it is with those who claim special truth and not with orthodox Christian denominations.

Summary

What then is to be made of the accusation that the Christian Church is a hierarchical, authoritarian organization?  Well, yes the Christian Church is hierarchical but then so are many other organizations.  Yes, the Christian Church is authoritarian but no more so than any other group that people voluntarily join.  Yes, the Christian Church is organized but then so too is any of a number of other groups. 

So what is the issue being addressed in the article?  Though not stated it is the writer’s agenda born of his ignorance of what the Christian Church is really all about.  You see properly understood the Christian Church is all about service and as a matter of fact even a cursory reading of history will reveal that the notion of Christian service is the foundation for many of the benefits that people in the West enjoy today.

Background

To see the list of subjects to be discussed in this series see my blog (Christianity – Is it a Faith Driven by Fear? http://alviesthots.blogspot.com/2012/11/christianity-is-it-faith-driven-by-fear.html).  Contained within that blog is a reference, 20 Reasons to Abandon Christianity and in that reference is a list which is the springboard from which this subject has been discussed.